<?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 slashes processor prices</title>
		<description>Discuss AMD slashes processor prices</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 15:19:51 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/22640/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>thomasg says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices#comment-22244</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Price cuts are always good news, and this will either lead to improved market share for AMD or Intel cutting prices. Everybody wins!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>thomasg</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 17:34:07 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices#comment-22244</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>GKL says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices#comment-22214</link>
			<description><![CDATA[No no! lets hope the leaks are right, and buldozer is matching the 2600k IPC. (intels best chip for that benchmark is the 2600k not the I7 980x)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>GKL</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 13:12:01 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices#comment-22214</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>turingpest says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices#comment-22209</link>
			<description><![CDATA[quoting myself; "we could see some real competition soon..." http://fudzilla.com/processors/item/22642-intel-redesigns-the-transistor i might be wrong...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>turingpest</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 12:11:08 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices#comment-22209</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>turingpest says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices#comment-22208</link>
			<description><![CDATA[the leaked (and to my eye fake) pcmark/3dmark slide shows bulldozer matching sandy bridge in ipc in pcmark vantage. pcmark doesn't scale beyond 4 threads, so it's 4 sandy bridge threads against 4 bulldozer ones. if it is real then bulldzozer matches sandy bridge in ipc per thread in this instance. considering that intel doesn't have a new mArch until haswell, this would possibly mean near parity for amd in instructions per cycle, per thread until at least 2013. of course amd also have a new mArch in the works, so we could see some real competition soon...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>turingpest</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 12:07:57 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices#comment-22208</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Boomstick777 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices#comment-22202</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Llano then Zambezi soon.. Lets hope the leaks are wrong and Bulldozer can convincingly beat Sandybridge's 2600K, then we might see proper competition between AMD and Intel :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Boomstick777</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 11:30:50 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22640-amd-slashes-processor-prices#comment-22202</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
