Tech Star Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 In a recent interview with Gulf News, AMD’s CEO Hector Ruiz took the gloves off and went straight for Intel’s throat. Angry about Intel following AMD’s lead in areas like X86-64 (64-bit) technology yet dominating the market, Ruiz let loose to the media. “If you look at the last five years, if you look at what major innovations hamd_3d ave occurred in computing technology, every single one of them came from AMD. Not a single innovation came from Intel. Oh, but there’s more! Intel continues… to abuse their monopoly and that’s why around the world governments and regulatory agencies continue to go after them. Oh no he didn't. Yes he did! News Source: gizmodo :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted December 3, 2007 Veteran Share Posted December 3, 2007 Sounds more like jelousy than other thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abecedarian paradoxious Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 well, intel innovated 'speed', at least for this and probably the next generation... unless amd can put some NOx into their system. amd may have had grandiose ideas and superlative moves, but in the end it comes down to who does the most with what they've got. I seem to remember transmeta kickin' some arse for a while.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deactivated Account Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 if it was not for AMD. Intel would not be where they are Today.. if it was not for Intel. AMD would never be where they are Today.. They both copy each others work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berserk87 Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 its somewhat true though... everything new i hear about is coming from AMD, all i hear from intel is "hey we made it a bit smaller". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted December 3, 2007 Veteran Share Posted December 3, 2007 if it was not for AMD. Intel would not be where they are Today.. if it was not for Intel. AMD would never be where they are Today.. They both copy each others work. And I stated the contrary where? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deactivated Account Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 And I stated the contrary where? sorry I clicked on the wrong icon.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meningitis Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 amd is king they invented core 2 duo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+virtorio MVC Posted December 3, 2007 MVC Share Posted December 3, 2007 In a recent interview with Gulf News, AMD?s CEO Hector Ruiz took the gloves off and went straight for Intel?s throat. Looks like he missed and ended up with this crotch stuck in a blender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTD Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 Makes absolutely no difference who innovated what and when. That's completely immaterial. It's all about who can effectively and in abundant quantities provide the solutions demanded by homes and businesses. Doesn't matter who made the widget, rather who can bring the kind people want to market faster and effectively. Right now, it's Intel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trixx Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 amd is king they invented core 2 duo LOL. Core 2 Duo is Intel. You mean dual core processing, yes. AMD piloted that idea, and man did it succeed! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreadBoat89 Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 its somewhat true though...everything new i hear about is coming from AMD, all i hear from intel is "hey we made it a bit smaller". being innovative doesn't always mean they are the best or guaranteed a profit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajputwarrior Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 maybe they should innovate something that touches a core 2... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathray Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 This is all so useless... i think it comes down to marketing... see how apple is running the show now? When you see a commercial on TV and it's about processors and things like that... do you know who it is going to be? almost guaranteed? INTEL That is why Intel is running the show, whoever does the PR for AMD should get fired, it's so useless to hear all this bickering. The name brand for processors is intel, it has been for some time, and AMD is going to be "that other processor" until they start real advertising Sure, they may have created all this magic, but it's their own fault for not capatilizing on it effectively Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borbus Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 This is all so useless... i think it comes down to marketing... see how apple is running the show now?When you see a commercial on TV and it's about processors and things like that... do you know who it is going to be? almost guaranteed? INTEL That is why Intel is running the show, whoever does the PR for AMD should get fired, it's so useless to hear all this bickering. The name brand for processors is intel, it has been for some time, and AMD is going to be "that other processor" until they start real advertising Sure, they may have created all this magic, but it's their own fault for not capatilizing on it effectively This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deactivated Account Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 (edited) I'm a AMD fan but one of the answers as to why AMD is loseing the fight is that they do not run any TV ads.. I cant even remember that last AMD TV ad i seen.. But I do remember the last Intel TV ad.. Hell as I'm typeing its playing right now.. so my message to AMD is.. STOP F-ing Crying and do somthing that will bring yourselfs back up in the market.. Umm for Starters run TV ads you TARDS... Edited December 3, 2007 by dl0711 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chconline Veteran Posted December 3, 2007 Veteran Share Posted December 3, 2007 Well, generally, in the computer world, there are two distinct groups: Mainstream consumers, and the enthusiast user. To obtain the mainstream consumer market, it's mostly retail availability and marketing to "get your name to be a household name". Intel has certainly succeeded in this area, and over the years Intel and especially Pentium remains the premium brand for processors -- and the Core 2 CPUs has also obtained a similar fame. AMD, on the other hand, was just "that cheap CPU brand for cheap Compaqs" which isn't exactly a favorable position for the company -- sure, it has the retail consumer market as they are readily available, but most consumers don't mind paying more for a "better" (AKA Intel) processor. Now for the enthusiast market, it's a different story -- mostly the emphasis is less on marketing and more on performance, since there's usually little brand loyalty in this area. Move back 2 years and I am a big supporter of AMD CPUs. Now I own 4 Intel Core 2 based computers ALONE. Being that, it's performance-performance-performance. Everything roots down to performance. Overclockability, architecture, etc. = performance. Runs cooler = Better overclockability = performance. AMD has seen this in the Athlon 64 age in 2003-2007, and it certainly has gained a lot of favor from enthusiasts. However, they missed the boat when they introduced new CPUs. Native quad core (Phenom X4)? Big deal. It barely matches Intel CPUs from last year in terms of performance. The TDP sucks. It overclocks like crap. It may be priced lower, but for a few more bucks, I'd go for the one that's faster, and overclocks a heck load better. Spider platform? Sure, it's more "advanced", but AMD, it's about PERFORMANCE. I can't emphasize that enough. Intel wins in consumer market, and the enthusiast market. AMD needs to get their acts together instead of complaining about monopoly, "superior engineering and architecture", innovation, and all those crap. In the end, it's about who that makes a faster processor at a reasonable price, end of story. amd is king they invented core 2 duo Tell me, what do you see? And: http://www.intel.com/products/processor/core2duo/index.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berserk87 Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 I'm a AMD fan but one of the answers as to why AMD is loseing the fight is that they do not run any TV ads.. I cant even remember that last AMD TV ad i seen.. wow...now that u say that, i dont think ive EVER in my life, seen and AMD ad. :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1Frothy Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 So if AMD is so brilliant and virtually invented the modern 64-bit CPU then how is it that they're in such as poor financial position... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech Star Posted December 3, 2007 Author Share Posted December 3, 2007 I have never seen an AMD ad, but I have seen the AMD logo on a couple of Dell and DP commercials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Veteran Posted December 3, 2007 Veteran Share Posted December 3, 2007 AMD should learn to make faster processors rather than bicker about it. AMD was king between about late 2003 - mid 2006. Thats a huge timeframe to be king. Intel will probably be on top of the podium for a while yet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundayx Veteran Posted December 3, 2007 Veteran Share Posted December 3, 2007 If it wasn't for you AMD there would be no C2D, but COME ON!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowRanger13 Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 Athlon 64 was on top for a long time. It was a better processor then Intel's Pentium 4. AMD's Athlon 64 used other technologies to get performance while Pentium 4 relied more on it's high clock speed. Then AMD had Athlon 64 2X witch was a true dual core solution and Intel had Pentium D witch was basically just two Pentium 4s stuck together. It was AMD being on top that pushed Intel to get creative and come out with products like the Core 2. I'm kind of disappointed AMD could not make a better comeback with it's new CPU. I was hoping it would be closer to Core 2 performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draconian Guppy Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 (edited) Athlon 64 was on top for a long time. It was a better processor then Intel's Pentium 4. AMD's Athlon 64 used other technologies to get performance while Pentium 4 relied more on it's high clock speed. Then AMD had Athlon 64 2X witch was a true dual core solution and Intel had Pentium D witch was basically just two Pentium 4s stuck together. It was AMD being on top that pushed Intel to get creative and come out with products like the Core 2. I'm kind of disappointed AMD could not make a better comeback with it's new CPU. I was hoping it would be closer to Core 2 performance. Agreed, then we would have Core 3 :p Consumers don't care about innovations, they care about getting better mileage with their car, having better sound speaker system, not why it gets better gas mileage or sounds better. In other words Even if core 2 quads are 2 core 2 duo stuck together, who cares! They perform better than Phenom! :no: Seriously though, It's just plain jealousy... grass is ALWAYS greener on the other side :shifty: edit: raa :p Edited December 3, 2007 by maudit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raa Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 I can't help but notice that all of the AMD supporters seem to have spelling errors in their comments... AMD can't complain about this call anyway - it wasn't their decision. Microsoft are the ones to take aim at. I do remember them saying "We will not change the X64 standard if Intel decides to go against AMD". Thus, Intel was forced to use the AMD X64 extensions. (Correct me if I'm wrong on that) But it seems that innovation isn't made by Intel or AMD, but the software companies that use the processors! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts