AMD: We Innovate, Intel Copies

[ATOJAR]

Description:

Heading back home after opening an R&D center in Bangalore, AMD CEO Hector Ruiz, took some time off to bash Intel.

"If you look at the last five years, if you look at what major innovations have occurred in computing technology, every single one of them came from AMD. Not a single innovation came from Intel" Ruiz claimed. "So I would say that Intel is trying to catch up with us in that respect."

But how come Intel is outselling AMD for more than a year now? According to the AMD CEO, "Intel continues... to abuse their monopoly and that's why around the world governments and regulatory agencies continue to go after them."

The European Union and the South Korea accused Intel of anti-competitive practices this year, but the American Federal Trade Commission recently said it would not charge Intel with anti-competitive practices.

http://www.megagames.com/news/html/hardware/amdweinnovate,intelcopies.shtml

[nekrosoft13]

haha, sore losers.

He also should say our True-Quad core is better then Intel, NOT!

[XDanger]

Making a better cheaper product doesn't damage competitiveness
sour grapes

AMD's non advertising strategy doesn't help either, AM who??

[Redeemed]

Making a better cheaper product doesn't damage competitiveness
sour grapes

AMD's non advertising strategy doesn't help either, AM who??
I've always wondered why they never put money into marketing like Intel does. I know they don't have the resources to dump into like Intel does, but they could atleast make some effort to make their products known to the average consumer.

[jolle]

In a sense perhaps, with the P4 intel went the wrong way with deeper and higher clocked pipeline, which they had to abandon in favor of a more effiecient design, similar to the road AMD had been been down on all along.
But then again, they went with basing things of Core, which is in a sense a (distant but still) P3 derivative, so its not really "copying" AMD, just going back to something that worked better, before the marketing people insisted "high clocks sell better" (or atleast thats what I would imagine was behind the entire P4 deal, after AMD stole the show by reaching 1Ghz first)

Either way, what really matters is what offers more performance per dollar, innovative or not, so it doesnt really matter one way or the other.

[Tr1cK]

AMD started down a path that Intel eventually took and beat them down it. It doesn't matter what you innovate if the competition can make the same or better. Ruiz is out the door soon enough. I hope they get someone with more sense.

[a12ctic]

EMT64 = Stolen idea from AMD
Dual Core = AMD wins race, intel releases 2 cores glued together and eventualy a real dual core.
Quad Core = AMD wins race, intel again releases 2 cores pasted together.
On Die Memory Managment = Again, AMD creates, Intel is following, however its taking them longer to develope than the latter stolen ideas.
HT = Intel attempting to copy this idea as well, again, simular situation to the on die memory management.

Intel hasn't done **** in the past 5-10 years except copy AMD ideas, unfortunately, they still have more money and due to this can (sometimes) impant the ideas better than AMD. They can also blow more of it.

[Redeemed]

EMT64 = Stolen idea from AMD
Dual Core = AMD wins race, intel releases 2 cores glued together and eventualy a real dual core.
Quad Core = AMD wins race, intel again releases 2 cores pasted together.
On Die Memory Managment = Again, AMD creates, Intel is following, however its taking them longer to develope than the latter stolen ideas.
HT = Intel attempting to copy this idea as well, again, simular situation to the on die memory management.

Intel hasn't done **** in the past 5-10 years except copy AMD ideas, unfortunately, they still have more money and due to this can (sometimes) impant the ideas better than AMD. They can also blow more of it.
What about hyper threading? If I recall AMD had absolutely nothing to do with that...

[grey_1]

EMT64 = Stolen idea from AMD
Dual Core = AMD wins race, intel releases 2 cores glued together and eventualy a real dual core.
Quad Core = AMD wins race, intel again releases 2 cores pasted together.
On Die Memory Managment = Again, AMD creates, Intel is following, however its taking them longer to develope than the latter stolen ideas.
HT = Intel attempting to copy this idea as well, again, simular situation to the on die memory management.

Intel hasn't done **** in the past 5-10 years except copy AMD ideas, unfortunately, they still have more money and due to this can (sometimes) impant the ideas better than AMD. They can also blow more of it.
You realize this just makes AMD look even worse, right? If they had it first they should be kicking the tar out of Intel right now. They aren't. they are being grievously violated by Intel in multiple orifices, slapped, and told to enjoy it.

[Saintster]

Who cares who stole from who or who made what first,it's who can give the best product for the best price.

[a12ctic]

What about hyper threading? If I recall AMD had absolutely nothing to do with that...
HyperTransport, the replacement for FSB.

[Banko]

EMT64 = Stolen idea from AMD
Dual Core = AMD wins race, intel releases 2 cores glued together and eventualy a real dual core.
Quad Core = AMD wins race, intel again releases 2 cores pasted together.
On Die Memory Managment = Again, AMD creates, Intel is following, however its taking them longer to develope than the latter stolen ideas.
HT = Intel attempting to copy this idea as well, again, simular situation to the on die memory management.

Intel hasn't done **** in the past 5-10 years except copy AMD ideas, unfortunately, they still have more money and due to this can (sometimes) impant the ideas better than AMD. They can also blow more of it.
Dual Cores and all that stuff aren't AMD's idea either, the idea of having a dual core cpu existed a long time ago. As far as I know Intel looked into On Die Memory management before AMD did, it just didn't use it. Also AMD never used HT, and Intel licenses EM64T from AMD so they aren't stealing anything and in fact that is just x86 extensions, Intel came out with a 64 bit cpu first.

[Redeemed]

HyperTransport, the replacement for FSB.
That has no relation to HyperThreading though. HyperThreading deals with the processor being capable of dealing with multiple threads more efficiently. HyperTransport just increases the communication (eliminates bottlenecking) found with a standard FSB- atleast to the best of my understanding.

[a12ctic]

That has no relation to HyperThreading though. HyperThreading deals with the processor being capable of dealing with multiple threads more efficiently. HyperTransport just increases the communication (eliminates bottlenecking) found with a standard FSB- atleast to the best of my understanding.
I wasnt talking about HyperThreading... By HT i meant HyperTransport.
Dual Cores and all that stuff aren't AMD's idea either, the idea of having a dual core cpu existed a long time ago. As far as I know Intel looked into On Die Memory management before AMD did, it just didn't use it. Also AMD never used HT, and Intel licenses EM64T from AMD so they aren't stealing anything and in fact that is just x86 extensions, Intel came out with a 64 bit cpu first.

The way AMD implanted dual core was new, and they were the first company to make a real x86 dual core chip. The way AMD inplanted 64 bit was different because it was cross compatible with x86. For all we know the world could have come to an end tomarrow, but it didn't, I dont see why people throw up such trivial statments.

[|MaguS|]

Didn't IBM have the first released DualCore?

[XMAN52373]

EMT64 = Stolen idea from AMD
Dual Core = AMD wins race, intel releases 2 cores glued together and eventualy a real dual core.
Quad Core = AMD wins race, intel again releases 2 cores pasted together.
On Die Memory Managment = Again, AMD creates, Intel is following, however its taking them longer to develope than the latter stolen ideas.
HT = Intel attempting to copy this idea as well, again, simular situation to the on die memory management.

Intel hasn't done **** in the past 5-10 years except copy AMD ideas, unfortunately, they still have more money and due to this can (sometimes) impant the ideas better than AMD. They can also blow more of it.

While yes, AMD did release the first Dual Core CPUs, Intel, regaurdles of how they were done, released the first quad core CPUs and they perform better than AMDs Quad Core CPUs.

[Tr1cK]

It's hilarious how the biggest AMD fanboy has the weakest system on the forum by a long margin. I guess when you are the underdog, it's up to you to support the underdog. It could be perhaps he likes the three letter acronyms since he is one, AMD, ATI, EMO. :rofl

A12tic:
http://a102.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/26/l_d152dfa39206e010e035dcc5f01afaa5.jpg

[Feyy]

The truth: C2D & C2Q :nutkick: K10

Also "Fake" Intel Quads > "Real" Native AMD Quads owned:

It could be perhaps he likes the three letter acronyms since he is one, AMD, ATI, EMO. :rofl

:lol2:

[SH0DAN]

EMT64 = Stolen idea from AMD
Dual Core = AMD wins race, intel releases 2 cores glued together and eventualy a real dual core.
Quad Core = AMD wins race, intel again releases 2 cores pasted together.
On Die Memory Managment = Again, AMD creates, Intel is following, however its taking them longer to develope than the latter stolen ideas.
HT = Intel attempting to copy this idea as well, again, simular situation to the on die memory management.

Intel hasn't done **** in the past 5-10 years except copy AMD ideas, unfortunately, they still have more money and due to this can (sometimes) impant the ideas better than AMD. They can also blow more of it.



You = drunk on the koolaid Wrector hands out :)

[Redeemed]

I wasnt talking about HyperThreading... By HT i meant HyperTransport.


The way AMD implanted dual core was new, and they were the first company to make a real x86 dual core chip. The way AMD inplanted 64 bit was different because it was cross compatible with x86. For all we know the world could have come to an end tomarrow, but it didn't, I dont see why people throw up such trivial statments.
So then that is two up on Intel: Intel was the first to market 64-bit CPUs (64-bit is 64-bit no matter how you slice it) and they were the first to target heavy multi-tasking and multi-threaded situations (HyperThreading). Furthermore, didn't Intel come out with MMX before AMD came out with 3DNow!? I believe that'd make 3. And then what about the SSE extensions? Wasn't Intel the first to offer those? Not to mention being the first when it comes to using a smaller die. Of course, if you have an architecture like Prescott I guess the smaller die doesn't account for much. :rolleyes:

[Madpistol]

So AMD innovates, and Intel runs on a much more "traditional" platform...

Guess who's winning the race... ;)

[Redeemed]

So AMD innovates, and Intel runs on a much more "traditional" platform...

Guess who's winning the race... ;)

I wonder, if AMD didn't buy ATi and instead dumped a ton of money on marketing, never released the AM2 platform until Phenom- would they be in a better position now? I personally think so. Would ATi? Hard to say, though I kind of doubt it.

[Mr_LoL]

It's hilarious how the biggest AMD fanboy has the weakest system on the forum by a long margin. I guess when you are the underdog, it's up to you to support the underdog. It could be perhaps he likes the three letter acronyms since he is one, AMD, ATI, EMO. :rofl

A12tic:
http://a102.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/26/l_d152dfa39206e010e035dcc5f01afaa5.jpg
Jesus!!!! Whats sort of jeans are those? omg.

[Madpistol]

Jesus!!!! Whats sort of jeans are those? omg.

You like them? I think they're called "gay boys" or something like that. ;)

[hirantha]

This is like the old saying, Man who cant dance is saying I can’t dance cuz the floor is crooked. The man who cant dance is AMD