what the hell with the "borrowing AMD's architecture" ??
such a noob statement.. go study your ass more..

Intel stole Hyperthreadinf from AMD?

I think ur foolish ass is thinking off "Hypertransport" which is AMD's FSB.

an 8 core with hyperthreading is teh fucking pwnage...and its already been tested.



Hyperthreading AINT AMD.

HyperThreading is from Intel.
HyperTransport is from AMD.

Both are totally different technologies.
HyperThreading are found in cpus (Pentium 4s) that allows a cpu to create a virtual core of itself. It improves performance in Multi-threaded applications. This was a stepping stone for dual core and multi-core cpus.

HyperTransport is a interconnect path between the cpu and ram.
It's AMD's equvalent of Intel's FSB, but for AMD it's integrated into the CPU.
The HT is bidirectional meaning it's able to transfer upstream and downstream at the same speed.

The idiot who says "borrowing AMD technology" should study his ass more, cause even without the IMC on Intel's current cpus, it still kicks the asses out of those AMDs.

as far as i remember AMD was the first one to introduce dual core chips in da market while intel kept on saying dat dual core wont work..... so basically intel did steal da idea from AMD... and this chipset also supports AMD's Quad CrossFire. hmmm... now i wonder why intel 4got 2 mention dat in the pic??

i think he meant that intel stole the idea of integrated on die memory controller, not the hyperthreading, but this isn't intel's first try to integrate memory controller on the processor itself, it tried it once before and failed, AMD just succeeded earlier, that's all.

Anyway, in any case, who the f#

only extreme chips will be overclockable-then all all the intel fanboy homos will be crawling back to AMD!

that surley depends on wich stock performance we get. Today even without any OC intel looks better right now. Not everyone wants to risk an unstable system by overclocking, I would even go as far and say that only 1-2% really care much for overclocking features.

[1] a good overclock means a stable system, if you cant get your system stable while overclocking then you gained nothing.
-----------------------------
[2] if it is really 1-2% as you think out of the computer users population then why will intel "if we are to believe that the rumors are true" limit the overclocking potential of budget processors?! IMO, in any forums right now there are:
- detailed overclocking guides everywhere
- recommendation of hardware that enables overclocking
- many posts everywhere go with the idea of SPENDING less and GETTING more through overclocking
- new nano meter technology and efficient processors architecture enabled most users to get over 50% performance advantage over stock speeds with dirt cheap processors, my e2140 "1.6Ghz stock" reached 3.0Ghz on a P31 budget motherboard, couldn't be happier.

why is it dumb, its just some extra of the long pci-e slots, the shorter cards fit into those slots too. sure utilizing it for 4 video cards may seem gimmicky and not many people will do this. perhaps a few CAD or 3D artists will do this if GPGPU rendering becomes useful with SLI. perhaps it could be used for arcade machines, people expect those to have very good video performance.