Star wars Episode III used AMD Technology

Intel were not up to the Job

http://press.xtvworld.com/article5168.html

http://amdlive.amd.com/cinema/vid_starwars.aspx

AMD4Life!

yawn?

<-- leaves a can of flammable fuel to be lit.

And if they made another Star Wars and used AMD Barcelona chips, so what? The chips don't make the movie, people do. I seem to remember how some movies used to be made using Apple computers, and again, so what? But that did give rise to a lot of people who to this day claim that Apple is better at graphics than IBM based machines.

No, using one chip or another, or one OS or another, doesn't prove a thing other than that was what was used at the time.

<--runs like hell...



2 secs later..

Well... I could have made it more easier, if I knew where to find this guy:

*Yawn.*

In other news, Pixar uses Intel.

Guess what???

I still don't care either way.

The effects were done by hand, frame by frame (rotoscoping). it was a very long tedious process.

I have a theory that thunderman is really an alias / alter ego for BM. Think about it... do you ever see them in the same thread?

nice comments Grimmy...I use my parents old AMD as a space heater

I liked it the best of 1 - 3, but 3 and 2 were close. 1 was terrible, but the original 4 - 6 > all, especially 5 and 6. imo!

Best,

3Ball

so what, storyline makes a good movie, not chips

I thought there were all really good films. Of course, ESB and RoTJ are exceptional peices of film history. People will be watching those movies until we really have lightsabers.

They will be powered by 3 GHz K10s.. just the heat coming off of them focused into a beam. Intel isn't up to it.

Empire4Life

ROFLMAO you must have gone hunting the web looking for Intel insults, shows how much of a fanboy you are.

Here have some free interesting facts about AMD, Intel, and you.
*AMD was a smaller company that actually made cpus for Intel before breaking away.
*Intel's Pentium 1 had a math bug issue and had to be recalled (some anyhow).
*AMD beat Intel to the 1ghz barrier, and actually scaled better back then, pre-pentium 4.
*AMD's K5 was there first in house design and was a flop like the Phenom - late and too slow.
*AMD's K6 design was actually another companies design bought up - NexGen 6x86
*AMD's K7 design success was thanks to the Alpha design team and fsb design (DDR).
*AMD's K8 design took the main elements from old designs - check out Intel Timna and see where Fusion comes from.
*DELETED
*AMD's Phenom follows like the K5 - in house design, late and lacking.
*K8 was the first design that actually made AMD some money.
*DELETED
*Intels Israel team brought us the greatest cpus and designs the world has ever seen
*AMD Will always be second best, Intel is king, same as ATi vs Nvidia

Meh thats all that comes to mind atm...

Peace out DELETED

At least my articles are current any my intentions are to discuss the information, not start a flame war.

As others' have said:

YAWN

I, for one, is waiting eagerly to see how mobile Penryn performs. A 2.8Ghz Penryn with lower than 35W sounds really nice.

Sure, they used AMD. That's all good, but what we want to REALLY know is......

wait for it..........

whose keyboard did they use huh? Whose Keyboard??!!!

Actually, everything has just been "rumored". Apparently, the reason Intel possibly delayed Yorkfield in order to provide better support for OEMs and motherboard manufacturer. The 45nm process is at the moment, superb (evidently from the on-time release of 45nm dual cores)

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mainb [...] ssors.html

A GREAT PRODUCT for life.......AT A GOOD PRICE.

Gotta love your posts........

[CPUs] 24/7 WallSt: Ruiz Needs to Go

[CPUs] Tom's: Phenom Fails Most AM2 Compatibility Tests

[CPUs] AMD: Tier-Ones, Channel In Same Boat On Barcelona

CPUs] AMD Closes Below $8: Wall Street not Happy with Delays

[CPUs] The Inquirer: How AMD turned Barcelona into a right royal mess

[CPUs] AMD Issues "Stop Ship" Order for Opterons; TLB Errata Cripples K10

[CPUs] Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Phenom Fire - 140 Watts?

[CPUs] AMD Drops QuadFX Like a Bad Habit

[CPUs] AMD Stock Plummets 25% in Response to K10 Release

[CPUs] Barcelona Doesn't Deliver - Benchmarks Deemed Non-Compliant

[CPUs] Barcelona Availability Issues?

[CPUs] AMD Earnings Announcement Today

[CPUs] Sharikou Pushes Back BK Prediction

[CPUs] Hal Licino: How AMD's Failures Are Triggering An Intel Monopoly

The Roger Roger robots were rubbish, the storms should of been introduced in 2 or three and show how they were developed / or trained up etc.

Darth Maul was a mouldy baked bean with a cocktail stick, a character that wouldnt seem out of context with the Power Rangers, absolutely not effective enough, they chose the wrong actor for that one, yeah he pulled a menacing face but it wasnt acted out well like ok the Maul plot we put it in but couldnt be bothered with it.... The red and black makeup was a joke that looked like someone at a tattoo / body modding place had made a killing.
The Maul should have left a wound in everyones heart - add a bit of spinning heads and spewing green acid sick, not a double ended batton dancer with i love mum tattooed on hes head.

And what was the makeup on that queen character - looked like some one went to town on Natalie Portman with a Sesame Street big bird sitting on her face with a tummy upset.



Episode one for me was Lucas's most embarissing moment...( appart from the Ewok adventure )

Epsiode 2 got better but 3 got a bit lovey dovey..... and a couple of kids got knocked out...

for me the best bit was in 2 going through the mine field with that explosion. what effects - but after seeing the origionals then going to the new ones it has no comparisons....

lol, I just like the fact that he was by far the most athletic and most skilled fighter out of all of them. We all know he only died because he was the bad guy. I thought he looked cool. lol, but I guess thats just me. I also felt his entrance to the ending fight was epic. I have never seen so many people afraid of one man in my life (even when they have 2 jedi standing right next to them and they all have weapons). lol

Best,

3Ball

Yes, K10 is faster than K8 clock for clock, however, AMD finds itself in a unique position: They have negated their own product.

The K10 is faster than K8 clock for clock, but AMD has yet to stabilize K10 at clockspeeds high enough for it to exceed K8 in sheer speed. With the higher heat generated per die due to the extra 2 cores, and the shortcomings of SOI at 65nm, it will be a long time, (if ever using SOI) that K10 will equal or exceed 90nm K8 in clockspeed or clockspeed potential. AMD needs to get Phenom stable at 3GHz (and not on 1 or 2 cherry picked engineering samples used as demonstrators under controled lab conditions), consistanly enough for viable retail presentation in order for it to compete against 90nm K8

In regards to core count, supreme commander kiddies uneducated whining's aside, there are few applications that will actually make use of 4 cores now, or in the near future. This negates the need for a quad and thus the usefulness for the slower K10s for the majority users. In those ~2% of applications where core count does matter (graphics rendering, video editing, etc) the cores tend to get loaded to max capacity, setting the stage for TLB bug to occur....meaning that where K10 could be advantageuous to a user because of its higer core count, it negates its usefullness due to its own flaws. In short, the TLB bug negates K10s single notable advantage at this time.....core count. Perhaps B3 will "solve" all the problems, but given AMDs recent track record for PR vs reality, B3 falls into the same catagory C2D B2 did in 2006.... wait and see what the product itself does, not what the promoters claim it will do. If someone wants an AMD quad, they should wait for B3, at the very least. If they just want an AMD, there is really no reason to buy a K10 right now when K8 is still a superior product.

It funny how thunder guy starts these topics but leaves them alone and never comes back.....