Intel AMD irony

[PeteRoy]

Intel and AMD has some irony between them.

Some of the techonologies of AMD and Intel has very similar names.

1) Hyper-Threading and HyperTransport.

Now why AMD had to name their techonolgy a name so similar to Intel techonology?
Do they want to confuse people thinking they get Hyper-Threading?

AMD: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/DevelopWithAMD/0,,30_2252_2353,00.html

Intel: http://www.intel.com/info/hyperthreading/



2) Advanced Dynamic Execution and QuantiSpeed

Both Athlon XP and the Pentium 4 documentation are talking about a "fast execution".

AMD: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_3734_3742~10044,00.html

Intel: http://www.intel.com/design/pentium4/prodbref/#ade



3) Why AMD using SSE and SSE2?

Another irony is why AMD using Intel SSE and SSE2 techonologies?

I don't see any Intel cpu uses 3dnow extensions.

AMD: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485_9487%5E9493,00.html

Intel: http://www.intel.com/design/pentium4/prodbref/#simd

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Stop posting.

 

[DaTute]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Stop posting.

LMAO!!!

 

[InlineFive]

These threads are getting even more weak lately because of being written by people who don't know better.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Ultimate Irony:
Just last week someone was commenting that Intel CPUs are better because they run cooler. They weren't aware of the prescott core's heaty stats.

 

[dennisjai215]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Stop posting.

 

[DaTute]

Colours have some irony too.

Did you know that is not only black not white, but white isn't black either? How ironic.

 

[dullard]

We've got a new fanboy here it seems. My favorite PeteRoy post so far is that Athlon 64s don't perform better at games than the P4. Benchmarks like these show otherwise. Oh well, 113.2 frames per second vs 90.2 fps I guess is nothing.

PeteRoy, AMD and Intel started off together in the same company and then split ways. They always have and probably always will have agreements to share technology. Thus any patent that one company has the other company can use. Thus both companies do very similar things. Sometimes AMD is first to market with something, and at other times Intel is first to market with something. It doesn't matter. No one is copying as they are both sharing.

For example, AMD started with 3 digit model numbers on their Opterons (the first digit is the processor type and the second two are performance related). Look now Intel is doing the exact same thing with their P4 and Celeron - a 3 digit model number with the first digit referring to processor type and the second two related to performance. Is that supposed to be irony? I say that isn't irony. What MIGHT be irony is now AMD is copying Intel by releasing the Sempron with the exact same model numbers as the Celeron. So AMD copying Intel which is copying AMD. That might be irony.

 

[PeteRoy]

I don't know about anandtech, but from my own experience with both AMD and Intel, Intel is always better.

 

[mechBgon]

Hah! You call that irony?! :roll: I can top that. Actual screenshot: "Microsoft?" Never heard of 'em

Note the caption on the window's title bar, too This was during a DDoS attack on Microsoft, btw.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: dennisjai215

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Stop posting.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: PeteRoy
I don't know about anandtech, but from my own experience with both AMD and Intel, Intel is always better.

Lamest post I have ever seen in my life.

 

[DaveSimmons]

PeteRoy, my last 4 desktop processors and last 3 server processors were all intel. Despite that, I'd never make an idiotic and feeble attempt at AMD bashing like this.

AMD processors do currently offer better gaming performance at the highest end, and better gaming price/performance at levels below that.

AMD processors do accomplish more than P4 at a given clock speed, just like the intel Banias chips that intel is abandoning the failed Prescott design for.

AMD did create the 64-bit instruction set that intel will be using in its own 64-bit desktop processors.

Please edumacate yourself before posting any more fanboy non-irony.

 

[PeteRoy]

Originally posted by: CraigRT


Lamest post I have ever seen in my life.

Lamest post I have ever seen in my life.

 

[Carbonadium4]

Seriously, dont come on and try to start a fight.. topics like intel vs amd and nvidia vs ati are getting old

u should be comparing hyper transport to pci express not hyper transport to hyper threading.. they're two different things

 

[Lyfer]

Originally posted by: PeteRoy

Originally posted by: CraigRT


Lamest post I have ever seen in my life.

Lamest post I have ever seen in my life.

This guy is BEGGING for a BAN.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: CraigRT

Originally posted by: PeteRoy
I don't know about anandtech, but from my own experience with both AMD and Intel, Intel is always better.

Lamest post I have ever seen in my life.

I found it some competition: amateurs, please step aside...

 

[killedradiostar]

taken from the OED:

irony, n. - A figure of speech in which the intended meaning is the opposite of that expressed by the words used; usually taking the form of sarcasm or ridicule in which laudatory expressions are used to imply condemnation or contempt.

 

[PeteRoy]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
PeteRoy, my last 4 desktop processors and last 3 server processors were all intel. Despite that, I'd never make an idiotic and feeble attempt at AMD bashing like this.


AMD did create the 64-bit instruction set that intel will be using in its own 64-bit desktop processors.

Please edumacate yourself before posting any more fanboy non-irony.

Actually no, Intel was first to come up with 64bit processor in 2000, you should educate yourself before bashing my post.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: mechBgon
Lamest post I have ever seen in my life.

I found it some competition: amateurs, please step aside...[/quote]
Hahahahaha. I missed that thread earlier. Thanks for giving us the link.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: PeteRoy
Actually no, Intel was first to come up with 64bit processor in 2000, you should educate yourself before bashing my post.

Those are two completely different things (Itanium is a 64-bit processor - the Hammers, Xeons, and soon to be Prescots are 32-bit processors with 64-bit extensions). But if you want to ignore differences and just look at the 64-bit name, other companies had it far before Intel. the Alpha chips were 64-bit in 1992.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Dang! never seen mech get that confrontational before :shocked: Don't mess with his SCSI if you know what's good for you

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: PeteRoy

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
PeteRoy, my last 4 desktop processors and last 3 server processors were all intel. Despite that, I'd never make an idiotic and feeble attempt at AMD bashing like this.


AMD did create the 64-bit instruction set that intel will be using in its own 64-bit desktop processors.

Please edumacate yourself before posting any more fanboy non-irony.

Actually no, Intel was first to come up with 64bit processor in 2000, you should educate yourself before bashing my post.

Itanium does not use the AMD IA-64 instruction set that Windows 64 uses, and that intel is adopting now in P4s and Xeons. Itanium's instruction set is not backwards-compatible with x86 code.

 

[Tab]

Ignore.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: PeteRoy
I don't know about anandtech, but from my own experience with both AMD and Intel, Intel is always better.

better at what? costing more? :roll:

you really are a moron. congrats.