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: pgerassi who wrote (254017)	7/14/2008 8:41:36 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 275872

Pete, > A Puma will be faster in games than a Nehalem with an Intel IGP. LOL, it better be. Tenchusatsu

To: pgerassi who wrote (254017)	7/15/2008 3:32:42 AM
From: eracer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: Intel's graphics are so low end you need a microscope to see them. A Puma will be faster in games than a Nehalem with an Intel IGP. With the flood of cheap GeForce 8600 and Radeon 2600/3650/3850 cards on the market gamers would be silly to limit themselves to 780G graphics or Intel integrated graphics. For those who don't care about 3D games, Nehalem with integrated graphics will be fine for the vast majority. And Puma's successor will be updated with an R700 class core (Radeon 4xxx) integrated into the CPU. Fusion might even have a R800 class core (Radeon 5xxx) with DirectX 11. The chances of Fusion launching with DirectX 11 graphics is practically nil. I wouldn't expect a powerhouse GPU either considering the thermal limitations in notebooks. AMD hasn't even announced a desktop Fusion processor yet.