I wonder if this article will illicit a negative response from folks who are AMD only. I don't take sides, but I just wonder. I also wonder if AMD was able to work as closely with Microsoft or not.

I'm amazed for the Solid State drives!
However, Intel's SS drives are pretty fast and efficient themselves!
It's other MLC drives that need compatibility (by having write cache enabled and delayed writes when a reading operation is being done).

I only have one more request on windows 7,that the disk defrag program might be optimized, not to clutter files from the same directory over the disk, but to try to fit them as close to eachother as possible, allowing faster program bootups.

AMD is slowly put in a courner all by itself

So my AMD is once again kicked in the balls by Intel....

What about AMD?

AMD really doesn't matter folks... oh wait, I don't own any Intel systems. So much for upgrading to Windows 7 for me I guess

I'm sure Microsoft works with AMD closely as well as AMD does own a sizeable market as well.

This article talks about Intel, doesn't mean AMD is excluded.

They do. Not long a ago, a report says that AMD is working closely with M$ on developing codes that is optimized for virtualization. However, Intel always have more resources to provide better documentation and tech support.

I'm sure AMD will develops an optimization software that is only for AMD processor like the AMD Fusion.

If your an AMD fan, I wouldn't get worried over this article. For CPU performance, it mostly talks about improved use of HyperThreading, which is only on the new Nehalem line. Those CPU's are in a price bracket which AMD doesn't even really compete in. So if you stick to comparing AMD processors to their Intel equivalents, increased hyperthreading support doesn't matter because Core 2 doesn't have hyperthreading. So don't get worried that you should have bought the $150 Intel CPU instead of the $150 AMD CPU.

M$ doesn't want to cooperate with AMD? Perhaps AMD didn't have the same money to bribe MS to get their own optimizations in place.

People also forget that intel has more software engineers than microsoft...

I think this article was just highlighted because of the difference between Hyper-Threading and an actual core. Since AMD doesn't have Hyper-Threading like technology, I guess any improvements made to take advantage of multiple cores to Intel CPUs should also apply to AMD CPUs.

I can't help wonder why it nowhere in the above text says that the source is a post on the Windows Partner Blog, written by(surprise) Intel. Original post can be found at http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/p [...] ation.aspx other contributers are Lenovo and nVidia according to their own posts on the 3 day old blog.

The idea of the post is naturally to make us think AMD was left out of the development. However as it can be read @ http://gadgets.softpedia.com/news/ [...] 04-01.html that's not the case.
They instead provide the quote:

“AMD continues to be a great industry partner and we are very happy to work with them to deliver great premium experiences for our mutual customers. With technology such as DirectX 11 graphics cards, AMD understands PC users' needs by providing a dynamic entertainment experience,” said Mike Ybarra, General Manager, Windows Product Management, Microsoft Corp. “Because we worked closely with AMD in the development and test process of Windows 7, users running Windows 7 Home Premium and Professional on an AMD-based platform can experience a rich, fast computing experience.”

i have win7 installed at an athlon xp 2000 and here an athlon x2 5000. system response is way better than vista. i don't see any problem with this news.

The translation of this article is:

Intel helped Microsoft make Windows 7 run better using it's CPU.

I wouldn't be surprised if this turns into a lawsuit against Intel.... AGAIN! LOL.

Your ignorance is laughable.

It doesn't say AMD has no optimisations. They just haven't talked about them.

http://sites.amd.com/us/microsoft/ [...] ows-7.aspx

/silence all

Exactly.

Enhanced hyperthreading support, eh?

*dusts off P4 tower*

Actually, that doesn't make mention of Hyperthreading, and contrary to popular belief, pretty much all AMD chips since single-core Athlon 64s do in fact have. Go look up any Athlon or Phenom chip and see for yourself. Hopefully AMD has been able to do a bit more with MS to get hyperthreading support for their chips as well, though somehow I kind of doubt it.

I know for a fact that neither my athlon x2 5600 or my phenom 3750 have hyper threading. So I'm interested to know where you got this information.

That is HyperTransport, not Hyperthreading. Totally different thing.

god i wish hyperthreading would die, its such a waste of time. I got an i7 recently, and its awesome, but i don't see any real benefit to hyper threading. even if the stars have somehow aligned correctly for you to see a performance boost, its usually at the cost of twice the power usage, so you may as well just get another processor. more importantly, its just another complication for ppl trying to make proper multi core applications, as they see what looks like 2 cores - which is actually only 1 core - run 2 threads on it and end up with worse performance than if they were just running 1. just to be clear, there is NO benefit with hyperthreading for a multithreaded application, all the overhead in managing multiple threads more than cancels out any benefit from hyperthreading, which is diminished even further if your app is very optimized. so the only benifit comes if you are running multiple apps, but for me, i probably never run more than 4 full focus apps at the same time anyway, and its only going to get less relevant as more cores are added.

now "reverse hyperthreading" - that amd was talking about ages ago - that would be awesome!

but really what worries me the most is cpu makers straying from standards so much that code has to be optimized for a specific x86 cpu, whats the point of having the x86 standard.

Lol ok

Sorry AMD fanboys

Intel owns again...

Did you mean Intel has more software engineers than "AMD"? Because I guarantee you that Intel has no where close to the same number of software engineers as Microsoft, the biggest software company in the world.

Gotcha. My bad.

The same Microsoft who can't disable the TLB fix for the original Phenom on the Phenom xx50 and Phenom IIs. I have to download a 3rd party utility to get that 10% performance back from the TLB bug fix on my AMD CPU that doesn't have the TLB bug. A freshman computer science major could fix that in a day...