Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

AMD and Intel

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 13, 2011 1:47:01 AM

So, I was just wondering, what exactly is it that Intel has that AMD doesn't? Intel's already working on 22nm chips, and AMD is just starting out with 32nm chips.

More about : amd intel

a c 99 à CPUs
February 13, 2011 1:51:15 AM

kilo_17 said:
So, I was just wondering, what exactly is it that Intel has that AMD doesn't? Intel's already working on 22nm chips, and AMD is just starting out with 32nm chips.


To make a very long discussion short, money.
m
0
l
February 13, 2011 2:19:13 AM

Okay, so he's " Senior Performance Analyst", but I'm not familiar with him, so what did he do?
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 134 à CPUs
a b å Intel
a b À AMD
February 13, 2011 3:51:34 AM

, if ur interested in overclocking, but i remember quite well, that theyve overclocked socket 478 cpus passed 5 gigahertz , so its not that impressive tbh
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 99 à CPUs
February 13, 2011 12:04:08 PM

Quote:
To make it even shorter

Francois Piednoel


He might be the face of Intel to a handful of high-end enthusiasts, post prolifically on certain forums, and help out some OEMs with tweaking on enthusiast products, but he isn't the reason why Intel is able to move to smaller process nodes quicker. Not even close. The answer to that is "money." It takes several billion dollars to move a fab from one node to the next, with all of the R&D and equipment that are involved. Also, one guy who is involved in high-end enthusiast parts isn't even going to lead to that all much more revenue for the company, considering the enthusiast market is tiny compared to the mobile, enterprise desktop, server, and non-enthusiast OEM desktop markets. You can't overclock any of those machines and raw CPU performance is almost never the most important selling attribute for those markets, either. There are a lot of reasons why Intel has so much money and can move to smaller fab nodes more quickly, but Piednoel isn't anywhere even close to the top of that list. I'd say IBM is the real reason Intel has so much money, as they were the dominant computer manufacturer of the day and established Microsoft OSes running on Intel x86 CPUs as the standard for computing back in the early '80s by using those parts in their first PC. If IBM had picked, say, Motorola's MC68000 as their CPU of choice in the IBM PC, Intel likely would have been just one more of a bunch of U.S. memory manufacturers who went belly-up in the 1980s due to the Taiwanese underselling them by a wide margin. Or they would have been a minor player in the embedded CPU field. Or they would have gone into peripheral ICs like Broadcom, Marvell, or Realtek. Who knows exactly, but it IS true they would not be where they are today unless IBM picked them as the CPU supplier for the IBM PC.
Share
February 19, 2011 10:56:18 PM

Best answer selected by kilo_17.
m
0
l
!