-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Readies Shanghai to Battle Nehalem
- Thread starter Sylver123
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 6,521
- Location
- London/Camberley
Compete you say...I sure hope so.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 8,876
- Location
- Hoddesdon, London, UK
Me too. Looks doubtful though 
We all hope they bring something good out. It's good news that they shall increase the L3 cache but it if i am not mistaken that lead to increased latency. Hopefully they shall will manage to release processors in higher frequencies, above 3Ghz this time.
The enthusiasts are a ficle lot though.....
Look how quickly we all bough the athlon 64 when intel were struggling
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 8,876
- Location
- Hoddesdon, London, UK
Why would i have bought a hot, probably more expensive cpu/platform that performed less than the A64?
Fickle? no, just not really really stupid.
Most end users realise that neither AMD or Intel care about them as the individual it all about what makes the £££ or $$$. And just buy whatever is best at the best price point.
Nice to see some competition to Nahalem being announced even if we all know it 99% wont live up to any claims that it will realistically compete performance wise.
Indeed those claims seem quite unrealistic from AMD. I would be happy if they manage to match the performance of the current Intel chips but also offer the same overclocking potential as the Intel CPU's offer.
Anyway a pleasant surprise for AMD to offer equivalent performance with the upcoming Nahalem would be something that would offer us some nice upgrade solutions.
Good luck with that
The problem with saying things like that based on gut instinct, assuming you don't work for AMD designing their cpus?, is that you can be made to look a fool if it turns our not to be true.
I remember people saying the same thing about ATI before the 4850 launch. Look how many people had to eat their words then?
I really don't get that comment like anyone thinks AMD or Intel care about them.
I very much doubt that you have met anyone online who thinks that or has said that & people who make comments like you seem to get it confused with personal preference to a brand & brand loyalty which has nothing to do with whether a company cares & all do to with the Image, reputation, quality, features of products & fashion which is all gauged by the consumer & the consumers experience/needs.
Last edited:
Perhaps not - but we often talk about them as though they do - as enthusiasts we often forget that we do not represent a significant target market for either of the companies - it makes good PR to have the fastest thing out there, but that's not where the volumes shift. Saying "Intel should do X because then we'd all do Y" assumes they care what we think - unfortunately it's just not true.
The above debate is a good example - here we have a group of enthusiasts debating whether AMD can pull it out the bag and supply a product they would buy... AMD are focusing on the Server market battle, which has entirely different requirements than the home/enthusiast one. We all know that we can benefit from improvements server side (look at the popularity of the Opteron 939 range - I'm still running one) - but we would be foolish to think that t above statement from the Senior VP includes us in any way.
Which comes back to he problem - Large server operations are more concerned with Value than out and out Performance - hence the move to cooler and more efficient chips rather than the hot and heavy high performers of old.
The above debate is a good example - here we have a group of enthusiasts debating whether AMD can pull it out the bag and supply a product they would buy... AMD are focusing on the Server market battle, which has entirely different requirements than the home/enthusiast one. We all know that we can benefit from improvements server side (look at the popularity of the Opteron 939 range - I'm still running one) - but we would be foolish to think that t above statement from the Senior VP includes us in any way.
Which comes back to he problem - Large server operations are more concerned with Value than out and out Performance - hence the move to cooler and more efficient chips rather than the hot and heavy high performers of old.