Topic: EU slaps a record fine on Intel

[Nemesis]

Unfair shouldn't mean Illegal though, is my point. Why penalize a company for being successful? Imagine if the super bowl winners, where told, here you go, here is your super bowl ring, but we are going to take away your salaries, because you won.

Stephen

The problem comes with that word "Monopoly".  A major computer company MUST sell intel CPUs or they won't be a major computer company very long.  That makes intel legally a monopoly and the fact that they can use that power to prevent others from competing is why there are laws against it.

When one company controls the market it is not a free market.  Intel has been using that control to prevent AMD from competing.  Ultimately if that control destroys AMD there would be NO competition in the CPU market and that would block progress in CPU performance and features. 

[marstone]

Unfair shouldn't mean Illegal though, is my point. Why penalize a company for being successful? Imagine if the super bowl winners, where told, here you go, here is your super bowl ring, but we are going to take away your salaries, because you won.

Stephen

The problem comes with that word "Monopoly".  A major computer company MUST sell intel CPUs or they won't be a major computer company very long.  That makes intel legally a monopoly and the fact that they can use that power to prevent others from competing is why there are laws against it.

When one company controls the market it is not a free market.  Intel has been using that control to prevent AMD from competing.  Ultimately if that control destroys AMD there would be NO competition in the CPU market and that would block progress in CPU performance and features.

I disagree with the statement that a major computer maker has to have the majority of there systems item chips.  They have to have the majority as windows based, but chipset I am not so sure.  Out of five machines in my house only one is intel.

[Sirgod]

I kinda side with Marstone on this one. AMD chips are still available, and to be honest, I haven't used a Intel chipset since the early 90's. Then again, I'm an AMD man all the way.

Add to that, I can think of one example, (AT&T) where a monopoly would have given us the infrastructure today, to have built on the Internet backbone, Had they been allowed to continue, and not broken up.

Stephen

[Nemesis]

I disagree with the statement that a major computer maker has to have the majority of there systems item chips.  They have to have the majority as windows based, but chipset I am not so sure.  Out of five machines in my house only one is intel.

My brother-in-law used to sell computers and as he only dealt in AMD chips he lost deals with places that were intel only.  In other cases he had to persuade them that AMD was an equivalent even though at the time the price/performance crown was AMDs.  The knowledgeable people will chose intel vs AMD on their current relative merits but many people just don't know enough so they go with the "industry standard" intel. 

Also in the EU in the last few years there was a ruling that governments couldn't specify Intel as they had been doing.  I don't know if the U.S. governments are still (or ever did) issue intel only tenders for computers but EU governments were.

The last computer I built for myself was an Intel the prior ones were AMD.  I don't choose one brand exlusively myself I judge based on my current needs and the current standing of the manufacturers.  Not every one does but many do including big companies and governments.

[Sirgod]

I have to admit, I've been looking at the I7 core from Intel for awhile now, but that is because of it's uses in Multi boxing. Although I'm sure a cheaper AMD will do the same.

Stephen

[Pestalence_XC]

I build systems based on performance and capabilities.

in the last 3 years since Core 2 cam out and now the I7, AMD is hard pressed to have a processor that can compare in performance in both gaming and business.

the I7 Architecture is revolutionary, and removes the need for FSB based processing, and as such, the results are the Core 2 Quad (4 CPU) and the I7 Duo (2 CPU) running at 3.2 Ghz each, the I7 blows the doors off the Core 2 Quad.

Amd has nothing on the market currently that can match the I7.. the only thing about the I7 is the cost at the moment.. Motherboard, DDR3 Ram and the I7 processor is still a bit expensive compared to Core 2 or AMD equivalent

Then with the I7, if you want Overclocking.. you have the Intel 960 chipset.. and for ultimate speed.. get 2 HDDs at 10,000 RPM for say 1 TB total storage at 6 GB/s transfer rate and set them up in Raid 0 Striped. (equivalent of 12 GB/s. combine that with 16 GB DDR3 or more system memory (fastest rated FSB available, though the system doesn't use FSB, the memory can keep up with the I7 transfer rate) with a 16 GB USB stick set in Ready Boost on Windows 7, and for gaming, throw in 2 NVidia 295 GTX OC2s into SLI (or even 3 or 4).

That would be a decent machine by today's standards.. but it is cost preventative..

[Sirgod]

Thanks Pesty. See I was looking at Newegg the other day, and figured the I7 with a MB and 8 gig of ram to be about $500.00

That is doable over a few months, But I have not put together an Intel machine in a long time. Hmm. IF your still in Texas, we might be doing some wheeling and dealing after this summer.

Stephen

[Rod ONeal]

I build systems based on performance and capabilities.

in the last 3 years since Core 2 cam out and now the I7, AMD is hard pressed to have a processor that can compare in performance in both gaming and business.

the I7 Architecture is revolutionary, and removes the need for FSB based processing, and as such, the results are the Core 2 Quad (4 CPU) and the I7 Duo (2 CPU) running at 3.2 Ghz each, the I7 blows the doors off the Core 2 Quad.

Amd has nothing on the market currently that can match the I7.. the only thing about the I7 is the cost at the moment.. Motherboard, DDR3 Ram and the I7 processor is still a bit expensive compared to Core 2 or AMD equivalent

Then with the I7, if you want Overclocking.. you have the Intel 960 chipset.. and for ultimate speed.. get 2 HDDs at 10,000 RPM for say 1 TB total storage at 6 GB/s transfer rate and set them up in Raid 0 Striped. (equivalent of 12 GB/s. combine that with 16 GB DDR3 or more system memory (fastest rated FSB available, though the system doesn't use FSB, the memory can keep up with the I7 transfer rate) with a 16 GB USB stick set in Ready Boost on Windows 7, and for gaming, throw in 2 NVidia 295 GTX OC2s into SLI (or even 3 or 4).

That would be a decent machine by today's standards.. but it is cost preventative..

I7 duo? I haven't seen anything on these yet. Got a link?

[Nemesis]

I7 duo? I haven't seen anything on these yet. Got a link?

Link to full article

Until now, Intel's quad-core processors have been constructed from two dual-core dies, but now Core i7 brings together four cores on a single die. It's also Intel's first processor design to use an L3 cache, shared between all four cores.  The icing on the i7 cake is a pair of logic features found on neither the Phenom nor the Core 2. The first is Intel's HyperThreading (HT) technology, and the second is a new feature called Dynamic Speed Technology, which allows the processor to detect when load is unevenly balanced and automatically boost the speed of the cores with the most work to do. Idle cores are clocked down to keep power consumption within tolerance.

From one source I saw the i7 is aimed at high end machines (servers and workstations) with 3 channel memory and the i5 is the same chip with duo channel memory for the "rest of us".

[Rod ONeal]

Sorry, I was talking about dual core I7 CPU. I've only seen quad cores. Maybe the reference to "I7 duo (2 cpu)" was a mistype?