AMD'S RESPONSE TO INTEL'S WOODCREST

You'll just have to love K8L.
Read here:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29890

This is more proof that there's no reason to worry about Intel's upcoming offerings. As bulshitter stated before, All this Intel propaganda is Exuberant Optimism

This is more proof that there's no reason to worry about Intel's upcoming offerings. As bulshitter stated before, All this Intel propaganda is Exuberant Optimism
the first half of 2007
great...right on time with 65nm. Wish they would do it on time though, and hopefully it will be in supply...

Dude, that article says nothing about nothing. I don't know why you post articles from the enquirer at all. You must be in the same mindset as they are which doesn't say much.

The enquirer is so AMD biased, a first grader could see that.

Now, for the rest of you that are reading this hopeless wonder of a thread, so far, my opty is clocked at 2.2Ghz and it is running very smooth. My goal for now is to get it to 2.7 on air. Just ran prime95 for 8 hours and the temp only reached 38C. Very nice! Highly recommend this processor!

http://photobucket.com/albums/f16/ [...] dTemps.jpg

Now see 9-inch, there's something more useful. Try that once in a while instead of reading biased ass sites man. Come on ...

I bet you if they were talking about Conroe blowing AM2's ass (won't happen) then all of you would believe it.

Not to be a pain, but how do you feel about luminaris's take on the enquirer?
Since you have quoted some ripe Intel gossip from them, do you think they are Amd fanboys?
Before the K7s came out, Intel staked thier reputation on FPU perf. If this little bit of gossip is true, Intel may never be able to claim they do (true) FPU right.

Well, I for one have never seen any such article from the enquirer nor do I care to as, they have writers there fresh out of high school. That's the real reason why I object to articles from them. Yes, the articles I have actually read from them do make them seem very much AMD biased but, the least they could do is write with some sort of professionlism.

In terms of The Inquirer, I do think they are biased ... toward themself. They concentrate on getting the news out, it really doesn't matter what side it's from as long as they said it first. I think that sensationalist attitude comes out in the wording of their articles which is why some seem Intel biased while others seem AMD biased. It's all just marketing the news in general as well as targeting audience groups for reactions. Despite that, I still think that the core of their articles are pretty reliable though. When they are wrong about their announcements, often it's probably not their fault since the information was right at the time, but the companies just changed their roadmaps or intentions. I found their mobile, desktop, and server outlook articles quite good though and agreed with most of their points on both sides. That's from my point of view of course. They are getting a bit dated now being from two months ago.

I'm sure you've read them:
Mobile
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28624
Desktop
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28602
Server
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28639

As for Intel trailing behind in FPU, that's what I was thinking too. The Pentium II provided a huge FPU increase causing AMD to introduce 3DNow to make up the difference. The Pentium 4 does quite well in FPU calculations as well with SSE and SSE2 though. I'm interested to know if K8L's improvement in FP performance is actually from the FPUs themselves so that everything benefits or is it just from the FPU instruction set they plan on adding which then may require program support. If it's just an instruction set, it won't nearly be as impressive as redesigned FPUs as Conroe will include an SSE4 type set also.

You got that right P4Man.