http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid= ... art_pos=24

Comparatively speaking I mean.

But will Intel ever actually pay a dime. They can probably tie things up with appeals for decades.

But this will help with the antitrust case in America that will happen in 2010.

AMD probably won't exist by 2010 with the way they're going.

This is ludicrous!

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.

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.

Downclocked A64's that are less than 4W...

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.