Quote Originally Posted by Zucker2k View Post
You're only saying all these things with the benefit of hindsight. Assuming Intel didn't exist, you wouldn't be making that statement. What most fail to see is that Intel jumped leaps and bounds ahead with core/core2; it was a true revolution and we're still living it. Its been three years since Intel turned around the clock/clock deficit, and AMD still seems confounded by Intel's momentum. I mean that "fake" quadcore, Q6600, is still very strong and trades blows with AMD's best two years after the fact. That alone should give any doubters an idea about how revolutionary core2 was/is.
/off topic
as calmatory has said before the reason why companies jump each other is because one fails to make their latest product. amd failed with k10 and thats why the core 2 quads overtook them. the core 2 idea is pretty amazing. who would of thought that just slapping two of your cpus that failed in the past together would of worked. if i remember correctly the first core 2 duo was made from two pentium M laptop cpus. and the core 2 quads were made from two of the core two duos. who would of thought that some crappy laptop cpus would work so well. it was a simple design that somehow worked and didn't take much time at all to do. i doubt it will ever work again but this set amd back. as we all know k10 can't take the performance crown right now but bulldozer is on its way and its a complete new design so anything is possible. the only thing that is pissing me off here is that even tho phenom II can't overtake the performance crown both phenom I and phenom II are nice cpus and anyone that has used one before can't doubt that.