Six core chips very price competitive with Intel
For once.
AMD doesn't suck?
Not always, but recently, yeah. Still kind of annoyed I had to buy an Intel chip in the new machine.Cakedaddy wrote:They've always been price competative. . . they were just behind in performance!
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
GORDON wrote:A few years ago they had about 18 months where they were beating Intel on the price/performance curve. Then Intel dropped prices on their Core 2 chips, and AMD has been playing catch up... until now?
Far as I can tell.
EDIT : My Intel hyper-threaded quad core is doing just fine.
Edited By Malcolm on 1272395412
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
The current machine I am on is a Core 2 Quad, and works great. Was the price/performance leader for a good 6 months. Still just fine, almost 2 years later. Of course I still haven't tried to play Crysis on it.
Chip is the Q6600, if memory serves, which it probably doesn't.
Edited By GORDON on 1272395796
Chip is the Q6600, if memory serves, which it probably doesn't.
Edited By GORDON on 1272395796
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."