Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 19th Sep 2010 20:32 UTC, submitted by sawboss
Thread beginning with comment 441744
To read all comments associated with this story, please 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:
2006-01-06
Its a good deal for us technies if this gets cracked. Typical folks will still fall for the extra $$$ for more speed while those of us who are savvy will get better performance for much less.
To me this really indicates that the desktop is in severe stagnation. The old school cpu manufacturers can't figure out how to innovate anymore so its come to this.
Another aside...this tells how poorly amd is doing. Last week I got ahold of a dual socket 24 core amd system. Running against a dual quad i7 the amd was clearly half the speed per core on heavy cpu load. Mixed loads the amd seemed to do not quite as badly. The good for AMD was that the system itself was overall faster than the intel on the multithreaded load. With intel 6 cores coming out that spells more trouble for AMD.
Edited 2010-09-20 05:04 UTC