- Thread starter
- #21
Im not a fan of tablets, laptops are nice however. 
and a nice little wall of text I would like to throw out.
you may see AMD return to the K10.5 and improve it. Why you ask?
Well lets look at intel. they have been improving on the P6 Architecture (Pentium Pro, 1995) up untill they thought "Lets build a new architecture from the ground up!" so they built the Netburst Architecture (Pentium 4). which was frankly.. shit due to thermals and power consumption and low efficiency.
So they went back to the PIII version of the P6 Architecture, and improved it to make the Pentium M due to they needed an efficient processor in laptops as the P4's thermals was just too high. Add in more improvements and you got Core/Core2, and if you look hard enough amongst all the improvements/additions, even Nehalem and Sandy Bridge is based on an architecture made back in 1995. However, Intel did get some good things out of Netburst, which is being used in their modern CPU's which would be Hyperthreading, Aggressive branch predictor, and QDR (Which was replaced with Nehalem with a integrated memory controller and Quickpath Interconnect. With Lynnfield and Sandy Bridge nomming the entire north bridge into the CPU.
I think AMD will learn that their idea of "Lets make a radically new architecture that can clock like hell!" is stupid. and may (I hope... for their CPU operations survival!) they take what they have learned with Bulldozer. and go back to improving their Phenom II.
Right now if Intel really wanted to fuck over AMD, it would drop the prices on its chipset/CPU. as its cheaper to make motherboards with just a Southbridge chip. AMD still uses a North and South bridge. (which is sorta a mixed result) It is more expensive but it allows for them to keep compatibility easily, unlike Intel who has to change socket configurations with almost every update as the CPU also does the task of the Northbridge.
and a nice little wall of text I would like to throw out.
you may see AMD return to the K10.5 and improve it. Why you ask?
Well lets look at intel. they have been improving on the P6 Architecture (Pentium Pro, 1995) up untill they thought "Lets build a new architecture from the ground up!" so they built the Netburst Architecture (Pentium 4). which was frankly.. shit due to thermals and power consumption and low efficiency.
So they went back to the PIII version of the P6 Architecture, and improved it to make the Pentium M due to they needed an efficient processor in laptops as the P4's thermals was just too high. Add in more improvements and you got Core/Core2, and if you look hard enough amongst all the improvements/additions, even Nehalem and Sandy Bridge is based on an architecture made back in 1995. However, Intel did get some good things out of Netburst, which is being used in their modern CPU's which would be Hyperthreading, Aggressive branch predictor, and QDR (Which was replaced with Nehalem with a integrated memory controller and Quickpath Interconnect. With Lynnfield and Sandy Bridge nomming the entire north bridge into the CPU.
I think AMD will learn that their idea of "Lets make a radically new architecture that can clock like hell!" is stupid. and may (I hope... for their CPU operations survival!) they take what they have learned with Bulldozer. and go back to improving their Phenom II.
Right now if Intel really wanted to fuck over AMD, it would drop the prices on its chipset/CPU. as its cheaper to make motherboards with just a Southbridge chip. AMD still uses a North and South bridge. (which is sorta a mixed result) It is more expensive but it allows for them to keep compatibility easily, unlike Intel who has to change socket configurations with almost every update as the CPU also does the task of the Northbridge.
