<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>AMD dumps Single Instruction Multiple Data</title>
		<description>Discuss AMD dumps Single Instruction Multiple Data</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19872-amd-dumps-single-instruction-multiple-data</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 00:33:45 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/19872/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Jurassic1024 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19872-amd-dumps-single-instruction-multiple-data#comment-2493</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As long as the fanboys (i hate any kind of fanboy), are praising everything AMD releases, there is no need to go after performance crowns. AMD was was starting to show it's balls when they released the AthlonXP and later Athlon64 chips that gave Intel a run for its money (then came Conroe). But then when you think about it, AMD only excels when their competition is on it's back (Intel and Netburst, then nVIDIA and Fermi). Now that their (AMD's) loyal customers praise them over and over like Jehovah on tech sites like this one, why would they put money into something better than the rest? That or they just don't have it in them. Think K8 and K10.5, and how long they've strung them along... Very similar to what Apple is doing.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jurassic1024</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 23:01:55 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19872-amd-dumps-single-instruction-multiple-data#comment-2493</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>pogsnet says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19872-amd-dumps-single-instruction-multiple-data#comment-2474</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Good! We don't need redundant functions of this matter. This maybe the answer for AMD processor inefficiency towards leading competitor. AMD needs to clean up unused and ineffective instructions down the bonnet to become more effecient.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>pogsnet</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 19:53:40 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19872-amd-dumps-single-instruction-multiple-data#comment-2474</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Alexko says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19872-amd-dumps-single-instruction-multiple-data#comment-2427</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Indeed. And actually, SSE means Streaming SIMD Extensions!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Alexko</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 10:45:02 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19872-amd-dumps-single-instruction-multiple-data#comment-2427</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Hobgoblin says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19872-amd-dumps-single-instruction-multiple-data#comment-2426</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Err, the SSE sets are SIMD instruction sets. SIMD hasn't been 'superseded' by SSE, SSE is SIMD, it's just a means of executing instructions in parallel and numerous bits of data at the same time.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Hobgoblin</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 10:26:13 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19872-amd-dumps-single-instruction-multiple-data#comment-2426</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
