View Single Post
Old 06. Sep 2013, 09:05 PM   #7 (permalink)
Doobie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Remah View Post
Whenever I see this, it reminds me that for several years from 2003 to 2009 Intel didn't have the leading CPUs because their transition to 64-bit was initially a flop.
Up until Core 2, AMD was always my choice in processors. Until then, AMD always had competitive mainstream performance at a better price. Even more so when Intel stumbled in the 64-bit transition. But, since Core 2, it has been Intel all the way (on the desktop).

Intel was too ambitious for their own good when when they started going 64-bit.
Doobie is offline   Reply With Quote