So is it easily said that Intel has put AMD way behind them?

 

It is also easier said than done.

 

Yes

AMD makes good budget cpu's, though

 

Isn't AMD working more in graphics stuff now? Cross fire or something? I've sort of forgot about AMD since all I hear now are Intel's new chips every few months or so.

 

AMD's graphics products come from their acquisition of ATI.

 

I feel that is pretty true now. I was an AMD fan.

 

I went from building two AMD machines back to Intel with i7 920.

 

AMD is still doing well in the budget market, but I don't know if that will continue.

 

Never was a fan of AMD...

 

I feel bad for AMD, for about 3-4 years AMD had the best product on the market. It was faster, cheaper, and used less power. Yet no one used them in their PCs. It's not cause of Intel's marketing. People don't really care what processor it is, if the salesman tells them it's faster than Intel than they'll be happy. It was intel using shady tactics to force OEMs not to use AMDs better, cheaper parts. Intel was giving Dell kickbacks of $250 million per quarter just for not using AMD chips. That's why when Dell was continually asked why they weren't using AMD chips they wouldn't comment, it was also why they could sell PCs for less than their competitors, $1 billion per year not to use AMD is pretty hard to say no to.

http://www.dailytech.com/Dell+Faces+...rticle5964.htm

What's funny is that once AMD filed for the anti-trust suit against Intel all the OEMs shortly there after started equipping PCs with AMDs. It wasn't until the Dell/Intel deal was exposed that Dell started using AMD chips. Intel got fined $1.44 billion by the EU and $25.4 million in South Korea they still have a trial in the US pending supposedly for Feb 2010 and I hope Intel gets a huge fine and some severe punishment cause they really hurt AMD and the PC market and consumers with their actions.

AMD could've gained a lot of marketshare and be much better off and more capable of competing with Intel's R&D budget. I remember back then that almost all enthusiasts built AMD PCs now you won't find hardly anyone. back them AMD created the first 64 bit CPU and the 64bit extensions that are used in Intel CPUs today. They were the first to integrate the memory controller into to the CPU something that Intel didn't do until late 2008 and the first with a dual core processor on a single die.

It was Intel's monopolistic techniques that allowed them to regain control and keep AMD weak since AMD never really hurt them except in the enthusiasts market. But Intel sure responded with it's Core 2 Duo processor. Since then they've wiped the floor with AMD and turned their company around since the Netburst P4 GHz race days. As much as I'd like to not support Intel cause of what they did to AMD AMD just can't compete with Intel right now. I do still use AMD for my home server but not on my main system it's a Core i7 860. AMD has nothing even close to competing with Core i7.

 

The first two systems I built were AMD's.

 

Running two AMD systems here.

 

Dell 521 with AMD dual core, here. It's very nice. I've never owned an Intel-powered computer.

Although I just went to Dell's site and saw I cannot get an AMD system anymore. Wow, I didn't know how one-sided Dell had become. I clicked a link titled "Compare processors and find what's best for you" and it went to a website at syndication.intel.com.

 

I used them a few times when building PCs and after that i never went back. I never quite liked them. I much prefer Intel>

 

I've got an AMD phenom x4 chip in my computer. Works great.

 

My wife is about to buy an Acer with an AMD processor. It's just going to be used as a budget internet browsing/excel file editing computer, so I told her it was a good deal, but personally I went with the Intel for my Acer. I'm running CS3 graphics, so I felt better knowing I would be fine with my faster processing.

I never really knew much about the chip battle until I read STUNNA's post. Pretty damn right on target for the business tactics now-a-days. I'm not surprised that Intel was buying people out.

 

Dell is selling one computer right now that has the phenom x3, this is the x4 with one turned off because of the problem that AMD has had with the x4's.

 

My last machine was a AMD, but they sorta stagnated when it was time for a new machine and Intel went way ahead.

 

Yup they were also giving other OEMs a discount on their Intel chips if the OEM wouldn't use AMD. Intel doens't have a chance in court, they've already been convicted in the the other two cases and when you look back on PCs at the time it makes sense. Why else would a company like HP not use AMD processors when they were faster and cheap than Intel. Otherwise they could pop an AMD and sell it for less and prove that it was faster.

 

intel fan all the way

I've never liked AMD

 

i used to have a chain full of AMDs that have blown under load, for one reason or another. they dont hold up well the overclocking at all.

 

 

I'm thinking about going quad core for my AMD based hyper-v home server. I can pick up an AMD 2.5GHz quad core for $120. I'm wanting to turn my Hyper-v home server into a media streamer with my Windows Home Server OS that would do transcoding to my devices and my hyper-v server would also host other OSes at the same time.

What I've always liked about AMD is that their upgrade paths are much better. I have an AM2+ board and I can put in an AM2, AM2+ or AM3 processor in it. usually with Intel every new processor family requires a new motherboard.

 

I haven't owned an Intel based desktop since my 386. Laptop is a different story. My Vaio has a Centrino Duo in it. Would have gone AMD, but I got a killer deal on a closeout. Anyway, desktops have been AMD all the way. I've currently got an Athlon 64x2 6400+ running Windows 7 and it still hauls. And with the AM2+ board, I can upgrade to a quad core just by doing a bios update. Stunna's right on the money with Intel and their shady dealings. I've heard all of that before. And their upgrade path does suck. You almost have to start from the ground up in order to do any serious upgrade.

I think AMD will bounce back and make something to compete with the i7. And I'm sure that when they do it, they'll make it cheaper than the i7. And I'm sure Intel will do everything they can to make sure that the OEMs don't use it.

 

Yeah I don't think AMDs got anything anytime soon that can compete with i7. If it's supposed to compete we'd already know about it. In order to compete it'd have to be out NOW or very soon since i7 has been out for a year now. By the time AMD gets something to compete with i7 Intel would have moved on to something way better. AMD is competing with Core2Quad and even then they're not doing so hot. Which is why you can buy their quad core processors for about $100.

The Barcelona from AMD was a huge let down, I was holding out on switching to Intel to see what Barcelona could do and they just couldn't get it right. There were delays and then they couldn't get CPUs fast enough to compete with Intel. They needed to launch with 2.5GHz+ processors to compete but yet could barely get 2Ghz processors out the door. Intel walked all over them

 

If anything, I expect that Intel will slow down the release of future CPUs until the market catches up with them. They have no reason to push the envelope right now.

 

the first two computers i built had AMDs. but the last one was about 6 years ago. since then, i haven't really paid attention to processors and wondered what's happened to AMD.

 

I've always been an intel man ahead of AMD

Intel > AMD

 

budget processors due to AMD already overclocking them out the door hence you get heat issues with them. Secondly, because of this, there is not room to play and DIY overclocking. Intel's chips on the other hand, you can really play with these suckers. Same boat that i used to system build with AMD, now purely Intel. <3 my i7 940

 

IMHO, Intel is definitely the answer to speed and power, AMD on the otherhand is budget friendly...

I've owned both and AMD computers were always a let down in terms of performance.

 

Considering that Intel has been exceptionally profitable the last 4 quarters and AMD is on the top 10 list of companies in trouble.. I would say

 

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...f081806S71.DTL

(11-04) 09:25 PST NEW YORK, (AP) --

New York's attorney general hit Intel Corp. with an antitrust lawsuit Wednesday, claiming the company used "illegal threats and collusion" to dominate the market for computer microprocessors.

Following a similar case in Europe, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo claimed that the world's biggest computer chip maker paid billions in kickbacks to computer manufacturers and retaliated against those that did too much business with Intel's competitors.

Intel used its market prowess to "rule with an iron fist," Cuomo said.

"Rather than compete fairly, Intel used bribery and coercion to maintain a stranglehold on the market," Cuomo said in a written statement. "Intel's actions not only unfairly restricted potential competitors, but also hurt average consumers who were robbed of better products and lower prices."

An Intel spokesman didn't immediately return a call seeking comment. When the company was fined $1.45 billion by the European Union over similar charges in May, Intel denied wrongdoing, saying its sales practices were legitimate.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Delaware, is based on practices that were revealed in internal e-mails obtained in an investigation that has lasted for nearly two years.

The case focuses on deals that Intel has struck with computer makers that agreed to exclusively use the company's chips. In particular, Cuomo cited Intel's practice of paying large rebates to big customers. He called it illegal and designed to squash competition.

Computer maker Dell Inc. alone was paid almost $2 billion in such rebates in 2006, the state said, in exchange for an agreement not to market products from Intel's main rival, Advanced Micro Devices Inc.

Cuomo said Intel resorted to "bullying" customers that didn't play along. Among other things, he said, Intel would threaten to end joint development ventures, and instead direct funding to a manufacturer's competitors.

The lawsuit said the fear felt by Intel's customers was revealed in internal e-mails, including one from an IBM Corp. executive in 2005 who wondered whether the company would risk too much by strengthening its business ties to AMD.

"Can we afford to accept the wrath of Intel?" he wrote, according to the suit. Another Dell executive worried that Intel's chairman and CEO would wage "jihad" against the company if it did more business with AMD.

Much of the legal action has been brought as a result of complaints by AMD, which is building a plant in New York state.

AMD also is suing Intel in a case set to go to trial next year in Delaware. That lawsuit quotes managers from Toshiba saying Intel's financial incentives amounted to "cocaine," and executives from Gateway complaining that Intel's threats of retaliation for working with AMD beat them "into guacamole."

Intel owns about 80 percent of the worldwide microprocessor market, while AMD essentially has the rest. Technical missteps by AMD and the company's deep financial problems have contributed to some of its challenges, but the company claims Intel's illegal tactics have hindered its progress as well.

 

meh

 

Damn maybe I should jump on the bandwagon and sue Intel too. I think $1.45 billion would get me started paying for all the troubles Intel has caused me.

 

Great article on Ars Technica about the Intel-Dell relationship

Here's a quote

So at one point Intel was paying Dell more $$$ in kickbacks then Dell was bringing in from Net Income. So Dell was making more $$ off of Intel than they could make themselves.

http://arstechnica.com/business/news...inst-intel.ars

 

What a great way to run a company. How in the hell did they report that income on their books???

 

here's how

 

If Intel gets nailed for this, as they have. Shouldn't Dell, they were taking bribes?

 

what sucks about all this though is that all these fines will just get passed on to the customer. So we'll end up being screwed twice by this.