Intel Vs. AMD Follow Up

I simply want to get down to the nitty gritty. I was certainly upset to see the constructive criticism, but afterall this is the writing world and we sometimes get that type of "stuff". I am posting a line from the press conference that held information regarding the "processor" war.

"From the CRN website"
'The reaction I received to CRN's head-to-head competition between the Fujitsu Lifebook S2110 (based on the AMD processing platform) and the Fujitsu Lifebook S6240 (based on Intel's Centrino) got right to the point. To recap: In a head-to-head test between those notebooks, Intel won on performance and battery life, but AMD won on price. '

I am not calling anybody wrong for criticising my information, but I am just saying that it is what it is. Intel performs better than AMD. This is a follow up to my last article and will hold more information regarding this war. I will make it more clearer also.

I am a huge Intel fan, but I don't take sides when producing information. A friend of mine uses an AMD chip and is a big gamer. He was short on some cash so I told him to go for it. He purchased an AMD Athlon 64. He hasn't had too many problems with it but it seems that his computer gets overly hot so there is no telling whether or not he is burning out the chip. AMD doesn't have a heat sensor installed which is very dangerous. This is something Intel has installed for along time. I installed a coolant system inside of his machine so he wouldn't have that problem. All in all AMD processors actually have lower wattage so that should mean they are cooler correct? Yes correct, but that's not the main problem. Even with a cooler wattage the chip will still get hot eventually so they can still burn out.

When the Athlon 64 3800+ went up against Intels Pentium 4 560 in a battle for "who's better" AMD came out on top. This was a huge accomplishment for AMD, but really didn't hurt Intel all that much. This was about a year ago and since then Intel has released the Xeon which lowers power usage and is great for Servers, but isn't used as much as the Opteron as of now. The Opteron is AMD's newer chip and is great for Server's, etc. AMD wanted to be the best they could with there Server chip. Being this was a year ago, we will now move into a more recent battle. The one I stated in the beginning of this article.

Intel obviously took that beating pretty seriously when the AMD 3800 took them in statistics, and also lost the Dual Processor War. AMD took them in every category you could think of. So I guess you're all thinking why am I defending Intel when AMD is beating Intel in every possible way? Well Intel is focusing a lot on there mobile chip set's. Centrino which is being used more and more in laptops beat out the Turion which is AMD's mobile chip. Being now that Laptop's are becoming the popular thing, Intel went that route and is simply dominating. AMD is still focusing on being the leader in the gaming department though.

AMD did take the route in challenging Intel to a Dual Processor Fight. Well as of right now they are winning. When Intel released there newest Xeon Processor, I'm not sure AMD will take that down. They have a couple of them out, but are scheduled to make a newer one that will probably beat out AMD's newest Dual Processor. I will keep everyone up to date on that one.

All in all AMD has improved. Athlon is staying steady at keeping it's pace with Intel's Pentium 4 Processor with HT Technology. I would have to say it's pretty even now to who's leading in the processor war. Once the newer Xeon comes out along with any other newer Pentium 4's, it could be another beatdown on AMD. We'll see what happens.