INTEL, AMD, and the media

[Xpl1c1t]

Is anyone other than myself getting increasingly annoyed and angry over much of the media/press' somewhat blatant favoring of INTEL over AMD? In a review of the prescott i just read the author stated, "Prescott is outperformed by the Northwood core, and of course, the Gallatin-based Extreme Edition. Even AMD’s Athlon 64 3200+ bests it in a majority of real-world benchmarks." Well, to think that even the Athlon 64 3000+ bested the "Gallatin-based Extreme Edition" and Northwood in almost all of the game-based tests (except Quake 3) is a funny thing to concider. Its not just this article, but almost every non-[H] review of a CPU to date, its just wearing on my nerves.

 

[Binauralman23]

i dont see what your complaining about. Yes the athlon 64 3000+ which is sposed to best out a 3ghz proc is beating a 3.2 ghz 2 meg cache, $1k proc, thats pretty impressive. And considering Intel was polishing off AXPs before the 64 thats also pretty impressive.

 

[MTB2Live Live4Comps]

intel. has. money.

 

[Stiletto One]

Originally posted by MTB2Live,Live4Comps
intel. has. money.

Quoted for truth.

Intel has the money/name recognition to be able to sound better than AMD—it's a bigger corporation too, which helps.

AMD has a slightly better product (Opteron vs. Xeon; Opteron vs. Itanium is over my head), and Athlon64 is better than Pentium 4 in certain applications (I'd still go P4 if I were making a single-processor DV/audio station, on account of hyperthreading), but there are still plenty of people uninformed enough that they still spell "Athlon" "Athalon" or "Athelon".