Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

INTEL RELEASES MOTHER-OF-ALL-FUD DOC

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 2, 2006 5:21:36 PM

So, Intel says that their dual core offerings are far superior than AMD's in every benchmarks.
Those statements were hillarious. :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 

What else can you expect from someone that's desperate to call your attention no matter at what cost.
Shame on you Intel. :?

http://theinquirer.net/?article=30000[/quote]
March 2, 2006 5:47:33 PM

Why doesn't the author provide a link to the document to allow the reader to form an opinion on his or her own?

I've searched the Internet using Google for the document and was not able to find anything.
March 2, 2006 5:51:46 PM

pure entertainment thanks for posting.

See know will you people believe me when i say my d920 is the best, Intel says so , so it must be true.
Related resources
March 2, 2006 5:57:43 PM

when will intel learn you cant bulls**t anymore
March 2, 2006 5:59:16 PM

HAHAHAHAH that was the most hillarious article ever, but I'm sure Intel thinks that in their minds. I totally think ATI and NV are inferior to that of the raging Intel GPU!!

"It gets funnier though, the not-on-the-roadmaps 805 @ 2.66GHz does not have a counterpart on SYSmark, but 'beats' an X2 3800 in PCMark. If you buy this one for a second, I have a bridge to sell you. The retail market tell a story that directly contradicts this page." LOL @ THAT! But the funnier thing is, I guarantee the Intel fanboys on these forumz will say "it does beat it! and it overclocks more too! LOL!!!!

Ya dude, totally a 955 beats an FX-60, even though 3rd party reviews show the 955 @ 4.26GHz gettng beat by the FX-60 @ 2.8GHz LOL!! So much for overclocking Intel Fanboys! lol you're all funny. Oh No! Dual Independent Bus's! Something AMD already has! Oh No! It's gonna beat AMD so much! Oh No! :o  . BWHAHAHAHAHAA that was a nice read lol.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 6:45:58 PM

Intel has the right to post its own opinions you know. And there has been a lot of AMD rubbish too so this is nothing special to look at.
BTW FX 60 isn't that far ahead,it gets matched by a 955 on stock at most things and it can't overclock very well.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1909488,00.a...
AMD is mainly ahead now because it's cooler and consumes less.
Performance wise,differences are small.
March 2, 2006 6:48:09 PM

Quote:
Intel has the right to post its own opinions you know. And there has been a lot of AMD rubbish too so this is nothing special to look at.
BTW FX 60 isn't that far ahead,it gets matched by a 955 on stock at most things and it can't overclock very well.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1909488,00.a...
AMD is mainly ahead now because it's cooler and consumes less.
Performance wise,differences are small.


Intel Fanboy, stop. There is no "AMD rubbish" or w/e the hell you're talking about, and I don't care what ExtremeIntelBiasedTech.com says, I'll stick to neutral sites, thanks fanboy. BTW, my post deserves 5 stars, not 1 fanboy.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 6:51:22 PM

is that better mike
March 2, 2006 7:07:20 PM

:lol: 
Extremetech is as neutral as it can get.
There are Xbit/A tech.. reviews most of them showing quite a tight score really, the games being the deciding factor. And nobody can't deny this.
And don't tell me that AMD never got overrated (that's the case here).
Intel does well in marketing(if someone read this article, it might have influenced his/her decision). For them is important to sell the chips so it's sell now and ask questions later. AMD would do the same if they had the $$$. (not to mention that Inq is AMD bias and it isn't the first nor the last time they bash Intel)

BTW I gave you 1 because you forgot to come up with a link to a site showing FX 60 beating a 955. Without proof i consider this AMD bias. And do you actually care about post marks?
March 2, 2006 7:13:16 PM

Whether somebody is AMD biased or not, is irrelevant, because at the moment, regardless of yours, ak47, and others Intel Fanboy "Overclocking P4's pwn!", "AMD is slow!", etc. posts, the facts remain this:

1) On a clock for clock basic, the Pentium 4 is FAR inferior to that of the Athlon 64.

2) AMD Athlon 64 processors are FAR cheaper than Pentium 4 Processors that offer similar performance

3) The AMD Opteron 64 Server/Workstation chip annihilates the Intel Xeon

4) Under x64 Environment, especially Linux x64, an A64 or 064 @ 2.6GHz can be up to 75% faster than a 3.8GHz P4 or Xeon in Memory Bandwidth, Application Performance, and everything else.

Those are 4 FACTS and I dare you Intel Fanboy's to challenge any of them.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 7:13:37 PM

When they stop making serious ammounts of money.
March 2, 2006 7:15:39 PM

Yeh you right Mike... All I gotta say...

AMD 4 LIFE
March 2, 2006 7:16:45 PM

lol man they stopped makin serious cash awhile ago why do you think that with every new core you need a new mobo and chipset
March 2, 2006 7:23:52 PM

Vindication!
I got flamed a while back on a thread I started, "A CPU made of paper," where I merely suggested that Conroe's actual specs -- when the chip actually becomes available for benchmarketing -- may not live up to the marketing hype.
Intel lies. A lot. Whoppers, really.
AMD (like any corporation) is not above telling a fib now and then.
But few companies consistently get away with telling the outrageous stories that Intel tells with a straight face.
March 2, 2006 7:33:59 PM

Quote:
Vindication!
I got flamed a while back on a thread I started, "A CPU made of paper," where I merely suggested that Conroe's actual specs -- when the chip actually becomes available for benchmarketing -- may not live up to the marketing hype.
Intel lies. A lot. Whoppers, really.
AMD (like any corporation) is not above telling a fib now and then.
But few companies consistently get away with telling the outrageous stories that Intel tells with a straight face.


I will say AMD gets frustrated now and thand and throws something out of left field, but they have SPEC and other 3RD PARTY NEUTRAL benchmarks and performance tests to prove what they say, they don't say "WE PWNZ0R INTEL BY 100000%", but instead give us consumers REAL NUMBERS and not made up sh!t.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 7:36:43 PM

Quote:
...Intel does well in marketing(if someone read this article, it might have influenced his/her decision). For them is important to sell the chips so it's sell now and ask questions later. ...


So you would rather buy based on marketing than on actual performance? I try to avoid taking sides, but Intels claims about their upcoming chips are just plain B$. They will be an improvement, but not that much.
March 2, 2006 7:39:16 PM

I will give credit to the Israeli team, the Pentium M CPU is a FANTASTIC chip, and my hat goes off to those people. But, the new Turion 64's on Socket S1 (638 Pins) are expected to eliminate the Core Duo and Pentium M's, but we'll have to see how this goes.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 7:41:05 PM

Actually, the 955 and FX-60 are about the same price, except the FX-60 is a bit more.
March 2, 2006 7:41:21 PM

1) That alone doesn't matters. I mean what would you choose: a very cool P4 6 GHZ(fictional of course) or a 3 GHz AMD 64. Longer pipelines are not necesarily a bad thing you know.
2)FX 60 is more expensive than 955 not to mention that Intel has got the cheapest dual core on the market
3)K
4)don't really care. Linux D already pointed that out for 100 times before.
What about the mobile world?
Is there anything better than the Core duo right now? NO
Will there be a better AMD CPU in the NEAR future? I doubt it(turion consumes more and delivers the same performance).
Intel has a lead here,doesn't it?
And i'm surprised you didn't mention the number 1 flaw of Intel chips. Inefficiency. That's the main reason for me not avoiding this line of Intel chips.
Performance wise there are pros and cons still i'd consider it a tie in most apps except games(that's excluding opterons and xeons,there things are grimm for Intel).
March 2, 2006 7:42:56 PM

Quote:
1) That alone doesn't matters. I mean what would you choose: a very cool P4 6 GHZ(fictional of course) or a 3 GHz AMD 64. Longer pipelines are not necesarily a bad thing you know.
2)FX 60 is more expensive than 955 not to mention that Intel has got the cheapest dual core on the market
3)K
4)don't really care. Linux D already pointed that out for 100 times before.
What about the mobile world?
Is there anything better than the Core duo right now? NO
Will there be a better AMD CPU in the NEAR future? I doubt it(turion consumes more and delivers the same performance).
Intel has a lead here,doesn't it?
And i'm surprised you didn't mention the number 1 flaw of Intel chips. Inefficiency. That's the main reason for me not avoiding this line of Intel chips.
Performance wise there are pros and cons still i'd consider it a tie in most apps except games(that's excluding opterons and xeons,there things are grimm for Intel).


Ah man...I give up on you Intel Fanboy, I just hope nobody pays attention to your biased and un-informed posts, *sigh*.

BTW: RICHPLS and COMPGEEK: 955 Intel For $1,169 on newegg.com, FX-60 AMD for $1,025...

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 7:43:34 PM

stop your intel bullcrap is over laoding my brain it hurts so bad now ahhh!
March 2, 2006 7:51:40 PM

Quote:
when the chip actually becomes available for benchmarketing


Ooops, I think I've coined a new word.
Benchmarketing is what Intel does with its new chips.
Benchmarking is what we're all waiting for ... real numbers.
March 2, 2006 8:00:27 PM

Quote:
2)FX 60 is more expensive than 955 not to mention that Intel has got the cheapest dual core on the market


Uhm, technically, it does not, since Intel does not yet have a true dual core chip on the market. Their current inplementation is no where near the AMD Dual cores.

BTW, I can sell the cheapest chip on the market too, I got an old 486DX for ya for $100. You want it? Its INTEL, and its cheaper than AMD, so it must be good. Ya know you want it.
March 2, 2006 8:04:04 PM

Quote:
2)FX 60 is more expensive than 955 not to mention that Intel has got the cheapest dual core on the market


Uhm, technically, it does not, since Intel does not yet have a true dual core chip on the market. Their current inplementation is no where near the AMD Dual cores.

BTW, I can sell the cheapest chip on the market too, I got an old 486DX for ya for $100. You want it? Its INTEL, and its cheaper than AMD, so it must be good. Ya know you want it.

Haha I think I got you beat, Athlon XP 3000+ for $99 ;) . Looks like AMD has taken back the crown of cheapest CPU!

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 8:04:31 PM

Quote:
Actually, the 955 and FX-60 are about the same price, except the FX-60 is a bit more.

Why do you compare the 955 with the FX-60? The much cheaper X2 4800+ is even better than the 955.
March 2, 2006 8:08:36 PM

hey brainy own that word so you could get rich off of it when soem one says that :D  dont wait do it now!
March 2, 2006 8:30:59 PM

Quote:
Intel has the right to post its own opinions you know. And there has been a lot of AMD rubbish too so this is nothing special to look at.
BTW FX 60 isn't that far ahead,it gets matched by a 955 on stock at most things and it can't overclock very well.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1909488,00.a...
AMD is mainly ahead now because it's cooler and consumes less.
Performance wise,differences are small.


If you remove the biased synthetics from that review Intel has nothing except a few benchmarks.
March 2, 2006 8:44:37 PM

I don't like your philosophy. I think both the 955EE and the FX60 are great chips, and I'd have a hard time choosing between them. Although I'd probably go with the 955EE for the 4 logical processors.

Also Compgeek, take a look at the ORB and tell me what CPU most of the top 20 scores in the world use.
March 2, 2006 10:10:14 PM

Quote:
I don't like your philosophy. I think both the 955EE and the FX60 are great chips, and I'd have a hard time choosing between them. Although I'd probably go with the 955EE for the 4 logical processors.

Also Compgeek, take a look at the ORB and tell me what CPU most of the top 20 scores in the world use.


Just because it has HyperThreading? That's a dumb reason.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 10:12:30 PM

mike what are you doin? go get ak on that other thread! ill help you if you need any help to take down another intel fanboy :D 
March 2, 2006 10:14:12 PM

Quote:
mike what are you doin? go get ak on that other thread! ill help you if you need any help to take down another intel fanboy :D 


I'm not on these forumz to "take down" fanboyz. I am having a discussion with the fanboy ak47, and I hope he realizes the truth soon.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 10:18:00 PM

ok man fine go it alone :roll: i dont care :cry:  :x
March 3, 2006 6:11:14 PM

"Why do you compare the 955 with the FX-60? The much cheaper X2 4800+ is even better than the 955."
Yeah right. LOOK,i'd take a 955 over a 4800 anyday,i don't care about energy consumption,i have proper cooling and it performs OCs better.
4800 has better price performance(doh) but for crying out loud it's not better.(you negate FACTS?,955 is at least equal)
I never said Intel has an edge on the desktop market but you make too much fuss about AMD lead and you post much biased AMD crap.

And as stated there int the ET site FX 60 is equal to the 955 in most benchmarks . There will be a final 965. It would be fair to compare FX 60 to that.

AMD should enjoy their time now cause they'll certainly pay for getting out of their cave.
AMD will simply be bombarded by Intel with:
very competitive or better CPUs (and good mobos)
marketing as always
deals with OEMs
paying web sites for biased reviews
=> AMD will suffer by the end of this year!
Go go Intel, don't give up
Show AMD what you've got
You have to use this one shot
Put AMD's progress to a halt
Get rid of it with a knock out
And kill it before it starts to rot! :twisted:
Yeah, can't wait for Conroe and woodcrest,not only for my personal needs but also to shut your mouths ! Core Duo is equall clock per clock to a X2 desktop CPU. On papper everything looks great. Intel is heavily working on these chips . They know AMD are aiming high but they also know that AMD are few . Good reasons to expect much!
March 3, 2006 6:32:19 PM

Quote:
"Why do you compare the 955 with the FX-60? The much cheaper X2 4800+ is even better than the 955."
Yeah right. LOOK,i'd take a 955 over a 4800 anyday,i don't care about energy consumption,i have proper cooling and it performs OCs better.
4800 has better price performance(doh) but for crying out loud it's not better.(you negate FACTS?,955 is at least equal)
I never said Intel has an edge on the desktop market but you make too much fuss about AMD lead and you post much biased AMD crap.

And as stated there int the ET site FX 60 is equal to the 955 in most benchmarks . There will be a final 965. It would be fair to compare FX 60 to that.

AMD should enjoy their time now cause they'll certainly pay for getting out of their cave.
AMD will simply be bombarded by Intel with:
very competitive or better CPUs (and good mobos)
marketing as always
deals with OEMs
paying web sites for biased reviews
=> AMD will suffer by the end of this year!
Go go Intel, don't give up
Show AMD what you've got
You have to use this one shot
Put AMD's progress to a halt
Get rid of it with a knock out
And kill it before it starts to rot! :twisted:
Yeah, can't wait for Conroe and woodcrest,not only for my personal needs but also to shut your mouths ! Core Duo is equall clock per clock to a X2 desktop CPU. On papper everything looks great. Intel is heavily working on these chips . They know AMD are aiming high but they also know that AMD are few . Good reasons to expect much!


Wow man, thanks, I needed a good laugh to start the weekend off before I go to a sweet AMD-Only LAN Party. Let me start off with Conroe:

Conroe:

Shorter Pipelined, meaning bye-bye goes the "Intel Domination" in Encoding and Video apps. Still uses the FSB: means it won't be any faster than current P4's in Memory Bandwidth and gaming. 4MB L2 Cache: that talks for itself. The only real competitor is the 1333MHz FSB Extreme Edition Conroe that's gonna cost 17 house mortgages.

Woodcrest:

Please........

HyperTransport alone can be scaled up to, currently, about double the performance now (32-bit 2800MHz BUS) which means that Woodcrest just got slapped in the face. Uh Oh, HyperTransport 3.0 is set to be released in 2007 which uses Fault Tolerant I/O, FB-DIMM's, DDR3, and speed increase. As well as the ability to scale Opteron 64 SMP servers up to 32-Sockets w/ 4 cores each (oo 128 AMD64 Opterons). Isn't that nice? But wait...HyperTransport 4.0....uh oh... DDR4, FB2-DIMM's, Faster Speed, and On-Chip Co-Processors...hmm...What's Intel makin'? Something called CSI...woot!

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 3, 2006 7:02:48 PM

Quote:
when will intel learn you cant bulls**t anymore


When people stop buying Dell, HP, Sony etc etc etc.

Im guessing, but I think what you really meant was "...bulls**t anyone who can read a benchmark"
March 3, 2006 7:19:27 PM

"Intel does well in marketing" -- Yup, thats how I,m going to decide which new CPU to buy----------- Based on the $$$ a bunch of business managment majors (who dont even know what a CPU is, other than the product they're marketing) gave to a bunch of actors/scriptwriters/producers/advertising websites etc etc etc.

Screw performance, relentlessly mind-numbing commercials and advertisments are a much more valuable measure of a products true value than actual performance!!

And for its next marketing trick, Intel will begin offering its CPUs in a variety of new and exciting colors. Maybe that will make them faster than AMD
March 3, 2006 7:22:21 PM

Quote:
"Intel does well in marketing" -- Yup, thats how I,m going to decide which new CPU to buy----------- Based on the $$$ a bunch of business managment majors (who dont even know what a CPU is, other than the product they're marketing) gave to a bunch of actors/scriptwriters/producers/advertising websites etc etc etc.

Screw performance, relentlessly mind-numbing commercials and advertisments are a much more valuable measure of a products true value than actual performance!!

And for its next marketing trick, Intel will begin offering its CPUs in a variety of new and exciting colors. Maybe that will make them faster than AMD


LOL I want a Black & Red CPU :twisted: . Oh wait, that's what color the Intel CPU's are after they go against an AMD64 :lol:  .

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 3, 2006 8:01:23 PM

Quote:
"Why do you compare the 955 with the FX-60? The much cheaper X2 4800+ is even better than the 955."
Yeah right. LOOK,i'd take a 955 over a 4800 anyday,i don't care about energy consumption,i have proper cooling and it performs OCs better.
4800 has better price performance(doh) but for crying out loud it's not better.(you negate FACTS?,955 is at least equal)
I never said Intel has an edge on the desktop market but you make too much fuss about AMD lead and you post much biased AMD crap.

And as stated there int the ET site FX 60 is equal to the 955 in most benchmarks . There will be a final 965. It would be fair to compare FX 60 to that.

AMD should enjoy their time now cause they'll certainly pay for getting out of their cave.
AMD will simply be bombarded by Intel with:
very competitive or better CPUs (and good mobos)
marketing as always
deals with OEMs
paying web sites for biased reviews
=> AMD will suffer by the end of this year!
Go go Intel, don't give up
Show AMD what you've got
You have to use this one shot
Put AMD's progress to a halt
Get rid of it with a knock out
And kill it before it starts to rot! :twisted:
Yeah, can't wait for Conroe and woodcrest,not only for my personal needs but also to shut your mouths ! Core Duo is equall clock per clock to a X2 desktop CPU. On papper everything looks great. Intel is heavily working on these chips . They know AMD are aiming high but they also know that AMD are few . Good reasons to expect much!


Seriously, get a grip. If Intel is on such a rebound, why are they gutting their outlook AGAIN?? Do you really think AMD has just been sitting still all this time? Please look at the facts before you spout off your fairy-land fantasies about one company or another.
March 3, 2006 8:31:43 PM

Oh, noes.
Shorter pipelines not good? Well it's really not only the pipeline that matters even in encoding.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=264...
Woot/ It's a great result considering the punny fsb count on the duo yet it performs so well.
L3 cache? Not until 65 nm arrives and that won't be coming too soon.
L3 will be on highly priced FX and opterons not on regular AM2s. And it won't improve much.
Intel's XE clocked at 3.3ghz will be available by that time with 45 nm just around the corner.

Servers? Well no need to get AMD-ish about opterons. Woodcrest will probably be higher clocked than opterons and i've read that they should perform better in SPEC tests.
Basically Intel will have
14 stages
4-issue out-of-order execution engine
it is romoured to be much better at FPU
and will have many features (virtualistion...)
As it is now, AMD is far from wining 2006 . And most people on 939 will probably skip AM2 cause it will probably be more expensive CPUs at the same performance with DDDR2 and to really get tha' boost you'd need to spend a lot.
About Conroe is only speculation and Laptop CPU w/ Yonah arhitecture performance test that shows equal clock performance. But still you have a positive benchmark. The only benchmark you can find about AM2 is one showing that AM2=939 performance wise. So AMD didn't/couldn't improve too much so they settled for needed upgrades.

AMD has reported probs with the memory controler and anyway,that alone aren't gonna give the performance crown,even in games.
BTW Inq also posted this
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28639
Now the AMD biased site actually posted THIS article.
March 3, 2006 8:42:53 PM

How is it that everything AMD claims for their upcoming products is either lies or has problems, but everything Intel claims is Gospel Truth?? Do you read your posts to see how biased you look?

I have no problem saying Intel makes decent chips, and infact better mobile chips at the moment. Thats why their mobile division seems to be the only one turning a profit right now.
March 3, 2006 8:42:56 PM

Quote:
Oh, noes.
Shorter pipelines not good? Well it's really not only the pipeline that matters even in encoding.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=264...
Woot/ It's a great result considering the punny fsb count on the duo yet it performs so well.
L3 cache? Not until 65 nm arrives and that won't be coming too soon.
L3 will be on highly priced FX and opterons not on regular AM2s. And it won't improve much.
Intel's XE clocked at 3.3ghz will be available by that time with 45 nm just around the corner.

Servers? Well no need to get AMD-ish about opterons. Woodcrest will probably be higher clocked than opterons and i've read that they should perform better in SPEC tests.
Basically Intel will have
14 stages
4-issue out-of-order execution engine
it is romoured to be much better at FPU
and will have many features (virtualistion...)
As it is now, AMD is far from wining 2006 . And most people on 939 will probably skip AM2 cause it will probably be more expensive CPUs at the same performance with DDDR2 and to really get tha' boost you'd need to spend a lot.
About Conroe is only speculation and Laptop CPU w/ Yonah arhitecture performance test that shows equal clock performance. But still you have a positive benchmark. The only benchmark you can find about AM2 is one showing that AM2=939 performance wise. So AMD didn't/couldn't improve too much so they settled for needed upgrades.

AMD has reported probs with the memory controler and anyway,that alone aren't gonna give the performance crown,even in games.


God you're a f*ckin newb, lol.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 3, 2006 8:49:11 PM

AMD obviously won't sit still but AMD can't research on many areas at the same time.
AM2 is a simple refresh( first contact with DDR2 and the like) though it'll last a year.
From a refresh chip you can't expect much
March 3, 2006 8:50:36 PM

Quote:
AMD obviously didn't sit still but AMD can't research on many areas at the same time.
AM2 is a simple refresh( first contact with DDR2 and the like) though it'll last a year.
From a refresh chip you can't expect much


I can't expect much from somebody like you. But you constantly amaze me with your ever-growing Intel Fanboyism.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 3, 2006 8:57:32 PM

hey mike i think hes being payed by intel to post here dont you?
March 3, 2006 9:07:32 PM

Quote:
hey mike i think hes being payed by intel to post here dont you?


No, he's too obvious to be paid.

BTW, every fanboy on here isnt't a plant being paid. Are you?
March 3, 2006 9:18:22 PM

I WISH :D 
March 3, 2006 9:18:29 PM

I'm fckin' right though.
And i don't give a dang about computers as long programs work on them. But facts are facts and you're AMD fanboyism is beyond anything i have ever encountered.
LOL i'm having the time of my life here.
You don't see the empty part of the glass when it comes to AMD. You're as blinded as you are not bright. You get mad over some speculation, you don't justify your claims and you make cats look like lions and vice versa.
You should get some time off LOL. Who ever gets mad in a public forum is bound to have other problems as well. You waste your time praising AMD. One thing is what there currently is,a totally different thing is what will be esspecially when changing arhitectures.
So i believe that Conroe will beat AMD. So what's the problem with that?
Does that alone make me an Intel fanboy? Nope just a X person that finds the Conroe looking impressive.

I'll give up on this one. You'd continue discusing this all night(it's night here were i stand). Sry and don't worry. There are a lot of other posts that you might consider Intel biased so go,go flammin'. I sincerely hope you'll find your equivalent of fanboyism on the Intel side so you can chat all day long!
March 3, 2006 9:22:41 PM

Quote:
I'm fckin' right though.
And i don't give a dang about computers as long programs work on them. But facts are facts and you're AMD fanboyism is beyond anything i have ever encountered.
LOL i'm having the time of my life here.
You don't see the empty part of the glass when it comes to AMD. You're as blinded as you are not bright. You get mad over some speculation, you don't justify your claims and you make cats look like lions and vice versa.
You should get some time off LOL. Who ever gets mad in a public forum is bound to have other problems as well. You waste your time praising AMD. One thing is what there currently is,a totally different thing is what will be esspecially when changing arhitectures.
So i believe that Conroe will beat AMD. So what's the problem with that?
Does that alone make me an Intel fanboy? Nope just a X person that finds the Conroe looking impressive.

I'll give up on this one. You'd continue discusing this all night(it's night here were i stand). Sry and don't worry. There are a lot of other posts that you might consider Intel biased so go,go flammin'. I sincerely hope you'll find your equivalent of fanboyism on the Intel side so you can chat all day long!


See what I'm sayin' guys? :roll:

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 3, 2006 9:26:32 PM

yeah i do man bye i gotta go now be back in a few hours
    • 1 / 11
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • More pages
    • Next
    • Newest
!