Linked by David Adams on Fri 12th Sep 2008 16:30 UTC, submitted by irbis
Thread beginning with comment 330257
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 05/19/13 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
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-09-15
Believe me, the last thing I want to see is AMD go under
or even drop a notch. They are Intel's only competition
and without AMD, we will, as you say, be paying through
the nose for our CPUs.
I've bought AMD before and my last CPU purchases were AMD
Athlon 64 X2. The last time I bought Intel was over ten years ago when I built a dual-proc rig based on Pentium IIs.
At the time, AMD had no consumer multiprocessor support.
I know Intel holds the high ground right now but AMD is good enough for me - their price/performance ratio suits my budget and I don't need the ultimate fastest CPUs for what I do.