Originally Posted by Squirrel
You are comparing apples and oranges. Yes, the 1100T may be AMD's flagship model at the moment, but only BD vs SB would be a fair comparison. I mean, how old is the PHII technology? 2.5 years? That's ancient. They have basically been only tweaking an old technology for the past couple of years.
Well, there are two ways of comparing a company's offering to another's.
A. You either compare same generation products without consideration of the price.
B. You look at all options available (disregarding when they were made) while factoring in the price.
The first way will give you an insight to their technologies, while the second on their marketing. For example you either compare an i7 990x to an AMD Phenom II 1100T to see what same generation processors can do (while not factoring the price) or you consider all the options available disregarding their tech generation to get an insight into which company has the best deal for maximum performance out there since both products are still on the market (the i5 2500k vs Ph II 1100T).
The comparison that I did just highlights that AMD doesn't even have the price/performance crown in the mid-high end segments. I could have made the comparison of the i7 990x vs 1100T to show how AMD is behind Intel in terms of technology as the two processors are hexacores of the same generation.
This just proves my point, you can't just keep cutting down prices without any innovation, you can see how even though AMD tries hardly to at least get the price-performance market niche, it can't due to the largely superior architecture of the 2nd generation Intel CPUs. At one point if this trend continues - which I doubt it will because I think Bulldozer will be a good step up - AMD would be so behind Intel technologically that it would be forced to exit the race.Edited by born2bwild - 4/25/11 at 1:00pm