http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid= ... art_pos=24
Comparatively speaking I mean.
| MysteryByte Computers http://mysterybyte.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| It's not all bad for AMD http://mysterybyte.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1491 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Flama22 [ Thu May 14, 2009 8:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | It's not all bad for AMD |
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid= ... art_pos=24 Comparatively speaking I mean.
|
|
| Author: | Dr_BenD_over [ Thu May 14, 2009 8:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
But will Intel ever actually pay a dime. They can probably tie things up with appeals for decades. |
|
| Author: | CMDR Steve-O [ Thu May 14, 2009 4:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
But this will help with the antitrust case in America that will happen in 2010. |
|
| Author: | Dr_BenD_over [ Thu May 14, 2009 6:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
AMD probably won't exist by 2010 with the way they're going. |
|
| Author: | Tony [ Thu May 14, 2009 6:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
This is ludicrous! |
|
| Author: | Flama22 [ Fri May 15, 2009 8:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I actually saw some sales figures for Q1 2009 and it looks like AMD was up 5% while Intel was down 5% in relation to each other. The authors speculation was that with the economy down less people were spending money on Netbooks, which are currently dominated by Intel chips. |
|
| Author: | sbeeze316 [ Fri May 15, 2009 12:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
i was reading about amd's netbook cpu's, they're essientially down clocked/low voltage A64's( i think there called Athlon Neo's or that may be there ultra portable chip i forget). Apprently they are a fair bit quicker and more energy effiecient then the atom's so i hope they can get some market share. nice thing about amd's offering is it has a HD3400 series gpu, alot nicer then the gma950 the atom is paired with. |
|
| Author: | Dr_BenD_over [ Fri May 15, 2009 1:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Downclocked A64's that are less than 4W... |
|
| Author: | sbeeze316 [ Fri May 15, 2009 1:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
i guess thats the claim, i just remember reading it ran cooler and faster. i theres various versions for ultra portable notebooks and netbooks. i know that the higest end ones draw a maximum of 15w but thats in laptops. the one i was looking at was 1ghz, where as the ultra portable was clocked at 1.6-1.8. even if it does consume more power the performance is amazing and well worth it http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/06/amd-kinda-sorta-takes-aim-at-atom-with-athlon-neo/ that article puts it somewheres between netbooks and ultraportables, there saying the chipset and cpu can eat upto 35w so its is dramrically higher then then atom but its still a superior cpu imho. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|