Recent content by john_

I wonder if everyone believes that these Snapdragon chips can do the job, or just rushing to build 1-2 models to avoid falling behind in case the Windows on ARM is successful this time.

Stupid decision. It only proves that they don't have a software division. When Windows 10 is still used by many, you support it, at least for a year and grab market share from those who intent to buy a laptop with no OS or a laptop with Windows 11, only to be able to downgrade it to Windows 10...

Is this like Firewire (1394) PC2PC connection, 25 years later?

That "AMD" in the roadmap is probably just trolling or a typo. We ARE talking about Dell.

You do realize that supercomputers are not intent for gaming, right? He is focused on fabs and how many billions he can get to build them. Intel stock up as $11B Apollo deal nears completion: WSJ We can laugh at him constantly for the next 1-2-3 years, but if his plan works, if he builds those...

The only one who will say that they where thinking AI in 2015 and I'll believe him, is Huang. Everybody else was either sleeping, or didn't had the means, financial or hardware, to set such a goal. Not to mention that if Intel was thinking AI in 2015, it should have been the main competitor to...

Intel managed to score one win with over 2 times the power consumption and while Nvidia is getting ready to annihilate everything in AI benchmarks with it's latest chips. In the end Intel will be slower than Nvidia in AI, slower in everything else compared to AMD and a joke in efficiency...

OK, OK, you just try to convince me that HU being biased is normal and expected. Sorry haven't realized that the whole time you where supporting my opinion. Thanks?

I would love a link where 4 times the cores(and only 2 times the threads) means 6-12 times faster processing.

I think it's more about space. Everything you said is correct, but I think it's about cores becoming too big and needing to eliminate some stuff to keep them smaller. Intel was never advertising threads anyway, if I am not wrong. Always cores.

Sorry, I can't understand this line as an argument. Your point? other than agreeing that HU is not totally objective? Scientific publications need bias when the people writing those can't explain everything they try to convince others that try can explain. LLMs.... How did we got from reviews...

AMD through that putting 1.51 cores would round up to 2 cores so they can advertise 2 cores instead of 1.51 cores. Because those modules was more or less that. A way to compete with Intel Hyper Threading and at the same time advertise more cores instead of more threads. Of course Bulldozer...

So, I guess it's 4.5GHz with Intel Baseline Profile for the top model? :p I wonder if that 5.5 is final. And at what wattage. If Intel stays at 5.5 for the final top product, then they either can't go higher, don't need to go higher thanks to IPC gains, or knew that their silicon was having...

It's an indication when a reviewer is biased, either by fear, or for gain. JMO. When a publication uses strong wording against company A, while being more careful when talking about company B or C, you know that, no matter their data, they are NOT 100% objective. Now HU is famous for their...

I think it's a good marketing move. Intel rushed to copy Apple's naming with the "Ultra", now AMD is trying to take advantage of the AI hype. While for most of us this naming looks stupid, for the average "don't know anything about hardware" consumer, putting that "AI" there is important. I...