Go Back   OC3D Forums > [OC3D] General Forums > OC3D News
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-11-15, 12:13 PM
tolagarf's Avatar
tolagarf tolagarf is offline
OC3D Crew
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Denmark
Posts: 850
Originally Posted by Kushiro View Post
The core 2 quad series were full fledged quad cores with 4 physical cores if I recall correctly.
Seems you're right. Must have been another CPU I'm thinking about.

Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-15, 12:42 PM
Oseth's Avatar
Oseth Oseth is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Mt.Doom
Posts: 113
As always someone seeking money for a companies minor mistake.

Whoever said America is notorious for suing people for nearly everything is right.

Although in this case I do think it is clear as day that each of the two cores are point linked and I guess technically are not independent cores, it still bugs me that this guy will most likely just get paid off because its too much of a hassle for AMD to actually go into a fight over this.

Greed, ladies and gents, it turns us all into filthy sacks of crap.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-15, 12:49 PM
shambles1980's Avatar
shambles1980 shambles1980 is offline
OC3D Elite
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: North wales
Posts: 1,185
Originally Posted by tolagarf View Post
Seems you're right. Must have been another CPU I'm thinking about.
the pemtium D cpu's were basically 2 non ht P4's glued together with some missing bits..
amd said they werent dual core and then tried to define what a core was.. (fair enough. back them amd had the better cpu's)
fast forward to the Buldozers and its pretty much amd doing the same thing, but intel did not bother to complain.

Either way the Pentium D's sucked "mostly due to being based on p4" pretty sure intel went back to basing cpu design off of the better p3 to make the core 2 duo and quads. which were excellent processors, and enough to compete with amd.
Then amd prety much do the same mistake intel did and we end up with buldozer. and if im not mistaken there next cpu/apu thingy will go back to the much better phenom design.

The only thing i find funny about it is, amd swore blind the pentiumD wasnt dual core. but when they did it they swear blind they are cores.
maybe they thought if its good enough for intel its good enough for us. But they really should have noticed the pentium D sucked. and they should have just learnt from others mistakes and stuck to their "its not dual core" guns
i7 2600, intel dz77sl-50k, 16gb 1600 DDR3, 900d case, gtx 780 @ 1306/1727 "xspc block", 1x 240 1x360 1x480 rads 2 bay res, http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/14829772
Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-15, 12:54 PM
AlienALX's Avatar
AlienALX AlienALX is online now
OC3D Elite
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 14,123
Intel went back to the Pentium Pro.

The Pentium Pro P6 microarchitecture was used in one form or another by Intel for more than a decade. The pipeline would scale from its initial 150 MHz start, all the way up to 1.4 GHz with the "Tualatin" Pentium III. The design's various traits would continue after that in the derivative core called "Banias" in Pentium M and Intel Core (Yonah), which itself would evolve into the Core microarchitecture (Core 2 processor) in 2006 and onward.[7]


Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-15, 04:36 PM
Zoot's Avatar
Zoot Zoot is offline
OC3D Elite
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,552
Poor AMD, they can't catch a break.

Wasn't there another lawsuit levied against AMD for overstating Llano's success too?
Desktop: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X | X570i Aorus | 32GB Corsair DDR4-3200MHz | RX 5700 XT | Aorus PCIe 4.0 1TB M.2 | Fractal Define Nano S
Home Server: AMD Ryzen 5 2600| ASRock Rack X470D4U | 32GB Samsung DDR4-2666MHz | 60TB | Fractal Define R5 | Debian 10 (Buster)

Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-15, 12:41 AM
NeverBackDown NeverBackDown is offline
AMD Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 17,046
Originally Posted by JR23 View Post
You gonna sue Kushiro over that remark?

Gonna keep the attitude down? I was just asking him a question? I didn't understand his reference/sarcasm until he explained it? Is that a crime? Besides I agree with him, people in the US are sue happy because it's easy money and are civil courts are crap.

But to answer your question. No I'm not. That'd be pointless

Originally Posted by Zoot View Post
Poor AMD, they can't catch a break.

Wasn't there another lawsuit levied against AMD for overstating Llano's success too?
Wouldn't be surprised tbh. I know there's petitions and stuff online against some AAA studios for having preorder bonuses and DLC. People think that makes them eligible to sue..
But tbh at the time for what Llano was, it was a success iGPU wise. Sales wise it probably wasn't though
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-15, 06:55 PM
ieldra ieldra is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3
I upgraded to my current CPU (i7 920) in early 2009 I believe, only a year or so after I had gotten an Q6600. The difference was insane, I don't think there's a ever been such a big generational leap in performance since then. Same with GeForce 7 -> GeForce 8.

Even now I'm somewhat hesitant on getting a 5820k lest Intel decide to actually make a big jump in performance
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:36 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.