Dan, Re: "Good Heavens, TWY is right, you are a paid stooge."
First, Dan, we should leave this witch-hunt behind us. Second, I have far more of a right to call you a paid AMD stooge than you have of calling me a paid Intel stooge. You're opinion is nearly 100% Pro-AMD and 100% Anti-Intel. I'd like to see some links where you can show me otherwise. But you don't see me going around and accusing you.
Re: "What Intel tried to do its customers with its Rambus strategy was disgusting and constitutes proof that Intel can't be trusted - and you know it."
Dan, I will not argue this topic with you, since I already know your whole reason for living is based on the foundation of this fundamental belief. I'd have better luck trying to convince a rock that it's a tree. Unfortunately for you, though, there is more to the story than you will ever care to believe, but I guess it's your choice to only see it in one way. Oh, well. Your loss.
Re: "And don't come back with that crap about 2 channels of rambus being slightly faster on some software than one channel of DDR. How about two channels of DDR (it is cheaper, after all) compared to one channel of Rambus?"
How many single channel RDRAM chipsets are there for Pentium 4, and how many dual channel DDR chipsets are there for Pentium 4? When some arrive, then you can benchmark them and prove your point. Until then, I can show you benchmarks of a dual channel RDRAM system, and prove that it does indeed outperform a system with a single channel of DDR. Ergo, Dan, RDRAM is still the fastest memory for the Pentium 4.
Re: "It's not just that AMD is leading computer buyers into the future with technologies like DDR, SOI, and X86-64, it's that Intel trying to shove computer buyers into a ditch, with technologies like Rambus and IA-64."
On this thread, I'll respect your beliefs. But you're simply going to have to accept that I strongly disagree with them.
wbmw |
