AMD Bulldozer

crispy

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
2,706
Well, lets see how it does when it runs apps not optimized by intels compiler. Looking forward for linux benchmarks where they might be more on par...
 

Yaka

Resident Freddy
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
4,419
heh are amd fan bois still banging that drum after all these years?
 

old.Osy

No longer scrounging, still a bastard.
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
2,257
It was never about AMD, but about technology enthusiasts milking performance out of cheaper alternatives. You know the type, us geeks.
 

MYstIC G

Official Licensed Lump of Coal™ Distributor
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
11,238
Not seen a good alternative to Intel since back in the Cyrix days unfortunately. Everything AMD I've tried has always been horrible by comparison.
 

Tuthmes

FH is my second home
Joined
Jun 18, 2004
Messages
5,491
AMD Athlon 64 was a lot better then the prescott/northwood Intels. HyperTransport is another thing we owe to AMD. Infact come to think of it AMD was first in getting 64bit to the public.

Nevertheless I've always hade Intel CPU's.
 

Embattle

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
9,454
If I remember correctly AMD copied it from DEC Alpha.

Since the DUOs where Intel simplified the processor AMD has been lagging.
 

Tuthmes

FH is my second home
Joined
Jun 18, 2004
Messages
5,491
Yes, yes hence I said beeing first in getting 64bit to the public. The x86-64 instruction set has it's pro in not having to compile or having performance penalty's when it comes to the x86-32 instruction set.

Intel was betting on another horse at the time, the Itanium.
 

Embattle

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
9,454
Which technically didn't need it at the time.
 

Embattle

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
9,454
Intel just had to totally change the way it was going with netburst, along came Core 2 and since they AMD hasn't caught up. The problem AMD have is it seems their reinvention involves sticking more cores on the processor, by doing so their reinvention requires the work of others.
 

Tuthmes

FH is my second home
Joined
Jun 18, 2004
Messages
5,491
Which technically didn't need it at the time.
Well technically we still don't!

Intel just had to totally change the way it was going with netburst, along came Core 2 and since they AMD hasn't caught up. The problem AMD have is it seems their reinvention involves sticking more cores on the processor, by doing so their reinvention requires the work of others.
Well that's where the fanboy's would say if it werent for AMD Intel would still have a netburst CPU. Core 2 and the Pentium M was and is full of awesomeness though.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top Bottom