Originally Posted by RagingCain
Mind you, I would kill
be over the moon for an 18 core i7 desktop CPU. I would would meh at an AMD 18 core CPU.
That is the definition of a fanboy,since no one knows the relevant performance data.
Originally Posted by svenge
Fixed that for you.
The main difference between Intel's addition of cores to their server chips and what AMD did is that Intel's core count wasn't designed to paper over a design that was massively inferior for almost all work loads in terms of performance and performance/watt. Instead, it was a natural outgrowth of their leadership in node size.
Also, how could AMD have increased the core count given that they sold their fabs to GloFo (who has yet to mass-produce anything smaller than 28nm, and even that node is wholly unsuitable for "construction core" chips). You'd pretty much have to encapsulate an entire 32nm wafer to get a 18-core die on AMD's platform, and then make a MCM module twice as large to hold two of them like the current G34 server chips do...
On top of that, AMD's x86 server market share is less than 5%, which means that there's absolutely no demand (and subsequent profits) to justify the R&D costs involved with new CPU designs in that sector. And as we all have seen over the last several years, without new server chips for AMD there can be no new designs trickling down to the AM3+ platform.
Lies. GloFo is in full production of 14nm as we speak.
Originally Posted by PostalTwinkie
These events are strictly for the purpose of blowing smoke up the ass' of the shareholders.
As are your comments are to consumers.
Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead
Why are you here? Just leave if you think none of this info is relevant.
As you can see there will always be haters who judge before any performance data is known.
People please learn to ignore these folks.