How dare I act like my views are the only ones important? Pretty hypocritical coming from an AMD fanboy such as yourself who hasn't even acknowledged Intel.
Suddenly you see a need for triple core CPUs do you? Funny that you stated this then - "but a triple core most people won't see the difference whether they use a triple or or quad-core" So tell me - if there is no benefit for a triple core CPU, then why are you preaching about it? You talk about triple cores like they are the best thing since sliced bread. Since according to you nobody will see the benefit of extra cores - tell me why it is so important for you to upgrade to a triple core in hope of some imaginary processing benefit?
My argument is simply that dual core CPUs (from the bottom of the range to the top) will happily serve most people. For those that need more CPUs, then the bottom quad core range CPU - is just a little above the most expensive dual core CPU. This then goes all the way to the top Quad core CPU. If AMD want to get into the market then their CPUs have to come in somewhere between Intels dual and quad core CPUs in terms of price and performance, but then as you said - nobody would see the benefit of an extra core - so if you dont need it - why not just stick to dual core? If you need the extra cores - even Intels cheapest quad based offering will be only slightly more than a dual core.
Oh for crying out loud - enough of the "I can't be bothered to change my motherboard" argument. yes as an AMD user you should be able to upgrade, but instead of hoping for some miracle with a triple CPU - you should be pushing AMD to produce quad core CPUs and to give Intel a real challenge. I would have expected AMD to do what they do best - come out with a CPU that is like for like, but is perhaps slightly faster and is much cheaper. Instead they are acting like a dog with a limp leg and trying to justify slavaging their damaged quad based CPUs.
At the end of the day - if i was an Intel Quad core CPU user and if AMD are to get my business, then they need to come up with something to beat my current setup.. losing one processor in the process is hardly going to make me want to jump ship now is it?
At the end of the day you will never see this argument for what it is because you are so hooked on your belief to support AMD regardless of what they produce just because you want to support the underdog. If thats what you want then fine, but convice AMD to come up with a Q6800/6850 beater and stop wasting time on damaged Quad core CPUs and passing them off as triple cores CPUs. The market already has Intels higher end dual core and lower end quad core's for that.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Shan @ Sep 18th 2007 10:40AM
How dare I act like my views are the only ones important? Pretty hypocritical coming from an AMD fanboy such as yourself who hasn't even acknowledged Intel.
Suddenly you see a need for triple core CPUs do you? Funny that you stated this then - "but a triple core most people won't see the difference whether they use a triple or or quad-core" So tell me - if there is no benefit for a triple core CPU, then why are you preaching about it? You talk about triple cores like they are the best thing since sliced bread. Since according to you nobody will see the benefit of extra cores - tell me why it is so important for you to upgrade to a triple core in hope of some imaginary processing benefit?
My argument is simply that dual core CPUs (from the bottom of the range to the top) will happily serve most people. For those that need more CPUs, then the bottom quad core range CPU - is just a little above the most expensive dual core CPU. This then goes all the way to the top Quad core CPU. If AMD want to get into the market then their CPUs have to come in somewhere between Intels dual and quad core CPUs in terms of price and performance, but then as you said - nobody would see the benefit of an extra core - so if you dont need it - why not just stick to dual core? If you need the extra cores - even Intels cheapest quad based offering will be only slightly more than a dual core.
Oh for crying out loud - enough of the "I can't be bothered to change my motherboard" argument. yes as an AMD user you should be able to upgrade, but instead of hoping for some miracle with a triple CPU - you should be pushing AMD to produce quad core CPUs and to give Intel a real challenge. I would have expected AMD to do what they do best - come out with a CPU that is like for like, but is perhaps slightly faster and is much cheaper. Instead they are acting like a dog with a limp leg and trying to justify slavaging their damaged quad based CPUs.
At the end of the day - if i was an Intel Quad core CPU user and if AMD are to get my business, then they need to come up with something to beat my current setup.. losing one processor in the process is hardly going to make me want to jump ship now is it?
At the end of the day you will never see this argument for what it is because you are so hooked on your belief to support AMD regardless of what they produce just because you want to support the underdog. If thats what you want then fine, but convice AMD to come up with a Q6800/6850 beater and stop wasting time on damaged Quad core CPUs and passing them off as triple cores CPUs. The market already has Intels higher end dual core and lower end quad core's for that.