CPU prices plummet

I know what you said.. I just said the truth is that AMD actually copies Intel :rolleyes:

AMD made their money of Intel's designs. Who cares if one of their products failed (Intel I mean), I can quote you a number of AMD products that failed as well. Care to tell us some about all of the failed AMD products, or should I do it?
 
None of that changes the fact that intel has pulled numerous questionable and unethical moves.

They needed a 2nd manufacturer to get the contract from IBM for the XT, then when AMD showed its true potential, by making the Am386DX40 where as intel only managed 33Mhz on the 386 they decided to kill off AMD (so they could have a monopoly). AMD has consistently proved itself to be the leader in x86 innovation . If it was not for them we would still be stuck with 386's because it would make enough money for intel.

I am not an AMD fanboi - just an avid intel hater - and if you did some research and look at the past of these two companies you will see why.
 
Weren't AMD the first with x64 cpus?

Weren't AMD the first to integrate the memory controller onto the cpu?

I will also never use Intel.
 
I'm not an Intel Fanbois either, and actually have and AMD and Intel PC at home.

AMD also did unethical things, or are the anti-trust courtcases with them and Nvidia doing price fixing not considered "unethical"

With regards to merced BTW... are you talking about the Itanium processor that Intel announced in 1999 and then AMD copied in 2001 with the AMD64? I realise their sales projections were way off, but its still the fourth-most deployed microprocessor architecture for enterprise-class systems.. which hmmm.. is still ahead of AMD
 
Don't Intel also give kick backs to companies that only sell Intel cpus?
 
Qwikslver said:
Weren't AMD the first with x64 cpus?
Click to expand...
Well, Intel and HP were there before, AMD released first , but the current Itanium is still sold more than AMD. Again, though, its going to be hard to say who copied who when Intel released thier specs first, and then AMD rushed out to make the chips first
 
Actually I think DEC were the first to market with 64 bit stuff...

Every company copies off every other company.. its just the way it is.
 
Kalvaer said:
Well, Intel and HP were there before, AMD released first , but the current Itanium is still sold more than AMD. Again, though, its going to be hard to say who copied who when Intel released thier specs first, and then AMD rushed out to make the chips first
Click to expand...

linky please, i thought Itanium was one step away from dead ie it was and is a disaster
 
Last edited:
Kalvaer said:
2006 AMD received subpoenas from the Justice Department regarding possible antitrust violations in the graphics card industry, including the act of fixing prices (Intel was already charged in the late '80s and '99, so they were again behind)
Click to expand...

ummm AMD had only just bought out ATI so how could they be responsible for antitrust violations (just because they buy a company that may have been responsible for price fixing does not make them guilty of price fixing)unless AMD made gpu's before then which i do not know about :p
 
QX6700RULZ said:
okie but nowhere does it say it outsells AMD so linky for that please.
Click to expand...
http://www.itjungle.com/tlb/tlb052708-story03.html

But ignore it... I read like in idiot. It is still the fourth-most deployed microprocessor architecture for enterprise-class systems, Just behind the x86-64, IBM POWER, and SPARC... Of course since I clean forgot the X86-64 is AMD's name for the AMD64... I would be wrong :o
 
QX6700RULZ said:
ummm AMD had only just bought out ATI so how could they be responsible for antitrust violations (just because they buy a company that may have been responsible for price fixing does not make them guilty of price fixing)unless AMD made gpu's before then which i do not know about :p
Click to expand...
I think they used to, or worked on simular projects which all failed, but then decided to drop those markets and go into RAM and CPU's, and then only because those were the only two of their markets that succeeded.

And just because ATI is now part of AMD, doesn't mean AMD is less to blame, You cant tell me the AMD board didnt' know what they were buying into. It also wouldn't surprise me if AMD and Intel do the same, yet sue each other every second year to keep the press happy and continue making millions of us who sit back and fight :D

[edit] sorry, meant wouldn't
 
Last edited:
Here's your timeline for the first 64bit microprocessors that aren't supercomputer grade equipment (that started MUCH earlier)

* 1991: MIPS Technologies produces the first 64-bit microprocessor, the R4000, which implements the MIPS III ISA, the third revision of their MIPS architecture.[2] The CPU is used in SGI graphics workstations starting with the IRIS Crimson. However, 64-bit support for the R4000 would not be included in the IRIX operating system until IRIX 6.2, released in 1996. Kendall Square Research deliver their first KSR1 supercomputer, based on a proprietary 64-bit RISC processor architecture running OSF/1.

* 1992: Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) introduces the pure 64-bit Alpha architecture which was born from the PRISM project.[3]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64bit
 
Kalvaer said:
I think they used to, or worked on simular projects which all failed, but then decided to drop those markets and go into RAM and CPU's, and then only because those were the only two of their markets that succeeded.
Click to expand...

lol i am learning lots today, what does AMD do involving RAM (googled but found nothing) ?
 
AMD Flash Memory is now Spansion Flash Memory (just a rebrand, its still owned by AMD and Fujitsu)
 
ToxicBunny said:
Here's your timeline for the first 64bit microprocessors that aren't supercomputer grade equipment (that started MUCH earlier)
Click to expand...
So everyone beat Intel and AMD :)

Next up though was :

1994: Intel announces plans for the 64-bit IA-64 architecture (jointly developed with Hewlett-Packard), Still ahead of AMD

We could argue though that it was HP and not Intel as HP, started the EPIC program research in 1989
 
Also from what I know, the integrated memory controller was also developed by Intel first, they just didn't put it into a chip until the i7
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X