Well, if their previous gen quad cores (QX9770, QX6600, etc.) are very fast, these should be faster. But I cannot rely on the price however, because making smaller is more expensive..
i still like AMD over intel. I do a lot of gaming and the video card what metters more. AMD had the fastest card till the 9800Gx2 came out about 2 weeks ago.
AMD isnt as good as intel no matter how much you like them. and they have good video cards cause they dont make their own. they mucho off of ATI and Nvidea.
dont forget AMD owns ATI and asus, and im sure you will see ton of new stuff coming out from them. A Intel CPU thats as fast as a AMD CPU can cost $100-$1200 more as well so AMD still better imo and from the PCs ive tested the AMD is a better way to go
wow integrated memory controller how "innovative". Maybe one day intel will have some of their own ideas. Still, I'm glad for the improvement since mac will never use AMD.
Here is "innovative" for you. Hafnium gas process, hig-k metal gates that increase performance and use less power, 45nm, 32nm 80 core CPUs. Thats jut the CPU side.
What Intel also does is push innovation outside of the CPU arena. They pushed SATA, pushed DDR2 are pushing DDR3 and are presenting WiMax which is much faster than WiFi.
I'll give AMD credit for the IMC but a lot of their technology came from IBM helping them where as Intel does most on their own.
Not really. x86-64 is considered AMDs but true 64bit or x64 as it would be called is Intels back with the original Itanium. It just wasn't adopted as it didn't backwards support x86.
Als AMD didn't produce x86-64 all by their lonesome. IBM helped them with that. In fact the A64 was just a AMD version of the Power5 CPU from IBM.
Ok, Fair enough, I just don't like how intel tries to pass these ideas of as their own. The truth is without having these two companies the processor would suck. AMD was doing good but now they are behind.
Where you are right the fact is that this is something that Intel has been working on since the Pentium 4. In fact Nehalem was supposed to come where Prescott did but they held it back.
Bot companies innovate and push ideas. Only some get accepted. Like Intels Hyperthreading. AMD has yet to adopt something like that even though it could benefit them.
Im sick of all this Intel i7 hype. Heres some actual factual proof why intel i7 is not designed for gaming but designed for servers.
Intel i7+large L3 cache+extremely small L2 cache= not very good gaming performance.
Fact:games Utilize large L2 cache, thats why current dual core and quads are good.
Please read these articles before commenting.
Intelligent comments please.
Lakomcl 3 years ago
Well that is not 100% true. The reason why most quads suck for gaming is the fact games don't use a quad-core.
GTA4 shows a HUGE improvement over a C2D because of quad support.
Now your right the L3 cache idea is questionable but once again the game coding is what fails to make a quad a gaming CPU.
Twisted86 3 years ago
sick of the i7 hype? The i7 does much better than the core 2 series.
I think you need to read some articles.
FSFchannel 2 years ago
hey, i was just talking to glenn hinton face-to-face yesterday about this, and the nehalem sounds awesome!
ChinterPictures 3 years ago
it better not suck like Pentium D
3dlegoman 3 years ago
Well, if their previous gen quad cores (QX9770, QX6600, etc.) are very fast, these should be faster. But I cannot rely on the price however, because making smaller is more expensive..
Youanden 3 years ago
2-3 years ago, AMD kept up and challenged Intel. Now, AMD is playing catch up. Big time!
flipboi87 4 years ago 3
i still like AMD over intel. I do a lot of gaming and the video card what metters more. AMD had the fastest card till the 9800Gx2 came out about 2 weeks ago.
JDRyder15 3 years ago
AMD isnt as good as intel no matter how much you like them. and they have good video cards cause they dont make their own. they mucho off of ATI and Nvidea.
ajhthecoolman 3 years ago
oh yeah, and you can customize intel chips with ATI or Nvidea video cards anyway, so....yeah. intel is better than AMD
ajhthecoolman 3 years ago
dont forget AMD owns ATI and asus, and im sure you will see ton of new stuff coming out from them. A Intel CPU thats as fast as a AMD CPU can cost $100-$1200 more as well so AMD still better imo and from the PCs ive tested the AMD is a better way to go
JDRyder15 3 years ago
Is it just me, or does this guy sound shy or something to be talking about it? Not very good, especially if your the Lead Architects...
Anyway, the new technology sounds awesome, can't wait for it. Good job Intel.
carlover78 4 years ago
He is probably not an outspoken person, he is not used to speaking into a camera so he is nervous.
He is probably not nervous at work talking to his colleagues.
PeteRoy 4 years ago 4
wow integrated memory controller how "innovative". Maybe one day intel will have some of their own ideas. Still, I'm glad for the improvement since mac will never use AMD.
cllgnc89 4 years ago
Here is "innovative" for you. Hafnium gas process, hig-k metal gates that increase performance and use less power, 45nm, 32nm 80 core CPUs. Thats jut the CPU side.
What Intel also does is push innovation outside of the CPU arena. They pushed SATA, pushed DDR2 are pushing DDR3 and are presenting WiMax which is much faster than WiFi.
I'll give AMD credit for the IMC but a lot of their technology came from IBM helping them where as Intel does most on their own.
dregothic 4 years ago 3
Yeah what he said LOL
Jeffizzlemynizzle 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
x86-64 was AMD's invention.
Xmeagol 4 years ago
Not really. x86-64 is considered AMDs but true 64bit or x64 as it would be called is Intels back with the original Itanium. It just wasn't adopted as it didn't backwards support x86.
Als AMD didn't produce x86-64 all by their lonesome. IBM helped them with that. In fact the A64 was just a AMD version of the Power5 CPU from IBM.
dregothic 4 years ago
Ok, Fair enough, I just don't like how intel tries to pass these ideas of as their own. The truth is without having these two companies the processor would suck. AMD was doing good but now they are behind.
cllgnc89 3 years ago
Where you are right the fact is that this is something that Intel has been working on since the Pentium 4. In fact Nehalem was supposed to come where Prescott did but they held it back.
Bot companies innovate and push ideas. Only some get accepted. Like Intels Hyperthreading. AMD has yet to adopt something like that even though it could benefit them.
dregothic 3 years ago
Will Nehalem work with SkullTrail?
zytekfan 4 years ago
AMD is toast :)
vivek7006 4 years ago 4
Yeah but thats to bad
i'm not saying that i'm a amd fanboy i just like the competion to keep both the prices honest
Jeffizzlemynizzle 4 years ago