joke, right!

probaly.

I think AMD should worry about what AMD does best, lower power conusption then Intel.

And since intel has recently gotten their game back (Core), I think Intel wants to stay ahead by performance (not clock speed), now that they relize how much money it can make them.

DAAMIT, go work on some low power HTPC cpu's or something.

Maybe AMD can use their " internal AMD emulations" to create some credibility. Time to stop releasing estimated numbers that turn out to be way off and release some products that do what they are claimed to do.

See ZDnet blogs on how deceptive AMD benchmarks have been... Comparing to Xeon5355 when higher performing Xeon 5365 needs to be used.... see the fine print below amd ublicity graphs in this article.. Xeon5355 bench marks are form April2007.. intel has updated bench marks after that..

The POV-Ray comparison is totally unfair and amatourish, as they both ran benchmarks not the standard way, so with the same settings! The rendering window was open (with differring sizes as well)! If you run the benchmark the standard way, there will be no rendering window! And size, as well as possible other diferring settings DOES AFFECT PIXEL/SECOND NUMBERS. Btw, from those results, the Barcelona is slower than an Athlon 64, per core, at the same clock, which is irrealistic, too.

Let's face it, AMD made a huge mistake in buying ATI, it's only downhill from here. That's what happens when corporations make horrible decisions, they die out. I just hope that when they go bankrupt, ATI can spin off of them and be their own company again.

I'd like to see how an "internal Intel emulation" of an old Netburst-based Xeon at 6.0 GHz would stack up against a Barcelona. I bet that would be some good emulated butt-kicing, too.

Another thing... there's a reason this bit of "news" didn't show up at other tech sites, like AnandTech.

Fuck!
This really stinks!

that's cool

I love opteron ^^