An exclusive gaming industry community targeted
to, and designed for Professionals, Businesses
and Students in the sectors and industries
of Gaming, New Media and the Web, all closely
related with it's Business and Industry.
A Rich content driven service including articles,
contributed discussion, news, reviews, networking, downloads,
and debate.
We strive to cater for cultural influencers,
technology decision makers, early adopters and business leaders in the gaming industry.
A medium to share your or contribute your ideas,
experiences, questions and point of view or network
with other colleagues here at iVirtua Community.
Just for Info, I thought you may all want to know that the Athlon 64 FX-55 was a prototype CPU being sold in the market.
The FX-55 is AMD's first CPU to use Strained Silicon on Insulator for there 130nm process. And it actually worked great. AMD can further increase the speed from 2.60GHz to past 3.00GHz on 130nm w/ Strained Silicon on Insulator & still keep the power consumption & heat down.
But they are taking to logical step & releasing there Athlon 64 FX-57 along with all there A64?s in 2005 @ 90nm w/ Strained Silicon on Insulator.
Just for Info, I thought you may all want to know that the Athlon 64 FX-55 was a prototype CPU being sold in the market.
The FX-55 is AMD's first CPU to use Strained Silicon on Insulator for there 130nm process. And it actually worked great. AMD can further increase the speed from 2.60GHz to past 3.00GHz on 130nm w/ Strained Silicon on Insulator & still keep the power consumption & heat down.
But they are taking to logical step & releasing there Athlon 64 FX-57 along with all there A64?s in 2005 @ 90nm w/ Strained Silicon on Insulator.
Hey man. AMD doesn't need high processor frequencies because their processors do more work in each cycle. Who cares if they can get 3.0Ghz? They could just make the FX-55 do even more work in each clock cycle.
I asked a friend today what the fastest *processor* was. He said 3.6Ghz. I repeated *processor*. And then I said AMD Opteron 850. Then he said \"Well, I don't do AMD. They suck.\" I said \"Man...Intel sucks! AMD is so much better.\"
Intel has brainwashed all the naive and ignorant people in the world in believing:
1. Intel is the *one* and *only* processor company that exists, and they are the best. 2. Intel processors are very fast because their frequencies are very high.
It pisses me off so much when people say that crap. It's like the name Intel has been branded into people's head, analogical to people being plugged into the Matrix. Now, most people are seeing that AMD is clearly the better company, and thus, they come to the *REAL* world. :rolleyes:
Contributed by Predator, Guest 510 iVirtua Loyalty Points • • • Back to Top
I understand 100% about AMD's architectural benefits when it comes to doing more work in each cycle. It's there 15 pipeline architecture along with the HTT which grants them this benefit. It also decreases the chance to Increase its clocks. And this is 100% O.K. because it?s not all about Raw Clock Speed.
What I was trying to explain here is that even though AMD does not need High Clock Speed. If AMD can achieve higher Core Clock Speed?s with this new process of Strained Silicon, & keep temps down, then they are only going to benefit from this.
I LOVE the fact that a Athlon 64 3200+ @ 2000MHz takes on the P4-E 3.80GHz any day.
I LOVE IT. Now if only people can take out of there brain-washed minds that little phrase with the nice looking eye catching, little silver sticker saying ?Intel Inside?.
It?s sad because programmers at my work love Intel in a stubborn way. When I show them credible benchmarking sites with almost 90% of them showing AMD taking the lead, they tell me that it?s fixed. And that there is no way in 100Years that AMD is faster than Intel.
This just proves that Intel?s monopolizing advertising works. And It SUXXX.
Digg Topic
Tag topic on On del.icio.us
Technorati Search
Post to Slashdot
