Amd vs Intel

[aragorn2909]

Heres an interesting story

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...~99713,00.html

Comments?

[sapo]

i ve always used amd and aways will do... anyway...

all my friends that have an amd64 cpu is using x86 version of ubuntu.. because of compatibility problems

[Big Venus]

same here my first system was an amd duron and now I have a amd64... And plan on getting an amd64-x2

[endy]

It seems like this was inevitable, and should be good all round. The only down side could be that as AMDs become more common I'll feel less special for having one

[rider343]

I have both processors on my work...
My Intel 3.2 Ht is more stable...

[CoriolisSTORM]

Im all for AMD, but that's some pretty bad accusations if it turns out to be true. I had an Intel chip before I upgraded, and it was one of the Pentium 1s that you could give a certain instruction to and it would crash the system. Some sort of flaw in it. I personally prefer AMD because of the cheaper prices, and 64 bit chips (which I want).

[Takis]

*slaps Intel*
*slaps Intel again*
For shame. I always had an admittedly rather fanciful notion that hardware manufacturers were above petty rivalry and concentrated on merely making a better product than each other. Just look at Cisco: market dominance in its field, and I'm not aware of anything that tarnishes its name.

[Big Venus]

Even though Apple is going over to intel, they want make Mac OSX compatible with regular intel pc chips. So the Intel vs. AMD will never see the Mac battle ground at least for now...

[poofyhairguy]

I personally prefer AMD because of the cheaper prices, and 64 bit chips (which I want).

Better dual cores...Better dual cores.

[gil-galad]

I read the whole complaint. It was very bitter. AMD is genuinely mad at Intel.

Based on my limited understanding of the anti-monopoly laws, AMD has enough evidence to win.