AMD and Intel.

Since everyone I talk to seems to like AMD alot more than Intel. So how come Intel is so much bigger? I own Intel and it was my first PC that i've owned. I had this pc for about 5 yrs now. But before that I really never heard of AMD up intell a couple of years ago. Now I hear AMD this and that, there better and what not. I'm suprised AMD isnt' as big as Intel. 8)
19 answers Last reply
More about intel
  1. that is easy, as that the history of intel is slightly longer than AMD, so they had a market share advantage than others, the other fact is thast amd only became better than intel in recent years, and intel have been brainwashing mass consumers (think about it, does your 84 year old grandma want to know the difference between northwood or a prescott? she will most likely want to get intel as most oems offer it and most tv commercials about computers have intel in them (amd is more enthouthist or else the well informed kinda product) and then is that intel is appeartenly palying dirty (which i think is very possible, due to the fact that dell started to get amd stuff after the initial lawsuit.... and the fact that when i was in china in 2000, there was no amd products, and i was in a pretty big port city (a big port city in china gets the newer western stuff faster) and since we were near taiwan the governemt had actually cared about us (hmmm anyone wana see some ICBM testing? come to some rural area near where i live (not in the city of course....) anyyywayyyysss back on topic, intel also have more support from other hardware vendors before middle s754, you can even say that hardware support was not good until when s939 became pretty main stream, so that more people wanted intel for compatibility (VIA + AMD anyone?)

    if amd keep up their product quality, i'm sure that in 4 years it will be on equal footign as intel and then 1 year later it will be surpassing intel in terms of sales and stuff, provided that no new cpu artectiture is developed (be it bio computer, optical cpu, or else just a new set of instructions that is not a addon to X84)
  2. Intel was a major player @ the invention of modern PCs. They are the ones who took an early lead in chip development. They had a legal division, and a PR division that ruled, so they were able to keep competition to a minimum.
    They just haven't been up to the competition's standards for the last few years.
    Not to worry, they will rise again. Until then, buy Amd, for better use of your hard earned $.
  3. well intel will not rise if they do not fix their standard a little, i mean seriousely, a marketing pro for CEO??..... this says a lot for their care for making better products for the consumer, but this can go either way, as the bigger they are the harder they fall and the bigger they are the hard to make them fall........
  4. Quote:
    that is easy, as that the history of intel is slightly longer than AMD
    Nope. They are bothe offshoots from Fairchild. Amd went first. I'd say that Intel didn't go until they stole the original chip, but I'm afraid of law suites, so I wont.
  5. woah hello i guess i haven't gotten far enough back in history..... something tells me i need to google Fairchild to find out more, then again if you can redirect me to a proper site then much would be apperciated :)
  6. :D
    Quote:
    Intel was a major player @ the invention of modern PCs. They are the ones who took an early lead in chip development. They had a legal division, and a PR division that ruled, so they were able to keep competition to a minimum.
    They just haven't been up to the competition's standards for the last few years.
    Not to worry, they will rise again. Until then, buy Amd, for better use of your hard earned $.


    It sounds like your more of an intel person. Am I right?
  7. Quote:
    that is easy, as that the history of intel is slightly longer than AMD
    Nope. They are bothe offshoots from Fairchild. Amd went first. I'd say that Intel didn't go until they stole the original chip, but I'm afraid of law suites, so I wont.

    who or what is fairchild? :roll:
  8. Well ass all the outha say ya History is Much longer.. So ppl who dont realy Put their time into research n stuf.. all thos noob that of caus who ever was there long is Alway beter.. u c 4 me no doubt intel is realy realy when p1 n p2
    n p3 n even early p4 was realy the King then in CPu..i mean compare 2 then amd with it AMD k5 K6 2 3 n thunder-B n early AlthonXp ya no mater what in Speed or Tempture n stuff.. intel is beter then.. But not when Amd brought out there 0.13 althonpx in which then was quite balance in Tech n the upcaoming barton Core with 512k L2 as well as the Most Well Know of all time which BRing AMD beater today is their amd Althlon 64bit..! 1st 64 bit Cpu in the market.. n The amz Temp that Amd can offer as well with Speed on such low Cor Clock compare 2 intel.. n dud 1 important thing since u dont no. do u no that most comany n business 2day they are all force 2 use. intel server n intel PC.. since due 2 the offer of intel company the garentee n stuff ther is no way a company can chos a AMD which have not beter offer 2 protect ther own company or business so more n more ppl are kind of force 2 use intel as this ppl also think More ppl who use it the beter it is.. Get it kind of stupid but that the fact.. Cool but now the fact is intel can no longet stant ther suckness. n still lie abt the quility stuf.. Since in realy suck now..!
    Thanks AMD rule . :)
  9. Intel also have thier fingers in more pies, they produce a lot more than just CPUs. They produce the most GPUs as well I think (correct me if im wrong) because they shift so many onboard gpus.
  10. Other thing is that Intel gives great discounts to their mayor client (Dell, HP, and others) to secure market share & they got more resources to build fabs so they have a lot of processors on stock so the discounts does not hurt their earnings.
  11. Quote:
    Nope. They are bothe offshoots from Fairchild. Amd went first. I'd say that Intel didn't go until they stole the original chip, but I'm afraid of law suites, so I wont.


    Hmm...AMD didnt incorporate till 1969...this means that Intel was one year infront of them about eleven months but thats a year. AMD didnt go public until 72 and then again it took them about thirteen years to really make it to the Fortune 500. Noyce was the one who helped co-found Intel from departing from Fairchild. I am not sure about the statement above stating AMD was a direct rip from Fairchild as well. It is safe to say though, AMD was not infact first. However, the plain fact is INTEL has been getting PWNED by AMD since the K6 processor. Intel has been trying to introduce new products and they have a much larger marketing scheme to them yes. ALSO not to mention after the lawsuit, whos not to say Intel has been doing this forever, since the start? This is a major financial setback for anyone who is trying to gain more money. This is also a major reason to why Intel is known more than AMD....But going back to quality of a product, AMD has always had them beat in this department. I agree with HolyLancer, in about four years its a done deal for Intel. Intel will never be able to fully "LEAP AHEAD" hahahaha http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28619
  12. Quote:
    Intel also have thier fingers in more pies, they produce a lot more than just CPUs. They produce the most GPUs as well I think (correct me if im wrong) because they shift so many onboard gpus.

    OK i'm going to feel really stupid at this point. Again my ass doens't know too much about comps. What are GPU? I mean I probably heard it before but...just didnt know the acronym for it. :roll:
  13. Grafik Proc Unit the brain of ur video card.
  14. Actually, the lawsuit has helped AMD in the retail market. Where I work, we carry more AMD based systems than Intel now. What kills AMD is companies like Dell, Sony, and Toshiba that only use Intel. HP, for the record, has been one of the major pushers of AMD. Granted, for awhile, we didn't carry AMD Hp's, but now, that's all we carry.
  15. Quote:
    Actually, the lawsuit has helped AMD in the retail market. Where I work, we carry more AMD based systems than Intel now. What kills AMD is companies like Dell, Sony, and Toshiba that only use Intel. HP, for the record, has been one of the major pushers of AMD. Granted, for awhile, we didn't carry AMD Hp's, but now, that's all we carry.


    Thats what I meant to portray with the statement about the lawsuit. But anyways, you really run Windows95? wow I want a copy!!
  16. Quote:
    Actually, the lawsuit has helped AMD in the retail market. Where I work, we carry more AMD based systems than Intel now. What kills AMD is companies like Dell, Sony, and Toshiba that only use Intel. HP, for the record, has been one of the major pushers of AMD. Granted, for awhile, we didn't carry AMD Hp's, but now, that's all we carry.

    Where do you work at? :twisted:
  17. Sadly, yes, I still have a 95 based system that I use and an original 95 install cd.

    Let's just say I work in the retail market.
  18. :wink:
    Quote:
    yes, I still have a 95 based system that I use and an original 95 install cd.

    Let's just say I work in the retail market.


    Wow! So do you think it is worth it for me to invest in an upgrade from Win 3.1?
  19. LOL! Yeah, figure someone would make a 3.1 crack! Heck, why not go back to DOS? For the record, this is my main machine:

    2.5Ghz Celeron
    1 GB DDR-2100
    128MB FX 5200 (which do suck for the record but better than an intergrated GPU)
    40GB WD 5,400 RPM HDD (Programs only)
    200GB Maxtor HDD(Files and Mp3's)
    Server 2003 as an OS

    It ain't the greatest, but when all you do is Word, it's more than enough.
    The 95 system is used for an old DOS program I have and my main Word machine it seems. I type more on the 95 system than my main machine.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Intel AMD