Quote Originally Posted by justthefax View Post
Nehalem is basically a great validation of AMD's architectural choices -- on-die memory controller, Hypertransport, small L2, big L3, monolithic quadcore etc. People can argue on the details, whether inclusive or exclusive cache hierarchies are more effective etc, but the gist is the same.

Too bad AMD wasn't pragmatic enough about when to introduce features, though. Kinda like the R600 was so forward-looking that it was beaten by Nvidia. Until the R7xx generation they didn't focus on optimizing for NOW rather than 2 years in the future. Hopefully AMD has applied that lesson on the CPU front in Deneb and Bulldozer. I still can't believe AMD decided to aim for quad-core or bust in 2007 when the market was -- and is -- dominated by dual-core. They don't seem to have a new dual core design even now, apart from broken quads.
your compare is on personal desktop happenings, and you are right they did not bring what was required for the market at that time.

BUT amd's focus is on server and believe me the future there is for sure on quad core and higher, both intel and amd cpu prices are way more focused on the quad core offerings for months now and all dualcore have an EOL mark for a long time .