Search<%BANNER[left_130x130_1]%>
<%BANNER[left_130x300]%>
<%BANNER[left_130x130_2]%>
<%BANNER[right_130x600]%>
|
<%BANNER[top_768x90]%>
DiscussionDiscussion on Article:
Started by: Joz | Date 03/19/08
Comments: 8 | Last Comment: 07/23/08
[1-4]
1. Before anyone says anything.
No, Intel did not copy AMD yadda yadda yadda. And Yes, VIA > INTEL> AMD [Posted by: Joz | Date: 03/19/08]
2. I wounder just how long it will take for the software industry to cach up with it. We are gona be happy if we have the 64 bit applications used as a "standart" by 2010 ....a thing that came out years ago.
[Posted by: sin | Date: 03/19/08]
 cach up what?faster 32 processors for 32 bit software are straightfoward [Posted by: muzzel Mo | Date: 03/22/08]
Yes, but...32-bit procs can be improved up to a point. AMD made the 64-bit set because they thought it would improve IPC more than other tinkering they could do to the cores. In fact, K10 chips are almost as fast (clock-per-clock) as Core 2 while in 64-bit mode. [Posted by: cheeseman | Date: 03/23/08]
2010......? I want the $hit and I want it now!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[Posted by: unclesharkey | Date: 03/23/08]
3. Thanks For This Info
[Posted by: khalilzip | Date: 05/19/08]
4. DAMN that's a haggard ass.
[Posted by: Optimus Prime | Date: 07/23/08]
[1-4]
<%BANNER[banner_468x30]%>
|