AMD unleashes the 6000+

[Wildside]

there really isn't that much of a history of leapfrogging. everything up to and including AMD's K6 was on par or inferior. early K7 started to take a lead in some respects. the Athlon XP asserted power over the Intel competitors fairly well with Intel only taking minor victories here and there. K8 pretty much completely took all advantages from Intel and was completely superior. now is really the first time i would say Intel has "leapfrogged" AMD.

not for long though, dont u think AMD's first 2 quad-cores, coming out Q2-Q4 2007, will pwn Intel's quad-core n the next one their making in overall performance testing?

 

[Nagasama]

you're comparing an e6600, and a x2 3800+, and the x2 3800+ is (was before Brisbane) the budget dual core processor, compare it to an e6300 and I guarantee the difference is negligable.

very much so.

 

[Slam'n Systems]

i do.

I agree there; As long as AMD is around and they still pop out products, I doubt I'll ever go Intel.

 

[NosBoost300]

not for long though, dont u think AMD's first 2 quad-cores, coming out Q2-Q4 2007, will pwn Intel's quad-core n the next one their making in overall performance testing?

ya.. and intel will also be releasing their new structures, being the penryn (45nm dual core) and their new true quad core that is also 45nm... its not like intel isnt going to be coming out with anything new

I agree there; As long as AMD is around and they still pop out products, I doubt I'll ever go Intel.

and whats the purpose of this??? why not go where performance is best at a lower price???? is it really worth it to be that stuborn

 

[Sora]

I don't like hardcore only AMD fans. I think you should look at both sides of the spectrum on things like this. Sure you can have your preference but Intel finally are putting out some good chips and it's worth giving them a shot. Being too biased only makes you seem too hardheaded, no one likes to take advice from a person who is pushing something on you. Just my two cents.

 

[BennyV04988]

I'm nvidia for life i think... because it just goes back and forth, and way too often. You can just pick one and go with it, end of story.

Processors though, Intel is on top, and will be until AMD comes with better for cheaper, which....won't be happening.

names aside... Why go less for more, when you can get more for less?

Give me ONE good reason to go AMD vs INTEL (from scratch, $180+ cpu)

 

[M733mhz]

The main reason I'm still buying AMD is because I already have a 939 setup. People building from scratch would be a rare percentage going with AMD like I said earlier. It's the very few people who are on a budget or just don't need the performance of a newer chip.

 

[BennyV04988]

hence "from scratch, $180+". I'm not talking about budget builders... I'm talking about anyone who buys the X2 4400 or better with an am2 board is just retarded...

 

[M733mhz]

I don't know if "Retarded" would be a good word to use. Some people are just stubborn and will buy certain brands until they die. It's not really something to continue arguing about because it will never get solved. Some people prefer one product, other people like another, That's all there is to it.

 

[Apokalipse]

AMD's 4600 costs about the same as an E6300, and it beats the E6300 in most benchmarks.

AMD's 6000+ is not very far off the E6700, either.

When K8L comes out, I am quite sure they will be ahead again, and very significantly.

K8L will work on socket AM2, aswell.

No, I don't think Intel is kicking AMD's behind.