<?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>TI plans dual-core OMAP 4440 at 1.5GHz</title>
		<description>Discuss TI plans dual-core OMAP 4440 at 1.5GHz</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 13:20:39 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/21535/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>loadwick says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14344</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As for what Cartman said about 99% of people don’t need anything more than a Pentium II, I totally agree, Most games aren’t written well enough to need more than 1 good core, possibly dual tops these days, but yeah if you are not a big transcoder or a benchmarker then you don’t need to change your 5 year old computer, just keep it clean. But that is software writers fault and I think Intel + AMD should set up a nVidia style ‘TWIMTBP’ team to get programmers writing multi-threadily and use all of their CPU efficiently, especially games where they could use the CPU for better AI, Physics, path finding, collision detection, deformable geometry, etc.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>loadwick</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:03:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14344</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>loadwick says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14343</link>
			<description><![CDATA[That is because Intel doesn't want someone who can actually challenge them, they just want someone who they can call ‘the competition’ so they don't get their massive monopoly broken up. That is why i am so excited by Microsoft opening up Windows to ARM. They are not going to challenge the high-end, not at first at least, but it just means some more completion in the PC market. I fear though it will hurt AMD more than Intel though as for the first few years ARM will just be eating up the low-end market which is where AMD makes its money.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>loadwick</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:42:29 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14343</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14258</link>
			<description><![CDATA[loadwick, while it might be true what you've said, it still doesn't explain why intel were so excited to stop AMD by challenging their license in the GF spin-off! Remember, the "sorry AMD, your license will expire in 10 days" headline that was all over the internet? Believe me, they are scared of AMD. Why? Because they have to make multiple dev teams and they have to expand in order to stay ahead... which costs money and makes a lot of bossies bark louder than they should. More like what Cartman, and add to that incentives for sales people... give them money and they will shove Pentium 3's down people's... bags!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Jan 2011 02:29:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14258</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Cartman says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14201</link>
			<description><![CDATA[U explained very nice and i agree with the most... But you can thank to stupid customers that buy Intel too much for all that, and most of those peope doesnt know diffrence between single and quad core cpu In my opinion Intel is better in stuff that most normal people dont use... Normal people wouldn see diffrence between i7 and P2 And testing in benchmarks means 0 to me, companies with money can buy every bench they want]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Cartman</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 14 Jan 2011 14:27:40 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14201</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>loadwick says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14171</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In my view it is because there was no need to as nothing could touch it but more importantly Intel doesn't want to pull too far ahead of AMD or they will get done for monopolising the market so they slow down, let AMD catch up, maybe even over take with their new Bulldozer, let AMD make some money and then come back with LGA-2011. I am not some Intel fanyboy, my MB, CPU and GPU are all AMD as they offer the best value for money but its only because Intel allows AMD this market. You never wondered why Intel's chips are half the size of AMDs, they have better yeilds and yet are never cheaper?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>loadwick</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 14 Jan 2011 12:10:38 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14171</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>loadwick says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14170</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Intel needs healthy competitors. Thats why when AMD was ready to go under Intel invested (bought shares) a huge amount into AMD. (same reason Microsoft did that to Apple many years ago). I am not saying that from time to time a company like AMD can't come up with a great chip to take down Intel for a while but what i am saying is IF Intel wanted to it could wipe AMD out and still make profit. Intel owns its own fabs so no 3rd party to take profit, its die process is much small (been 32nm for over a year and soon 22nm) so die size is much small, IF they wanted to they could massively under cut AMD as Intel's chips are much cheaper to make but they 'let' AMD have their market share. Give me one reason why Intel has taken so long to replace LGA-1366.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>loadwick</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 14 Jan 2011 11:59:02 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14170</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Cartman says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14155</link>
			<description><![CDATA[MMM wasnt Athlon 64 killer of Intel in its time? And you tell here that was lets' the competion have some market share yea right :), Athlon 64 was first 64 bit processor for us normal customers...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Cartman</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 14 Jan 2011 10:13:20 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14155</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>loadwick says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14134</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Let me rephrase, i am surprised that Intel are not in this market but i do think its only a matter of time, probably very different from Atom but when you are 2 or 3 years ahead of the competition in lithography then even inefficient poorly designed chips can still be faster and use less power than chips twice the size. Not to mention that Intel’s profit margins are far larger than anyone else's as they own their own fabs and advanced lithography often results in small die sizes. Time will tell.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>loadwick</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2011 23:25:38 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14134</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jurassic1024 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14126</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Intel is not in the same market. Intel does x86 only, and Atom is no match for these chips for what they do and where they are used.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jurassic1024</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2011 19:24:31 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14126</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>loadwick says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14120</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Not sure what you mean there RickyT23. I certainly wouldn't agree with you that Intel has 'the fastest processors' not in the smart phone areana thats for sure. I agree that Intel often 'lets' the competion have some market share like they did with AMD Athlon and like they are doing again with Bulldozer. If Intel didn't want to let AMD in the game then they would have replaced LGA-1366 already but they are going slow to let AMD earn some much need money.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>loadwick</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2011 16:48:34 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21535-ti-plans-dual-core-omap-4440-at-15ghz#comment-14120</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
