GUYS for all of you out there, thsi statement now should clear a hell of alot up
I LOVE AMD, and actually use them as a domestic user, but when it comes to commercial localized network vreating server defferentials, AMD will no longer be friendly in a dark are of unknown. New information as a rumour, and may i say when a rumour this big hits, its rare that its wrong. like AMD ATI when that was a rumour.
AMD is close to folding, due to ray tracing technology that INTEL is close to releasing. CPU's ( fusion ) will not aquire horsepower and as as of ghz measurment display.
i hate intel for there buying everyone out and doing it them selves, i love AMD for there friendly transistors and arc. inpart from amd+2
either way as it stands now, now way does AMD in any way evoke to be a challenge against server compatability and stability against INTEL.
i personally use xeons for servers. because they fuckin pawn ass.
its xeons, and no one else compete's at all
xeons can look at using 8 servers per core. its that stupid.
avizeke Wrote:GUYS for all of you out there, thsi statement now should clear a hell of alot up
I LOVE AMD, and actually use them as a domestic user, but when it comes to commercial localized network vreating server defferentials, AMD will no longer be friendly in a dark are of unknown. New information as a rumour, and may i say when a rumour this big hits, its rare that its wrong. like AMD ATI when that was a rumour.
AMD is close to folding, due to ray tracing technology that INTEL is close to releasing. CPU's ( fusion ) will not aquire horsepower and as as of ghz measurment display.
i hate intel for there buying everyone out and doing it them selves, i love AMD for there friendly transistors and arc. inpart from amd+2
either way as it stands now, now way does AMD in any way evoke to be a challenge against server compatability and stability against INTEL.
i personally use xeons for servers. because they fuckin pawn ass.
its xeons, and no one else compete's at all
xeons can look at using 8 servers per core. its that stupid.
In a calculation and observation the results were likely.
Intel; Is very good and fast but absorbed alot of dust and was likely to burn out if you do not clean it enough and every clean damages the cpu so more frequently you have to clean it the more damage (Yes ppl, You do not clean it with silky smooth paper, You take a soar and hard toothbrush or a big metal dustsucker obviously in most cases.)
AMD; Smooth and balanced it is has a very nice board and it does not absorb as much dust since its alot more quiet and running alot smoother than the intel. Lasts long and gives a Balanced perfomance.
Luburium Wrote:Have not read the entire post, Just the question.
In a calculation and observation the results were likely.
Intel; Is very good and fast but absorbed alot of dust and was likely to burn out if you do not clean it enough and every clean damages the cpu so more frequently you have to clean it the more damage (Yes ppl, You do not clean it with silky smooth paper, You take a soar and hard toothbrush or a big metal dustsucker obviously in most cases.)
AMD; Smooth and balanced it is has a very nice board and it does not absorb as much dust since its alot more quiet and running alot smoother than the intel. Lasts long and gives a Balanced perfomance.
Luburium Wrote:Have not read the entire post, Just the question.
In a calculation and observation the results were likely.
Intel; Is very good and fast but absorbed alot of dust and was likely to burn out if you do not clean it enough and every clean damages the cpu so more frequently you have to clean it the more damage (Yes ppl, You do not clean it with silky smooth paper, You take a soar and hard toothbrush or a big metal dustsucker obviously in most cases.)
AMD; Smooth and balanced it is has a very nice board and it does not absorb as much dust since its alot more quiet and running alot smoother than the intel. Lasts long and gives a Balanced perfomance.
What the hell is this crap?
Come one, it's so clear... im talking about the cleaning and dust absorbing !
Well in the race between intel and AMD what does everyone think about AMD's phenom chip's specially the 2nd gen vs intels new i7 chipset?
Personally I think the i7 far out performs the phenom series based soley on performance. As I havent had the chance to purchase a new phenom series cause I have intel now I have heard the AMD "true" quad core is only a triple core processor leaving the 4th core "locked". Not so sure if that's true haven't read much about the new series yet. A friend of mine mentioned that the AMD quad cores only have a 3% advantage on the i7's I find this hard to believe unless your comparing processor to processor. The new i7 boards come with a whole array of nice things such as QPI(quick path interconnect) which is basically intel's version of AMD's HT pipeline. Plus the i7's eliminate the need for a memory controller. That means no more FSB so to speak because the middle man is gone. plus as a standard it uses ddr3 and triple channel memory. Although the price comparison is a whole other debate I believe the intel's i7 just put phenom to bed :/
*Windows lack of output*
You: Hey, I want to run this program!
Windows: Ok.. It crashed... Now what? Give up?
You:...wtf...
*linux output helpful?*
You: ./My_program
Linux:...Failed!...oo kitties!
You:...wtf...
afterhoursgaming Wrote:Well in the race between intel and AMD what does everyone think about AMD's phenom chip's specially the 2nd gen vs intels new i7 chipset?
Personally I think the i7 far out performs the phenom series based soley on performance. As I havent had the chance to purchase a new phenom series cause I have intel now I have heard the AMD "true" quad core is only a triple core processor leaving the 4th core "locked". Not so sure if that's true haven't read much about the new series yet. A friend of mine mentioned that the AMD quad cores only have a 3% advantage on the i7's I find this hard to believe unless your comparing processor to processor. The new i7 boards come with a whole array of nice things such as QPI(quick path interconnect) which is basically intel's version of AMD's HT pipeline. Plus the i7's eliminate the need for a memory controller. That means no more FSB so to speak because the middle man is gone. plus as a standard it uses ddr3 and triple channel memory. Although the price comparison is a whole other debate I believe the intel's i7 just put phenom to bed :/
amd has been putting mem controlers in its cpus for a long time so yet again an other thing copied by intel. memory wise phenII (socket am3) support both ddr2 and ddr3. compare an i7 to a core2 duo and then compare it to an athlon 64 x2, an i7 looks more like amd then you think
![[Image: sig_spam.JPG]](http://www.gtfogaming.co.uk/files/sig_spam.JPG)
![[Image: 3386928252.png]](http://www.speedtest.net/result/3386928252.png)