Quote Originally Posted by Manicdan View Post
i just think that its funny to compare the first 45nm AMD chips with the first 32nm Intel chips.
Why it is funny? They've chosen clock parameter. What's funny about that choice?
if they did the comparison right, the intel one should stomp amds in every way.
and the right way would be?
its a year old and on a dying platform.
Sorry dying platform?
instead we see a near matching comparison. (i am NOT saying they are the same in every way, im just saying the review makes it look that way)
well apparently review has shown what you get from 3-core "K10.5" architecture @ 2.8 GHz against HT enabled Clarkdale w/o Turbo @ 2.8, and 2.93 GHz... don't understand what you've expected?