• Rekall Incorporated@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I personally wouldn’t buy an Intel chip on desktop or in a laptop (as of today), but I think you’re being a little bit melodramatic. Their offerings are not that terrible, this is particularly true with laptops where you have a much wider selection if going with Intel.

    Laptop OEMs have actually called out AMD for not providing enough support for implementing AMD platforms in their devices.

      • towerful@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        You are wrong.
        Intel didn’t design them to do that. Design implies intent.
        They fucked up, yes. Not providing replacement/refund for damaged chips is horrendous. It will probably end in a settled class action lawsuit where everyone affected get $5, which isn’t a good outcome.

        But they didn’t design them to do this.

      • Rekall Incorporated@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Based on historical trends, I would disagree.

        AMD was in a far worse spot with bulldozer and they were able to become competitive again.

        I don’t support Intel (or AMD), if anything I wish there was far more competition in the CPU (x86 or otherwise) and GPU space.

          • Rekall Incorporated@lemm.eeOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I am looking at it from a more global perspective; more competition results in better prices and a wider selection of products for consumers. In that sense, we want AMD and Intel to be both competitive and roughly equal.

            I explicitly stated that I would not buy an Intel desktop CPU or an Intel laptop at this point.