On mySimon: X-Ray: See Through the World Around You
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 5 of 13:
Next »
« Previous
Intel no longer has the best x86 CPU. Since
it takes about 30% more clock cycles for their chip to do what an Athlon chip does, they are looking for ways to keep from losing market share without any improvements in their core design. Two inefficient cores on one piece of silicon means twice the inefficiency. This will only widen the gap between their chip performance and AMD's.

They have pushed the speed to the max and now they are having to use huge processor caches to eke very small performance increases. And yet, their core is still the same inefficient core and soon to be twice the inefficient core.

AMD simply has a better proccessor design, a better I/O architecture between the CPU and peripherals and all for less consumption of power and less wasted energy in the form of dissapated heat. This will allow their dual core chips to actually increase their efficiency.

It's no wonder Intel wanted to sway the industry to something other than x86. They have fallen behind and have no new ideas on how to improve their x86 offering. I guess they thought they had they ability to force the change to another architecture. They gambled and they lost. If Microsoft had released their 64-bit XP for x86 chips when they first said they would, Intel would have been sunk. It's funny how they Intel chip and the 64-bit XP have suddenly ended up with nearly the same general release date. Colusion had to be involved.
Posted by: bjbrock   Posted on: 12/17/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Does this mean M$ can charge more for one server?  crocd | 12/17/04
Could, but won't  PA-ITGuy | 12/17/04
Multi-core as in 2 or real multi-core?  crocd | 12/17/04
MS has stated the pricing will be based on sockets.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/17/04
Intel no longer has the best x86 CPU. Since  bjbrock | 12/17/04
And you thought  Roger Ramjet | 12/17/04
Collusion...  Feldwebel Wolfenstool | 12/17/04
So why is MS supporting AMD then?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 12/17/04
Active Management Technology  Traveler2 | 12/17/04
Well, I willn't be the one to get carried away, either.  Grayson Peddie | 12/19/04
I was also thinking about the dual/tripple/quad-core processor, too.  Grayson Peddie | 12/19/04
Troll Alert!  Roger Ramjet | 12/20/04
Please don't call me a troll.  Grayson Peddie | 12/20/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

Enterprise Applications

  • Check out some of the easiest and most powerful ways to boost productivity while saving money on your application infrastructure. See ZDNet's comprehensive Enterprise Application resource center, now!
  • New Online Dashboard
  • Read about top issues IT decision-makers face every day, plus get cost effective solutions to real life IT problems. Oracle Topline