coastie65, on 04 February 2012 - 08:48 AM, said:
Yeah, I know. It was just an off hand remark I threw at her at the time.
Actually, it was someone I was dating at the time and I was happy someone gave her that thing as i was getting more than a little tired od trying to squeeze more out the Packard Bell ( at her request I might add ) than it was willing to give. That thing was not intended to be used to try and run a business. I think it was running a P3 and she had "upgraded" to Windows 98 ( I believe Win 2k was the flavor of the day at the time ). She also thought she could handle a Website........not. That thing was crippled as far as memory went. Told her she would need a server for that. She ended up going to a third party to host her web site. She also didn't have the internet connection for trying to host a web site. Early on, AMD did have the better processor and I suspect when they were writing the instructions that was what it was based on.
Honestly, I think it had more to do with Intel getting complacent. They didn't see AMD as a threat. When the P4 launched, it was easily the largest fumble in Intel's history. Massive space heaters that underperformed.... even the P3s - at similar clock speeds - were faster. Then came the Hyper Threading fiasco, a wonderful idea at the time, that turned out to be more harm than good. Lastly, was Rambus. I am fairly certain that alone killed the P4 in the mid tier gaming market - where most of the money is spent. AMD happened to come out with a quality product, at the right time, and used DDR ram. Was this because of the instruction sets? Not really. I suspect it was more due smarter core design, cache management, etc.
In a way it is too bad. AMD had a chance to be the front runner for some time to come. The Athlon 64's were such a mess at launch though, that it made it hard to really consider an AMD.