Still same difference since performance is what actually matters at the end of the day. Or you would rather have a Nerburst?
I'm one to buy the product, not the story. Marketing says X but I don't really care about the label. I care about the performance and value. What actual performance will I get in the applications I will use, and how much do I have to pay for that performance.
It's a moot point for me anyway, as the soonest I'll be able to afford anything new is next year's tax returns, if even then.
At the end of the day are they really missing out on performance? Do the people crying even own these $500 chips? My guess is no on both parts. This is off topic but I hate the culture of people complaining about shit on behalf of others.
I agree with you. The question is, why doesn't AMD?