AMD: Another failing try to get back in game with Intel

Doug
If your argument is right on the money about Intel, Intel would have been back to old highs of 70's or higher. AMD would have been out of business long ago. It is not happening. You are grudingly boasting about Intel's 30% gain so far. You are a moosehead

Doug
If your argument is right on the money about Intel, Intel would have been back to old highs of 70's or higher. AMD would have been out of business long ago. It is not happening. You are grudingly boasting about Intel's 30% gain so far. You are a moosehead

Doug
If your argument is right on the money about Intel, Intel would have been back to old highs of 70's or higher. AMD would have been out of business long ago. It is not happening. You are grudingly boasting about Intel's 30% gain so far. You are a moosehead

Doug
If your argument is right on the money about Intel, Intel would have been back to old highs of 70's or higher. AMD would have been out of business long ago. It is not happening. You are grudingly boasting about Intel's 30% gain so far. You are a moosehead

Doug
If your argument is right on the money about Intel, Intel would have been back to old highs of 70's or higher. AMD would have been out of business long ago. It is not happening. You are grudingly boasting about Intel's 30% gain so far. You are a moosehead

Doug
If your argument is right on the money about Intel, Intel would have been back to old highs of 70's or higher. AMD would have been out of business long ago. It is not happening. You are grudingly boasting about Intel's 30% gain so far. You are a moosehead

Doug
If your argument is right on the money about Intel, Intel would have been back to old highs of 70's or higher. AMD would have been out of business long ago. It is not happening. You are grudingly boasting about Intel's 30% gain so far. You are a moosehead

Doug
If your argument is right on the money about Intel, Intel would have been back to old highs of 70's or higher. AMD would have been out of business long ago. It is not happening. You are grudingly boasting about Intel's 30% gain so far. You are a moosehead

Doug
If your argument is right on the money about Intel, Intel would have been back to old highs of 70's or higher. AMD would have been out of business long ago. It is not happening. You are grudingly boasting about Intel's 30% gain so far. You are a moosehead

Doug
Intel produced one billion Celerons three years ago and it is stil selling them to unwittingly laptop buyers who went to white box computer dealers. Intel makes more money on lowly Celerons than Duo or Quad core chips. Intel just renamed Celerons as Atoms now. What is next? You like companies who makes cheap tin foil chips.... AMD makes better chips but people snubbed them for Itnel's top chips that they dont really need anyway... Speaking of bizarre!!

gumbo's right...Doug you're a moosehead.

you asked "Who cares?"

The (what I like to call "right") answer is, everyone who understands that AMD is undervalued right now and have always produced a superior product to its rivals, but have just fallen on some hard times lately (really since the ATI acquisition).

If you joined their first quarter investor conference call or paid any attention to what they are doing you would see that they are on a path to return to profitability.

So stop knock on AMD...and start buying.

Doug, just because you post your comment a million times doesn't make it true. (must be using a slow POS AMD system that won't let you see that your post was accepted)

Doug you are a moosehead. You only mentioned power consumption. That is only one of many new features the new laptop platform is touting. The biggest in my opinion is the 3 fold graphic performance over any Intel offering in the same power envelope. This is why it will sell, over 100 design wins! Moron..