Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 20th Nov 2007 16:46 UTC, submitted by Luis
Thread beginning with comment 285839
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-08
Yep, from customer point of view it is the price/performance ratio that counts (plus reliability, power consumption and such things), not so much who happens to have the fastest product on the market at the moment. Newer and faster processors are developed all the time, and the fastest products are usually all too expensive for most people.
Besides, when AMD seemed to be leading CPU development and Intel seemed to be a bit slow, it was in fact very active time in Intel development labs. The results show now. The same could perhaps be said about AMD/Ati now, and I'm sure they have lots of internal development going on nowadays.
Anyway, Intel has been doing very well in the CPU power consumption front lately, and that may actually mean a lot more for their business success than who happens to have a slight lead in the most recent CPU speed comparisons.