<?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>Intel extends lead over AMD </title>
		<description>Discuss Intel extends lead over AMD </description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 07:24:02 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/25318/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Blizzard says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36331</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What is AMD slogan? A: Smarter Choice !!!! ;-)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Blizzard</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2011 15:15:09 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36331</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Chris says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36325</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Agreed, for having tried Atom and Brazos machines, I can tell it's far more worth spending money on a brazos one, far more reactive. I heard once in a shop, someone asking an Atom netbook and despite the fact that the reseller told him AMD was better in that segment, took INTEL because he thought AMD was "uncompatible". Hearing that sounded a bit strange to me.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2011 09:02:52 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36325</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jay says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36307</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well Atom is finished pretty much. Cedar-Trail stuff isn't yet available it didn't even pass DX10.1 certification coz Intel's monkeys cannot write graphics drivers. It wasn't giving Intel much profits so what do they do, they stop focus & pretty much abandon it in the PC space & being greedy they launch a new standard in Ultrabooks coz everyone wants a Macbook Air clone these days & they do price fixing even when OEM's ask them to reduce prices they don't listen to them. Why do OEM's even stick up with them? Coz to survive they need to sell Intel apparently as per OEM's. AMD Brazos will make a 2x better ultrabook if OEM's put it in good design enclosures but why don't they! :-x]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jay</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2011 13:25:30 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36307</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>las says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36305</link>
			<description><![CDATA[lmao so we got good Intel products because of AMD? Yeah right. Even a OCed C2Q would be my choice over any AMD CPU. They are garbage. Really bad OC Scaling. Shitty single threaded performance. Crappy clock for clock performance. That's what AMD CPUs stand for. AMD lost this war several years ago. And did this stop Intel? No, we got SB and soon IB. Stop fooling yourself. Those who work at Intel like their jobs, this mean they dosnt sit on their ass because of no competition. Why should ppl upgrade if they didnt come up with new stuff? Use your brain pls. They want to earn money, so they will keep making good products, simple.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>las</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2011 11:07:14 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36305</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nt300 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36304</link>
			<description><![CDATA[That I agree with, I also agree AMD should have done some long term (15+ years) Joint Venture with ATI instead of buying them out completely. AMD also made the mistake of becoming Fabless, Big Mistake. Who's to blame? AMD's upper management, they've made very poor decisions. Even when Dirk Meyer was CEO, his hands were tied because AMD's previous CEO set certain motions into play where it would have cost AMD an arm and a leg to cancel and so they were forced to see them to the end. You are being way too soft with Intel; they've already proven to be the bully for years now.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nt300</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2011 10:27:10 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36304</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>majorpayne says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36303</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There is only one truth and you are a shitty troll eh shitty Gay err typo error Jay boi.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>majorpayne</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2011 09:19:52 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36303</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>dicobalt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36301</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Monopoly Masters or just some people who did fast paced R&D for CPUs in the last 5 years? Intel can't win. If they lower prices too much they get sued for dumping product. If they raise prices people think it's due to monopoly price fixing. Compared to AMD which failed to hit any targets on time since the release of the first Phenom. AMD who blew a huge wad of cash on an ATI acquisition instead of a partial acquisition and partnership. AMD failed to put the dollars into R&D for CPUs and they bet it all on the GPU. Now that bet has been called and they are about to loose the hand.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>dicobalt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2011 06:38:08 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36301</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nt300 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36298</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I encourage everybody to read this article that was written back in 2004. It shows how AMD lead the PC industry with Intel following behind. It was AMD that released many 1sts and took huge chances. If you think about it, AMD had no choice to do so… Also be sure to read the part: Role reversal: How it might have been Where AMD leads, Intel follows - 2004 http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1011948/where-amd-leads-intel-follows]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nt300</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2011 03:53:44 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36298</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nt300 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36296</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yes I read that news release by AMD. I believe it's a good idea for AMD to keep low for now, continue with strong R&D and hopefully by 2014 to 2015, they will have enough arsenal to fight back strong. Right now they will have to concentrate on Price/Performance, something they've been winning in for some time now. Remember AMD is known for taking big chances on innovation despite the fact they are a much smaller company versus Intel. You see Intel won't take chances like this.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nt300</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2011 03:47:51 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36296</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nt300 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36295</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Intel has good products, no questions asked. You can thank AMD for those good Intel products, because of AMD's past competition and being responsible for steering the industry in the right direction, is the only reason why Intel has great products. Don't fool yourself in thinking that all we need is Intel because you are wrong, we need both AMD and Intel competing with each other so both can continue to innovate.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nt300</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2011 03:43:53 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25318-intel-extends-lead-over-amd#comment-36295</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
