Every story and comment from the Hacker News API, in a layout borrowed from 2001.
A comment on Apple’s M1 Positioning Mocks the Entire x86 Business Model. Parent comment
Generally speaking, AMD had some more advanced microarchitecture features than Intel, leading to better per-clock performance.
Intel marketing struck back by emphasizing GHz, GHz, GHz. At least until Pentium 4 scaling hit a brick wall.
Then, a chip was sold as a "Pentium 4" "2.8 GHz" (or a "Pentium II" "300 MHz"). No other codes.
By the end of that range, the multicore era had started, and both Intel and AMD had moved to new systems of processor labelling.
There are no comments on this comment yet.
Generally speaking, AMD had some more advanced microarchitecture features than Intel, leading to better per-clock performance.
Intel marketing struck back by emphasizing GHz, GHz, GHz. At least until Pentium 4 scaling hit a brick wall.
Then, a chip was sold as a "Pentium 4" "2.8 GHz" (or a "Pentium II" "300 MHz"). No other codes.
By the end of that range, the multicore era had started, and both Intel and AMD had moved to new systems of processor labelling.