• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel to be Slapped with Greatest Fine in EU History

Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Messages
621 (0.17/day)
Likes
67
Processor INTEL Core i5-2500K - 4.4GHZ
Motherboard ASUS P8P67 (REV 3.0) LGA 1155
Memory CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (4 x 4GB) DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) GIGABYTE GTX 980
Storage SAMSUNG 840 EVO 1 TB x 2 + 2xWD6400AAKS RAID 0
Display(s) LG 34UM65 (2560x1080)
Case CORSAIR 650D
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster Z
Power Supply CORSAIR RM850
Mouse CORSAIR Raptor M45
Keyboard CORSAIR K70
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
I'm not sure if i agree with the penalty.. taking away their money is a really weird and odd punishment, but i guess what do you do.
Free i7 raffles? Complements of Intel? :toast:
 

smuggler

New Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2006
Messages
7 (0.00/day)
Likes
0
Quite an argument going around about anti-competition law. Well not living in EU, but I should say that there is nothşng wrong with what they did and 1 or 2 billion € fines is not much when the effects of Intel's actions are calculated.

EU makes more than 20 % of world market and taking into account the period Intel's anti-competitive actions continued it is just small enough like to get pinched by its mama.

And why is it always big companies are fined in competition cases? Well this is microeconomics 101 issue. If a company is dominant seller in any market, it has the power to set the price. If there is a small competitor this big company I can kill the small company A in two ways 1- It can cut prices untşl the company A cannot keep up 2- it can make vertical agreements to prevent buyers to buy from company A. So Intel was abusing its market dominance ( 80 % market share is market dominance wherever you are in the world).

EU fines smaller companies (smaller means not a monopoly but a oligopoly in the market) for making horizontal arrangements like fixing prices to maximize profit but you never here them because they are in markets not appealing as much as technology (bitumen, glass, chemicals etc)
 

Mussels

Moderprator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
46,202 (9.52/day)
Likes
13,686
Location
Australalalalalaia.
System Name Daddy Long Legs
Processor Ryzen R7 1700, 3.9GHz 1.375v
Motherboard MSI X370 Gaming PRO carbon
Cooling Fractal Celsius S24 (Silent fans, meh pump)
Memory 16GB 2133 generic @ 2800
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X (BIOS modded to Gaming Z - faster and solved black screen bugs!)
Storage 1TB Intel SSD Pro 6000p (60TB USB3 storage)
Display(s) Samsung 4K 40" HDTV (UA40KU6000WXXY) / 27" Qnix 2K 110Hz
Case Fractal Design R5. So much room, so quiet...
Audio Device(s) Pioneer VSX-519V + Yamaha YHT-270 / sennheiser HD595/518 + Corsair Void RGB
Power Supply Corsair HX 750i (Platinum, fan off til 300W)
Mouse Logitech G403 + KKmoon desk-sized mousepad
Keyboard Corsair K65 Rapidfire
Software Windows 10 pro x64 (all systems)
Benchmark Scores Laptops: i7-4510U + 840M 2GB (touchscreen) 275GB SSD + 16GB i7-2630QM + GT 540M + 8GB
As smuggler is hinting at, the laws are in place to prevent big business A from making business' B C D E and through to Z, kaput.

If intel kept this price fixing up, AMD would go out of business and then there would be NO competition in the CPU market. see how much your chips cost then, without AMD to keep intel competitive.
 

TreadR

New Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
79 (0.02/day)
Likes
4
If you read here, you will see that at first nVidia wanted to produce the chipset under their current licence, giving them QPI for free.
"the change in design means the old license doesn't apply, Intel believes" (bit-tech)
That wasn't speculated in the cross-license... Intel made it up and frankly I don't give a flying f. how much money Intel put in QPI, so stop giving this argument... it makes you look lame.

If it would have been specified in the license NV was given that it's valid only for Core platform, stating that clearly, would have given Intel the right to challenge it. Twisting the meaning that it's new and it doesn't apply... isn't much of a proof.

In fact, there was no way a four-year-old cross license agreement (in march 2009) could have specified a 2007 rumored tech to make Intel's point valid!

"though NVIDIA says it has been trying to resolve the problem with Intel in a "fair and reasonable manner" for more than a year." (electronista)
This is what I'm referring to the QPI-SLI cross-license issue.

Pity the fool that has no idea what a cross-license is.

Sorry, I have to break the forum rules this time only... hopefully:
IDIOT!

And that's being sensible!

"Intel claims that the statement given by Petersen was false because Intel believes that Nvidia doesn’t have a bus license for processors using an integrated memory controller.
That's why NV called it QPI in the article you've mentioned it!
Source (notice the date?): http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/03/27/nvidia-files-countersuit-against-intel/1

Basically, Intel gave them a license for Intel chipsets, without a clear statement that it's not covering future "different" chipsets and that is a mistake on Intel's part as they should have limited the licensing terms properly.

Besides, I feel sorry for you for trusting a MARKETING director. :roll:


motherboard manufacturers(not Intel as you claim) did not want to increase the price of their already too expensive motherboards. It was the motherboard manufacturers that stopped nVidia here, not Intel.
Right... Intel didn't want a 100$ chip on their mainboards, no matter by who they were manufactured because it would have hurt their overall Nehalem sales. But yeah... an Intel fanboy like yourself, can state that.


Now you've lost me...CPUs are not GPUs...why are you comparing them...
I don't doubt your single-threaded neuron got lost! :roll:

If NV won't be allowed to produce SLI QPI chipsets, as was stated on the more recent article on bit-tech, that would leave them with the only option to produce SLI chipsets for current gen platforms to stay in the chipset market... and the single viable platform is AMD.
I said "stay" because the articles alredy mention that NV has nothing to add to the QPI tech besides SLI.
Now, did you find yourself?


I see you like to piece together your inaccurate remembering of the facts to form a bunch of speculation, to accuse a company you don't like of things they did not do.

And I never contradicted myself, you just fail at reading and comprehension, obviously.
Yeah kid... just believe that if it makes yourself feel better. :roll:

Some people pointed you were wrong... you're just suborn and want it to be your way.


recently their stock has been downgraded to "junk" status. also, investment researchers believe that by 2011 AMD will have to stop competing with intel in order to survive. that may mean they stop making desktop chips and stick with graphics and maybe do umpc chips. who knows.
True, they are in a critical financial state... but it's not over and in order to continue they need to increase their market absorption rate. This means less profits through low prices for now but more clients for the future which will help to be more competitive and to get more money from.

Here's a piece of news regarding AMD's market share... for the better:
http://www.techreport.com/discussions.x/16855

Also I wouldn't say "always"... although I don't fully understand the part with obama. :wtf: but if it's related to what Swansen said next, I think I understand.

smuggler, that's what people said already, TheGuruStud even gave up arguing... the arguments continue because of fbz that don't get what Intel did. Take a look at newtekie1... he was even given a proper explanation by twilyth, yet he still insists that Intel didn't do anything wrong.

I guess we're back in the ages of Sparta... who shouts the loudest and the longest makes the point.
 

crtecha

New Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
2,407 (0.72/day)
Likes
204
Location
ipsay meechigan
System Name Coolin Runnings
Processor AMD X4 Phenom 9950 B.E. @ 3.3ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-MA790x-DS4 BIOS Ver. F6
Cooling CM Vortex 752
Memory apacer PC6400 800mhz x 2
Video Card(s) Two ATI Radeon 4850's in xfire
Storage Seagate 7200.9 320gig+250gigx2
Display(s) Acer P191w 19' wide
Case Antec 900
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Antec Power trio 550watts
Software Windows 7 x64 Build 7100
1,000,000,000 EUR pshhhhhh pocket change for them :p
 

Mussels

Moderprator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
46,202 (9.52/day)
Likes
13,686
Location
Australalalalalaia.
System Name Daddy Long Legs
Processor Ryzen R7 1700, 3.9GHz 1.375v
Motherboard MSI X370 Gaming PRO carbon
Cooling Fractal Celsius S24 (Silent fans, meh pump)
Memory 16GB 2133 generic @ 2800
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X (BIOS modded to Gaming Z - faster and solved black screen bugs!)
Storage 1TB Intel SSD Pro 6000p (60TB USB3 storage)
Display(s) Samsung 4K 40" HDTV (UA40KU6000WXXY) / 27" Qnix 2K 110Hz
Case Fractal Design R5. So much room, so quiet...
Audio Device(s) Pioneer VSX-519V + Yamaha YHT-270 / sennheiser HD595/518 + Corsair Void RGB
Power Supply Corsair HX 750i (Platinum, fan off til 300W)
Mouse Logitech G403 + KKmoon desk-sized mousepad
Keyboard Corsair K65 Rapidfire
Software Windows 10 pro x64 (all systems)
Benchmark Scores Laptops: i7-4510U + 840M 2GB (touchscreen) 275GB SSD + 16GB i7-2630QM + GT 540M + 8GB
This threads getting pretty heated...
 
T

twilyth

Guest
Last year they made 8.2 billion dollars. A billion euro fine would come out to 1.33 billion U.S. tender (according to google). That isn't exactly a slap on the wrist; that is 16% of their earnings. That is extreme compared to Microsoft's fines. Look at this: http://www.microsoft.com/msft/earnings/FY08/earn_rel_q2_08.mspx
For those of you saying this is nothing for intel, howabout you send ME 16% of your after tax earnings for the year. After all, you won't even notice - right? :laugh:

If you don't hit companies that break the law with fines that actually hurt, then they will just incorporate those fines into their cost of doing business.

And Intel can't can't just raise their prices and pass it along since as of now at least they still have some competition. So this is going to come out of their pockets of their share holders.

Intel should have realized that this type of an agreement would violate the law when they had a 80% market share. While this sort of thing is tolerated when done by smaller companies, there should have been no doubt it would be tolerated in Intel's case.

Now let's just hope they get put in their place by the other countries investigating them. Total fines of a few billion $$$ ought to bring the message home. :nutkick:
 

crtecha

New Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
2,407 (0.72/day)
Likes
204
Location
ipsay meechigan
System Name Coolin Runnings
Processor AMD X4 Phenom 9950 B.E. @ 3.3ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-MA790x-DS4 BIOS Ver. F6
Cooling CM Vortex 752
Memory apacer PC6400 800mhz x 2
Video Card(s) Two ATI Radeon 4850's in xfire
Storage Seagate 7200.9 320gig+250gigx2
Display(s) Acer P191w 19' wide
Case Antec 900
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Antec Power trio 550watts
Software Windows 7 x64 Build 7100
Greed sn a mofo. I guess thats why they say you cant have it all.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
21,043 (6.22/day)
Likes
10,146
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) PowerColor PCS+ 390 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate 6 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
Intel should have realized that this type of an agreement would violate the law when they had a 80% market share. While this sort of thing is tolerated when done by smaller companies, there should have been no doubt it would be tolerated in Intel's case.
Innocent until proven guilty.
 
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Messages
621 (0.17/day)
Likes
67
Processor INTEL Core i5-2500K - 4.4GHZ
Motherboard ASUS P8P67 (REV 3.0) LGA 1155
Memory CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (4 x 4GB) DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) GIGABYTE GTX 980
Storage SAMSUNG 840 EVO 1 TB x 2 + 2xWD6400AAKS RAID 0
Display(s) LG 34UM65 (2560x1080)
Case CORSAIR 650D
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster Z
Power Supply CORSAIR RM850
Mouse CORSAIR Raptor M45
Keyboard CORSAIR K70
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
For those of you saying this is nothing for intel, howabout you send ME 16% of your after tax earnings for the year. After all, you won't even notice - right? :laugh:
Yes, 16% of the average person's salary would be a big deal, however, Would Bill Gate's lifestyle be affected if 16% of his income was taken away? Prolly not. When you are talking about billions and billions of dollars, chances are it would not make/break Intel or affect them as much as an average person. In other words would you perhaps see some slowdowns in R&D... sure... would Intel shut down... no.... The effect that such a fine would have on Intel is totally dependent on how much of those profits they were putting back into the company.
 

Tyr.1358

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2008
Messages
33 (0.01/day)
Likes
5
Location
Sterling, MA
Yes, 16% of the average person's salary would be a big deal, however, Would Bill Gate's lifestyle be affected if 16% of his income was taken away? Prolly not.
No offense, but who are you to say that Bill Gate's lifestyle would not be affected if 16% of his income was suddenly levied into a fine? Just because his earnings are larger than the average median income does not mean that his 16% is any less important than your 16%. The United States Census Bureau recommends that a mortgage represents 36% of your income. Food is 12%, Auto 12%, and the rest is divided into 5% slots for insurance, debt, investment etc. I guess the point is that he has significantly higher bills than someone with a median income, and it is immature to believe that his NSI (net spendable income) is worth less to him (because the figure is larger) than it would be to you.
When you are talking about billions and billions of dollars, chances are it would not make/break Intel or affect them as much as an average person. In other words would you perhaps see some slowdowns in R&D... sure... would Intel shut down... no....
The same thing goes for Intel. If you think that there won't be any serious repercussions for them on the basis that they have the same operating cost as any other, smaller, company; then I might just call you ignorant. Intel has crazy operating costs to deal with compared to any other company with a smaller budget.
The effect that such a fine would have on Intel is totally dependent on how much of those profits they were putting back into the company.
Profits are not just expendable cash that you can throw around like your last paycheck of the month after your bills are payed. Intel invests their earnings in stock growth, R&D, and next year's budget. Their profits are also put back into the local economies to promote growth in their investment sectors: http://www.intel.com/community/. For example, they have a small facility in Marlborough, MA. I live not to far from there, and I can tell you that the entire town completely relies on regular support from Intel to stay afloat. They support a local trade school and promote growth throughout the entire industrial park. A good analogy would be how Starrett Tool in Athol, MA (pretty much a empty shell of the former company now) completely bankrupted the entire county when it went out of business last decade.
Intel can't can't just raise their prices and pass it along since as of now at least they still have some competition. So this is going to come out of their pockets of their share holders.
Maybe I can break this down a little more. Private companies sell a product to make money. Public companies make money to sell a product. They are opposites, OK? The problem is that the product that public companies make is stock value.

Companies make money by selling things. Companies sell a product at a price that covers their operating costs. Operating costs encase many things, including wages, taxes, electric bills, shipping costs, insurance, office supplies, company cookouts etc. So it is safe to say that any company will strive to sell their product. That is their goal, to create a large gap between operating costs and the revenue stream created by their product.

Intel is on the stock market. Their product is stock, and anything that needs to be done to maintain that stock value can be legally considered an operating cost. Selling processors is just a way to increase stock value. In a public company, the stockholders come first; that means that in order to maintain investor relations they have to maximize their stock value. Microsoft, for example, sells stock. They increase their stock value by making operating systems. Coca-Cola increases their stock value by making beverages. Comcast increases their stock (advertising) value by selling groups of people who watch TV.

To re-quote:
Intel can't can't just raise their prices and pass it along since as of now at least they still have some competition. So this is going to come out of their pockets of their share holders.
The first thing Intel will do is raise their prices, because that is how you cover operating costs. <- You see that sentence right there? Damn that feels good.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Messages
621 (0.17/day)
Likes
67
Processor INTEL Core i5-2500K - 4.4GHZ
Motherboard ASUS P8P67 (REV 3.0) LGA 1155
Memory CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (4 x 4GB) DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) GIGABYTE GTX 980
Storage SAMSUNG 840 EVO 1 TB x 2 + 2xWD6400AAKS RAID 0
Display(s) LG 34UM65 (2560x1080)
Case CORSAIR 650D
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster Z
Power Supply CORSAIR RM850
Mouse CORSAIR Raptor M45
Keyboard CORSAIR K70
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
No offense, but who are you to say that Bill Gate's lifestyle would not be affected if 16% of his income was suddenly levied into a fine? Just because his earnings are larger than the average median income does not mean that his 16% is any less important than your 16%. The United States Census Bureau recommends that a mortgage represents 36% of your income. Food is 12%, Auto 12%, and the rest is divided into 5% slots for insurance, debt, investment etc. I guess the point is that he has significantly higher bills than someone with a median income, and it is immature to believe that his NSI (net spendable income) is worth less to him (because the figure is larger) than it would be to you
Are you joking? You really think that Bill Gate's lifestyle would be different if he had 16% less income??? You realize this is the Bill Gates of Microsoft we are talking about right?

Also, the stats you are stating are AVERAGES. You think Bill Gates is paying 36% of his income towards a mortgage!? You realize how expensive his house would have to be if that were true??? If you think Bill Gates is even paying a mortgage at all, you need to wakeup. No offense :laugh: Also, if Bill Gates is paying 12% of his income towards his food bill, then I would like to know what is he eating... What, is he having baby seal steaks flown in daily from Alaska?! You would be hard pressed to spend more than a million dollars everyday on food...

Also, I never said whether I think it is fair, or right that Intel is being fined, I am simply pointing out that there is no way this will make Intel go out of business, or anything that drastic.
 
Last edited:

Tyr.1358

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2008
Messages
33 (0.01/day)
Likes
5
Location
Sterling, MA
Are you joking? You really think that Bill Gate's lifestyle would be different if he had 16% less income??? You realize this is the Bill Gates of Microsoft we are talking about right?

Also, the stats you are stating are AVERAGES. You think Bill Gates is paying 36% of his income towards a mortgage!? You realize how expensive his house would have to be if that were true??? If you think Bill Gates is even paying a mortgage at all, you need to wakeup. No offense :laugh:
Gates' fortress is valued at 147 million dollars: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Gates%27_house His estate is larger than most college campuses, and it's construction which started in 1988 was financed. There are a few small aerial photos here: http://www.propertyinvestmentproject.co.uk/blog/2008/01/02/bill-gates-house/

Also, if Bill Gates is paying 12% of his income towards his food bill, then I would like to know what is he eating... What, is he having baby seal steaks flown in daily from Alaska?! You would be hard pressed to spend more than a million dollars everyday on food...
$500k minus taxes =$360,331 x 12%= $43239.72 / 360 days = $120.11 a day for food. A bit off-topic, but my weekly grocery bill is about $90.

Wake up call: Bill Gates' income is actually small, the 45 billion dollar figure from forbes (or wherever people get it) is an estimation of his net worth, which is based on the stocks he holds. He doesn't actually make a lot of money, sad but true. He owns billions of dollars of stock, however. If he needs money for things then he sells stock. Here is his income before the vista flop: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/543343.html

Now, the taxes on his house alone are about a million dollars a year. He pays his bills by selling stock, he doesn't actually have a large income to cover his bills. That 500k a year goes towards his mercedes (or whatever he drives), the electric bill, and food. Just like you. What is more important to notice, is that his 500k a year is before taxes. After taxes his income comes out to $360,331.

And while we are at it, the Gates Foundation doesn't donate money, they donate stock. The charity organization can then cash in that stock.

Also, I never said whether I think it is fair, or right that Intel is being fined, I am simply pointing out that there is no way this will make Intel go out of business, or anything that drastic.
In the USA, monopolies are disbanded by dividing the one large conglomerate into smaller independent companies. You can't do that with Intel because Intel does one thing: they sell processors. Sure, you could divide up the chipset business, but that wouldn't change anything. Even if you tried to make two smaller companies that sell processors out of Intel, how do you divide up the R&D? Who gets what technologies? I believe that is why our government hasn't stepped in, because there isn't a whole lot they can do.

The EU solves this with a fine, but at what costs? Intel Corporation is not obligated to pay fines that are issued outside of America, where the company is based. The money will have to come from their European division/sector/sub company. That will bankrupt that market. What is worse, is the price hikes we worked out in my earlier post will be levied against the European market. You can't just slide money around from one company to another to cover costs. If that were possible then Ford Europe would have taken over Ford USA by now (a great idea actually).

I suppose they could use the USA company to buy stock in the Euro market, which is called a "buyback". This would give the Euro sector enough money to cover the fine. The problem is that they would have to dilute the shareholder's earnings in the USA in order to buy the stock. This violates their goal, so it won't happen.

The Euro sector will either go bankrupt, or be bought out/restructured.
 
Last edited:
T

twilyth

Guest
To re-quote:

The first thing Intel will do is raise their prices, because that is how you cover operating costs. <- You see that sentence right there? Damn that feels good.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. Intel is not yet a monopoly, therefore any increase in price means a decrease in sales - ceteris paribus. However Intel has very high fixed operating costs. So any decrease in sales pretty much comes out of the bottom line.

Personally, I hope Intel does raise prices. It will give AMD that much more of an advantage. :nutkick:
 
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Messages
621 (0.17/day)
Likes
67
Processor INTEL Core i5-2500K - 4.4GHZ
Motherboard ASUS P8P67 (REV 3.0) LGA 1155
Memory CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (4 x 4GB) DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) GIGABYTE GTX 980
Storage SAMSUNG 840 EVO 1 TB x 2 + 2xWD6400AAKS RAID 0
Display(s) LG 34UM65 (2560x1080)
Case CORSAIR 650D
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster Z
Power Supply CORSAIR RM850
Mouse CORSAIR Raptor M45
Keyboard CORSAIR K70
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Gates' fortress is valued at 147 million dollars: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Gates%27_house His estate is larger than most college campuses, and it's construction which started in 1988 was financed. There are a few small aerial photos here: http://www.propertyinvestmentproject.co.uk/blog/2008/01/02/bill-gates-house/

$500k minus taxes =$360,331 x 12%= $43239.72 / 360 days = $120.11 a day for food. A bit off-topic, but my weekly grocery bill is about $90.

Wake up call: Bill Gates' income is actually small, the 45 billion dollar figure from forbes (or wherever people get it) is an estimation of his net worth, which is based on the stocks he holds. He doesn't actually make a lot of money, sad but true. He owns billions of dollars of stock, however. If he needs money for things then he sells stock. Here is his income before the vista flop: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/543343.html
Yes, his "house" is huge and he OWNS IT. That is my point....

Also, you are pointing out his SALARY FROM MICROSOFT. Not his income... :banghead: Someone who has a net worth as high as Bill Gates is obviously going to have lots of investments making lots of money. You think that Bill Gates could have that house if he was making only 500k a year, dream on. :laugh:

It comes down to this, do you really think (as in your opinion) that Bill Gates is spending more than 83% of his yearly income (not salary) on goods/services?

/end total thread derailment
 
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
2,261 (0.71/day)
Likes
171
Location
the uk that's all you need to know ;)
System Name not very good (wants throwing out window most of time)
Processor xp3000@ 2.17ghz pile of sh** /i7 920 DO on air for now
Motherboard msi kt6 delta oap /gigabyte x58 ud7 (rev1.0)
Cooling 1 green akasa 8cm(rear) 1 multicoloured akasa(hd) 1 12 cm (intake) 1 9cm with circuit from old psu
Memory 1.25 gb kingston hyperx @333mhz/ 3gb corsair dominator xmp 1600mhz
Video Card(s) (agp) hd3850 not bad not really suitable for mobo n processor/ gb hd5870
Storage wd 320gb + samsung 320 gig + wd 1tb 6gb/s
Display(s) compaq mv720
Case thermaltake XaserIII skull / coolermaster cm 690II
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply corsair hx 650 w which solved many problems (blew up) /850w corsair
Software xp pro sp3/ ? win 7 ultimate (32 bit)
Benchmark Scores 6543 3d mark05 ye ye not good but look at the processor /uknown as still not benched
god the lawyers always interfere why? it'll just be passed on to the customers anyway in the form of higher prices :banghead:i personally beleive we all have a choice as to which processor we buy nobody forces us to pay intel's excessive prices ,god knows theirs enough of e'm to choose from i'll more than like'ly be getting a i7 simply cause all my amd processors have had problems ,plus as my mate says it's about time ya bought a new computer and put that ancient thing out for the bin men:laugh:
 
T

twilyth

Guest
god the lawyers always interfere why? it'll just be passed on to the customers anyway in the form of higher prices :banghead:i personally beleive we all have a choice as to which processor we buy nobody forces us to pay intel's excessive prices ,god knows theirs enough of e'm to choose from i'll more than like'ly be getting a i7 simply cause all my amd processors have had problems ,plus as my mate says it's about time ya bought a new computer and put that ancient thing out for the bin men:laugh:
I was thinking about a 920 myself, but and AMD 940 on an AM2+ board with low CAS DDR2 is probably bigger bang for your buck.

If Intel does raise prices, AMD will be looking pretty sweet to a lot of end users.
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
1,140 (0.29/day)
Likes
63
Location
Baltimore, Maryland
System Name Cozad (Asus G60JX)
Processor Core i5 M 430
Memory 8 GB DDR3 1066
Video Card(s) nVidia GeForce 360M
Storage 500GB
Display(s) 16 inch LED LCD
Software Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
Intel can very easily discourage AMD chips by disallowing an Intel badge to be affixed to PCs and by refusing to pay for any advertisements for the OEM - The last thing Dell and HP would want is to pick up the whole tab for their commercials, and not have the 'Intel Inside' music chime in at the end of it. I've never seen a PC advertised on TV that bragged about using an AMD chip, and I bet it's because AMD cannot afford to pay for it.

Now I am waiting for Apple to be brought to the chopping block of the great EU - As locked down as they keep their platform I am sure they've stepped on a lot of toes besides M$