Nagasama
disgruntled ex-moderator
- Messages
- 6,956
- Location
- probably on the lake
me too me toooooo oh great swami fortune cookie!
,answer
... etc....answer
Dismissal of my arguments with "verbose technobabble ramblings" doesn't make them invalid.Apokalipse, you said, "Penryn hasn't got a lot of change, apart from a die shrink? uh yes it does."
A very generalized statement to make, then once I provided a hand full of changes, then you decide to go off on one of your verbose technobabble ramblings with , ... etc....
the number of changes here is not really relevant. What is relevant is what those changes are.If you have studied a lot about CPU architecture, you'll know why this isn't really anything revolutionary. CPU's get a lot more complex on the inside; but in this revision, not much of the actual core architecture has changed
I don't need to know a lot about CPU architecture to be able to read a handful of articles that explain 5 to 10 changes of a processor from current processors to know that 5 to 10 changes are much more then a die shrink.
Neither am I.I'm not here to argue AMD vs INTEL.
I never claimed you were. In fact, I'm not hellbent on absolutely going AMD. I do actually like the Core 2's architecture. I'm only assessing both architectures based on what I've read about them.I have both, use both and support both. I'm not a fanboy either way.
You know what?But, you made a bogus statement and left it way to open ended and then did one of your "insanely useless text happy come backs".
You know what?
snarf it.
I suspect you have not actually read my "insanely useless text happy come back".
Of course, I can't really tell if you're just saying that, but I'll take your word for it. Mainly because I don't want to play a contradiction game.Actually yes I have.
Talk about extreme exaggeration.Intel's Penryn's don't impress you with all of your godly knowledge of Central Processing Units. The AMD K10's are so uber radical that you are creaming in your jeans over them and the Penryn's pale in comparison.
peoples... Unless you are REALLY sad you always buy the best processor for the money right ? so why does it even matter.
Neither companies are dumb asses, therefor they will both, once in a while release a KILLER cpu, Intels case the C2D, AMD's are the high end signle core athlons (for the average person i.e. none of us) there great, extremely cheep and handle normal applications with a breeze. Hence there still popular, (atleast they were untul intels price cut, now the E6300 is pwning)
My point is in the neer futue it is likely (AMD being AMD), they'll release a fantasticly fast CPU and rock bottom prices, so at that time AMD will be 'winning' if you so wish to call it that.
The cycle will continue forever, and so will this argument. You can raise as many points as you want about how fantastic processors like the E6400 are... but i can bet i could find a cituation were a X2 3800 would be better, because of AMD's totally different architecture to Intels, there bound to be better at other thinsg than others.
Thats all ive got to say, until someone says AMD Pwnzorz, Vice Verasa.
thank you.. who cares which is better... choose the one that u can best afford