Intel is 50% faster than AMD when comaring chips of same size, FFS, come back to reality, that's certainly being light years ahead.
no thats not light years fella, if intel were selling quantum computers ,that would be light years, set your scale to that deffinition
and back in the real world joe blogs has two new bought laptops one a lano based apu system ,one an intel dual core ivy with HD3000/or 4000 , guy(probably lady
) presses load page ,to play bejewled , which cpu looks faster /better to her , neither she'll not notice.
as someone else said an ssd put in the lano or the SB/ivy lapy would be the only thing that would change her experience.
now the same girl as does many plays sims, not a heavy gfx game , which is she going to think is the best lapy, if neither had ssd and the lano was trinity v IB then the trinity wins hands down imho based on speculative nonesense but also commen sense
ps i know this lady and her daughter and her daughters mate ,theyre all sims mad
How can I not claim you're a fanboy when you constantly tell me that Llano or AMD CPU in general is equal to Intel when there's no much clear evidence against it? Don't you see it smells of blind fanboy?
not once have i said amd's cpu element or any sku is equal to intels, what i have said is that in this price bracket trinity will make a better experience for the end user all round and i have repeatedly said that AMD is not That far behind intel in cpu performance, ie in everyday use the average man can do all he wants on amd or intel sufficiently and i count my own rig as quite capable for the money spent ,i could have gone intel this round but i simply couldnt get enough pciex lanes out of intel for the money,
you need to understand that not all of us need/want the same things, im not out for the absolute fastest cpu, i simply could not afford it ,hardly anyone can as itll be an intel
all i needed was all my games maxed at 1080P, and for 96 quid ,despite what your saying intel had NO quad chip for that money and HT makes not a QUAD