Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: j3pflynn who wrote (219638)	12/8/2006 1:19:49 PM
From: eracer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: Get real! I was. Intel is a company which dominates the x86 industry, earns billions in profits every year, and already produces integrated graphics chipsets. You are being unrealistic if you believe there is little or no chance that Intel can create low- to mid-range cards within a few years. Even minor players like S3 and Kyro occasionally were able to build decent budget cards, but had little industry support or advertising budget. There's a world of difference between buying a company that's well established in a market with a history of superior products(if not best at the moment), with whom you have a great relationship, and starting from scratch with no expertise in high-performance graphics with a bad reputation in graphics to overcome already on your back to boot. Yes, there is a difference. That is why I was talking about low- to mid-range cards within a few years instead of R600 killers in one year. Not only does Intel need decent hardware, but they also need to pick up the pace in GPU driver development as well. I wonder how many AMD-ATI employees Intel will be able to buy away over the next few years to put to work on Larrabee.

To: j3pflynn who wrote (219638)	12/8/2006 4:50:56 PM
From: eracer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: ...bad reputation in graphics to overcome already on your back to boot. Core 2 to the rescue: xbitlabs.com gaming (1.86GHz Core 2 vs. 2.2GHz X2 4200+): xbitlabs.com Although we tried to avoid this outcome, but our today’s comparison of chipsets with integrated graphics cores eventually turned into another “AMD against Intel” article. And it is actually sad that it all ended with the traditional result: like in any other test session with Intel processors on Core micro-architecture participating, they appear to be the indisputable winners. New Intel micro-architecture allowed the company to make a significant jump forward and win the leading positions in the high-end and mainstream segments.