Intel Sheds Light on Penryn Enhancements

[Tatty_Two]

I know your point.....but it doesent change the truth

 

[Bri]

meatball

Just wanted to post a question regarding Intel vs AMD.

I,m not a tech wiz so heres my question's,
All agree?, right now Intel is fastest overall, O.K
but HOW?
Don't Intel's have more on die L2 cache?? (which would increase cost & performance?)
And Don't Intel chips have more transistors on die as well?
And the fact that the chip architecture is convaluted-frankeinstien?
To me there chip arhitecture seem complicated
O.K> but
AMD is a very close contender, right? right.. most won't notice the dif.
To me it seems that AMD is actually doing more with less.. ie a more efficient chip??
The simplicity of there chip architecture and the direct connect approach seems to have greater potential.
I think that AMD is trying to increase Band with so when they do perfect thier true core's potential's and fab process they will not be in the position Intel is with there FSB.
I look at it this way, You don't need to run high mghz if the chip is designed well and that's what we need to under stand.
There are thermal limits to deal with, no?
Intel seems to have the money to jump to easer solutions (more L2/transistore)to "beat" the comp.
So the Comp. has been forced to creat a product with less but that can do the same/more?

Anyway ... just some thought's

 

[Wile E]

Just wanted to post a question regarding Intel vs AMD.

I,m not a tech wiz so heres my question's,
All agree?, right now Intel is fastest overall, O.K
but HOW?
Don't Intel's have more on die L2 cache?? (which would increase cost & performance?)
And Don't Intel chips have more transistors on die as well?
And the fact that the chip architecture is convaluted-frankeinstien?
To me there chip arhitecture seem complicated
O.K> but
AMD is a very close contender, right? right.. most won't notice the dif.
To me it seems that AMD is actually doing more with less.. ie a more efficient chip??
The simplicity of there chip architecture and the direct connect approach seems to have greater potential.
I think that AMD is trying to increase Band with so when they do perfect thier true core's potential's and fab process they will not be in the position Intel is with there FSB.
I look at it this way, You don't need to run high mghz if the chip is designed well and that's what we need to under stand.
There are thermal limits to deal with, no?
Intel seems to have the money to jump to easer solutions (more L2/transistore)to "beat" the comp.
So the Comp. has been forced to creat a product with less but that can do the same/more?

Anyway ... just some thought's

Interesting theories, but the problem is, it doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is the end result, and the fact is, the Intels are more powerful AND use the same, or less power in most cases. I own both the rig in my specs, and 2 AMD machines, btw.

 

[candle_86]

this current rivalry is great for the consumer, i cannot wait for intel to enter the high end vga market just to squeeze Nvidia also.

they have no idea what they are doing is the problem look at there IGP's the NVidia and AMD IGP's walk all over them. First they need some engineers that have a clue about what is going on in a video card