that about fits with what I am seeing in my research; that AMD till now has been a follower and all of a sudden... they are the innovators and Intel is doing the following. Just seeing what other people think. I saw something on Tom's Hardware that I haven't had a chance to read yet that seemed to be saying that the latest P4 actually caught fire when they were trying to benchmark it... that's kind of a major flaw <g>
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:13:30 -0400, Angel Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >From what I've read, there isn't going to be a 4.0 P4 chip. It's not even on > >the cards anymore. > Just as all the reviews about the P4 said, it was a flawed design that Intel > lazily brought out because they felt they owned the > market. > But faced with competition from AMD they are crumbling. They don't have a > solid foundation in the P4 chips on which to build. They > were getting by through brute force, simply throwing more MHz out, while the > chips flaws lingered. And now they have finally hit the > point where the poor design can no longer be hidden, heat and power > consumption doomed the P4. I figure Intel must be doing some > sort of drastic architecture re-design in the interim, and hence decided to > skip this battle and cede to AMD for the time being, > perhaps knowing that with its advertising machine it isn't going to loose > totally. > > The only place that Intel still has AMD thoroughly beat, is in marketing. > That is what has kept them going ahead of AMD for the last > six years. > Intel's marketing juggurnaut is something that so far AMD has not been able > to match. > > I expect to see AMD's Dual Core solution out before Intel's and running > better than Intel's as well :). > > -Gel > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Multicore would seem to be the way to go, but maybe there is some other issue > with that. Maybe they are hoping the next stepping in > die shrink will help them. Where are they now, .13 micron? AMD really has > Intel's nuts in a sling in a bad way. Unless they have > some killer product waiting in the wings that they have kept totally in the > dark, they could be trailing AMD at the high end for the > foreseable future. > > They might be on a totally different tack though. What about the Pentium M > architecture? If I was Intel, I would get every ounce I > could out of that chip because the power profile is so awesome and AMD has > nothing really comparable to compete head to head. > Corproate PCs don't need 3.0 GHz chips much less 4.0 GHz, so why not push all > low-power systems for now? > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:137258 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
