<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Technology for Mortals &#187; AMD</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.formortals.com/category/companies/amd/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.formortals.com</link>
	<description>Because technology isn&#039;t just for geeks</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 06:16:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Two AMD Shanghai processors beaten by a single Intel i7-965</title>
		<link>http://www.formortals.com/two-amd-shanghai-processors-beaten-by-a-single-intel-i7-965/</link>
		<comments>http://www.formortals.com/two-amd-shanghai-processors-beaten-by-a-single-intel-i7-965/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 06:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>George Ou</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AMD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benchmarks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virtualization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formortals.com/?p=141</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[AMD had much to celebration last week as they managed to beat Intel&#8217;s Nehalem-EP to the mainstream two-socket server market with Shanghai.  AMD took a lead in SPECjbb, SPECweb, SPECfp, and Virtualization Nested Paging for the server market and it looked like they might have had 2 months of breathing room to before Nehalem-EP arrives [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.formortals.com/two-amd-shanghai-processors-beaten-by-a-single-intel-i7-965/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>68</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The facts about AMD&#8217;s ACP power rating</title>
		<link>http://www.formortals.com/the-facts-about-amds-acp-power-rating/</link>
		<comments>http://www.formortals.com/the-facts-about-amds-acp-power-rating/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 07:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>George Ou</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AMD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benchmarks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Energy efficiency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intel]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formortals.com/?p=137</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One issue that I&#8217;m frequently asked about is AMD&#8217;s alternative energy efficiency rating called Average CPU Power (ACP).  AMD created this new standard on its own last year and despite controversy, they&#8217;ve managed to get the media to accept this new definition of energy efficiency.  AMD has told the press that AMD&#8217;s ACP rating is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.formortals.com/the-facts-about-amds-acp-power-rating/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AMD Shanghai 45nm launch &#8211; Server benchmarks roundup</title>
		<link>http://www.formortals.com/amd-shanghai-45nm-launch-server-benchmarks-roundup/</link>
		<comments>http://www.formortals.com/amd-shanghai-45nm-launch-server-benchmarks-roundup/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 05:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>George Ou</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AMD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benchmarks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Processors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virtualization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formortals.com/?p=136</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[AMD launched its 45nm Shanghai processors today for the server market ahead of Intel&#8217;s Nehalem processor launch.&#160; AMD lists a series of benchmarks here but they omit many of the better results from Intel.&#160; To get the full official results, here are the benchmarks based on the best scores available from AMD and Intel as [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.formortals.com/amd-shanghai-45nm-launch-server-benchmarks-roundup/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SAP benchmarks for AMD Shanghai released</title>
		<link>http://www.formortals.com/sap-benchmarks-for-amd-shanghai-released/</link>
		<comments>http://www.formortals.com/sap-benchmarks-for-amd-shanghai-released/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>George Ou</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AMD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benchmarks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intel]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formortals.com/?p=133</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just came across some certified SAP server benchmarks for the soon to be launched AMD 45nm Shanghai processor in comparison to some Intel Tigerton 65nm processor and Intel Dunnington 45nm processor. System CPU Cores Sockets Clock Score HP ProLiant DL785 G5 Opteron 8384 4 8 2.7 GHz 7010 IBM System x3950 M2 Xeon X7350 4 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.formortals.com/sap-benchmarks-for-amd-shanghai-released/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AMD submits suboptimal SPECpower benchmarks for Intel</title>
		<link>http://www.formortals.com/amd-submits-suboptimal-specpower-benchmarks-for-intel/</link>
		<comments>http://www.formortals.com/amd-submits-suboptimal-specpower-benchmarks-for-intel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 09:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>George Ou</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AMD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benchmarks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Energy efficiency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Processors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formortals.com/?p=130</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Performance benchmarks are the equivalent of the Indianapolis 500 for the computer industry, if not more important.  Rarely are the top performance numbers attainable in the real world, but winning is a critical symbolic victory in the war of perception.  The winner of the benchmarks will be perceived to have a technological lead across their [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.formortals.com/amd-submits-suboptimal-specpower-benchmarks-for-intel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why are video drivers so hard to get right?</title>
		<link>http://www.formortals.com/why-are-video-drivers-so-hard-to-get-right/</link>
		<comments>http://www.formortals.com/why-are-video-drivers-so-hard-to-get-right/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Justin James</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AMD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Graphics cards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NVIDIA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formortals.com/?p=79</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I (finally) wrapped up a 6 or 7 month long struggle with my video card. See, some time ago, some update or another did something&#8230; odd&#8230; with my video card (an NVidia 7600 GS, for the record, the best passively cooled, dual DVI output card I could find when I put this PC together). It [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.formortals.com/why-are-video-drivers-so-hard-to-get-right/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AMD&#8217;s &#8220;new&#8221; low-power quad-core 9100e is a buggy gimmick</title>
		<link>http://www.formortals.com/amds-new-low-power-quad-core-9100e-is-a-buggy-gimmick/</link>
		<comments>http://www.formortals.com/amds-new-low-power-quad-core-9100e-is-a-buggy-gimmick/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 08:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>George Ou</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AMD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Processors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.formortals.com/?p=53</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[AMD just released a &#8220;new&#8221; low-power 1.8 GHz quad-core model X4 9100e and dubbed it &#8220;the world&#8217;s first 65W desktop processor&#8221;.&#160; But this claim seem to be dubious when you consider what AMD had to do to get to that power level and what they&#8217;re up against. AMD uses very low clock speeds to achieve [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.formortals.com/amds-new-low-power-quad-core-9100e-is-a-buggy-gimmick/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

