Intel: AMD was dragged down by "own shortcomings"

Intel paid their customers to not use AMD. Why do they object to also paying the UC?

By peterm2k on 16 Sep 2009

£ per performance

AMD are consider to give better performance for the same cost. How does this bad performance "drag them down" when it sold at less cost. If you want high performance go with Intel. If you want value for money go with AMD (unless your getting a back hand from Intel). How much more would AMD's market share improved with the back handed dealing of Intel?

By M_Hamer on 16 Sep 2009

Between 2002 and 2007 Intel was caught on the backfoot and did not respond very well to the AMD buzz. In those 5 years AMD provided x64 when Intel were to scrap x86 completely for a new 64 bit instruction set and hence new line of CPUs but scrapped the idea when AMD released x64. Intel forgot about a integrated memoery controller but AMD implemented it first and Intel have now. Cores, AMD provided dual cores. However the one big area where Intel used to score big was MHz speed rating but AMD were not happy with it and stated that IPCC was as important as they had a 25% advantage at the time over Intel. The only idea that floored AMD was the nature of NATIVE quad core whereas Intel went for quad core on two dies.

Intel flexed its capability and now we see Nehalem processors that incorporate all of AMD's advances (L3 cache, IPCC improvements, integrated memoery controller, x64 of course and a few new ones as well) which just ends up demonstrating that AMD were always too small to be able to hold off Intel for long.

The issue with Intel is its chipsets which cost a lot of money in motherboards when they come out and hence they start out expensive but buy enough and the price comes down.

AMD are competetively prices but when you are at 2.4 Ghz and Intel get more performance at 2.66 Ghz then you know that the writing is on the wall to some degree. Hence AMD keep going more and more for the entry levl and bottom line.

Buying ATi might have hurt AMD to because no major advance has come of it for the AMD CPU/GPU combination against Intels range of CPU. Funny that but PCIe x16 lanes are available for both and SLi/Xfire is also available on both platforms.

AMD were indeed sidetracked but selling models may have influenced the publics buying power and hence influenced thenm through price and lack of AMD availability.

By cosmogenesis on 16 Sep 2009

Foul play is foul play

If I am reading this right and intel are admitting foul play but say that, because amd were crap it doesn't matter. hell if I was getting beaten 5-1 in a semi final and the opposition hacked me down in the penalty box in the 89th minute I sure as hell want to see that red card whether that would see me through to the final or not.

Intel you got caught 'deal with it'

By SimonCorlett on 16 Sep 2009

@SimonCorlett

You get my 'Best Use of an Analogy' award! Fantastically put:-)

By alvin on 16 Sep 2009