What do AMD CPUs have over Intel?

[Legenderys]

Frankly no one should be having a problem in this economy. There's more opportunity than ever to get a STEM job and firms all over the U.S., Canada, and Europe are looking to hire and finding no one. If you have a problem in this economy, the problem is you.

I would highly recommend you to be more kind...

I live in Greece and i have my own business (thank god...)

Did you know that the 30% of the people in my country doesn't have a job?

SO PLEASE THINK BEFORE WRITING BC IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE POSITION THAT THE OTHER PEOPLE ARE YOU MAY INSULT OR GET THEM REALLY ANGRY!

So ask yourself.... Are you wrong? Should you stop saying what is cheap and what isn't? Saying something is cheap is very subjective..

And finally learn να βαζεις τη γλώσσα στο μυαλο σου πριν πεις κατι!

[patrickjp93]

And for $800 that still makes absolutely no sense when you can drop to a much cheaper CPU, get rid of the Z97 board and throw in a dedicated GPU that will trouce the HD4600. As such, and this is including a windows license. Will play most games 1080p ultra at 60FPS, not low-medium 25-35FPS with meh frametimes.

 

Have you tried gaming on a HD4600? I can tell you now it won't play 1080p medium settings on a lot of games making it a poor investment.

 

The guy said salary, not the lack of getting a job. Not everone is cut out to work a STEM style job; a lot of people can't afford to get into higher education during adult life to get the necessary qualifications to apply for these jobs.

 

And the economy in a lot of places is pretty bad right now, just because there's a lack of jobs in one specialized area doesn't mean that getting a job should be super easy.

 

I imagine there's a shortage of nuclear physicists, does that mean everyone should have jobs?

Getting a higher education is almost free. Getting a degree is not, but with resources like Coursera and ItunesU, no one has an excuse.

[patrickjp93]

I would highly recommend you to be more kind...

I live in Greece and i have my own business (thank god...)

Did you know that the 30% of the people in my country doesn't have a job?

SO PLEASE THINK BEFORE WRITING BC IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE POSITION THAT THE OTHER PEOPLE ARE YOU MAY INSULT OR GET THEM REALLY ANGRY!

So ask yourself.... Are you wrong? Should you stop saying what is cheap and what isn't? Saying something is cheap is very subjective..

And finally learn να βαζεις τη γλώσσα στο μυαλο σου πριν πεις κατι!

That would be the fault of the Greek people who relied on tourism for most of their industry while simultaneously allowing the government to borrow into insolvency and also taxing businesses out of the country. Life isn't easy for anyone anywhere. The jobs are out there if you're willing to cry and sweat and bleed a little to claw your way up, and so are the salaries. Becoming indispensable isn't easy, but it can be done.

 

And I will be candid because this world is not a gentle place. I carefully examine what I say for its basis in facts and what I do and do not know. If you have time for being offended, you're slacking when it comes to furthering yourself. It sucks but it's true.

[N3rot0xin]

You people shrug at the point of "they're cheaper then intel" like its not a big deal. Being cheaper is a huge deal to those of us who work minimum wage jobs with bills to pay but still want to relax and play AAA games at decent/good/highest FPS, or do whatever it is that you do. We all know AMD cpus are not the winner in terms of performance in the current market. But The most expensive AMD CPU is still cheaper then a mid range Intel chip. Sure the extra $75-$100(USD) isn't much on paper. But when you to build an entire machine, that extra $75-$100 is a big difference. Thats a power supply, an SSD, a motherboard, a hard drive, or hell even, Windows 7 basic is under $100. I'm AMD all the way. I am well aware that in certain use cases, they are not the best. I use it for gaming. Thats the only CPU intensive task I do. Until there are more games optimized for multi cores/threads, theres no point to me in paying $200-$300 more for a CPU I won't even notice. 

 

/personalopinion

[patrickjp93]

You people shrug at the point of "they're cheaper then intel" like its not a big deal. Being cheaper is a huge deal to those of us who work minimum wage jobs with bills to pay but still want to relax and play AAA games at decent/good/highest FPS, or do whatever it is that you do. We all know AMD cpus are not the winner in terms of performance in the current market. But The most expensive AMD CPU is still cheaper then a mid range Intel chip. Sure the extra $75-$100(USD) isn't much on paper. But when you to build an entire machine, that extra $75-$100 is a big difference. Thats a power supply, an SSD, a motherboard, a hard drive, or hell even, Windows 7 basic is under $100. I'm AMD all the way. I am well aware that in certain use cases, they are not the best. I use it for gaming. Thats the only CPU intensive task I do. Until there are more games optimized for multi cores/threads, theres no point to me in paying $200-$300 more for a CPU I won't even notice. 

 

/personalopinion

And in that case currently your best options are either going with AMD's a10 7850k Black Edition, or an Intel G3258 with a GTX 750TI if you're on a budget but want good power.

[MilkyWhite]

AMD CPUs have more panache, more pazazz and a noble heritage of David vs Goliath.

[patrickjp93]

AMD CPUs have more panache, more pazazz and a noble heritage of David vs Goliath.

roflcopter.

 

Not really sure what panache you mean, but the third one is definitely true. They are a company trying to keep 5 major markets from becoming monopolies.

[Buckley]

AMD CPUs double as heaters. Great for the winters.

They actually run cooler than Intel

Their core count and math calculations are far superior to that of Intel. Everything else, Intel has the lead but not by much other than IPC

[Legenderys]

That would be the fault of the Greek people who relied on tourism for most of their industry while simultaneously allowing the government to borrow into insolvency and also taxing businesses out of the country. Life isn't easy for anyone anywhere. The jobs are out there if you're willing to cry and sweat and bleed a little to claw your way up, and so are the salaries. Becoming indispensable isn't easy, but it can be done.

 

And I will be candid because this world is not a gentle place. I carefully examine what I say for its basis in facts and what I do and do not know. If you have time for being offended, you're slacking when it comes to furthering yourself. It sucks but it's true.

Unfortunately you don't really know the facts in Greece...   I don't think i can discus about Greek politics with you, but the only thing you need to know is that people don't have money to spend... Now if your parents give you pocket money and it is enough for you that is totally difference from the real life my friend........

[ZeroBreaker]

They ARE innovating in mobile, as I claimed. You seem to have gotten lost. And the ATOM is a phone/tablet/ultrabook chip (Ipad or Surface Pro) not a laptop chip. And Motorola has been making enemies with everyone. I can hardly blame Intel for ending support with them.

 You are claiming absolute nonsense without any evidence. You thinking or hoping for something does not make it right. The Atom was designed for netbooks. Newer revisions made some attempts for tablets, but it was NEVER an ultrabook chip. I consider netbooks to fall under laptops, not tablets or ultrabooks and the atoms in phones were completely different beasts to the normal atom, with hyperthreading and whatnot.

Motorola have been making enemies with everyone? What on earth are you talking about? It was while motorola was under google's reigns that they announced all recent phones from them would be upgraded to the latest version of android SAVE FOR the razr i, due to lack of support from intel with the closed source drivers and stuff. Community efforts have been all but fruitless because intel refuses to work with them. Intel gave up on the most promising chip in the mobile market. They also did the same for the other atom chips present in mobile. This was a good year ago. You absolutely are taking these laughable arguments from your rear end.

 

 

 

Intel HAVE focus on the mobile platform, saying otherwise is false. Intel will move forward, bringing even more support for the mobile market.

The ATOM wasn't only an laptop chip, and are actually only seen in lower-end laptops. A processor-model having trouble with some preexisting apps, isn't the processor-companies fault. Intel are offering ton of information towards their processor architecture for every coder or compiler to OPENLY support. You are blaming the wrong end. You cannot blame a diesel car for not function well enough if you try to tank it up with benzil.

Intel did ALL they could, they are also realizing their are just entering the market. Not all will support an newly entry of the market (as some won't make it, so they waste time and resources for supporting their architecture-model).

So would you stop saying Intel have no interest in the mobile market, which they have showed so many times. They would even PAY the manufactures the fee for some of the components that aren't on their die. This is a extremely stupid way of saying "we don't care about this market).

 

Sorry, but on the point 'intel did all they could', no. Intel ENTERED the market. In the UK, where we tend to get phones half a year later if at all, we got two phones - the san diego and the razr i, both of which I owned. Intel updated the former to 4.0 and the latter to 4.1 and then gave up. The san diego has had no update and the razr i is being dragged to 4.4 without support from intel. When a good chunk of major android apps were found to have issues with their phones and their phones alone, they did absolutely f-all and left motorola to deal with it. The number of people owning my phone were not small, because despite the fact the razr i was the only phone from a major manufacturer with an intel chip in a crowded market, and despite the fact iplayer is UK only, BBC tried several times to fix the issues, and eventually revamped the app, splitting video playback from the app to get it compatible.

 

I never said it was intel's fault that there was app incompatibility, but it was their problem and they should have at least attempted to fix the issue, rather than just ignoring it like they did. They did not OPENLY work with motorola or the android community, in fact they REFUSED to work with them.

 

They have been entering the market for a good few years now. Intel have recently been showing or hinting at nothing, and have been focussing far more on ultrabooks and 2 in 1's. They shifted their focus. It's not something that can really be argued, because they already did it.

 

The atom was a netbook chip and that alone. Netbooks fall under laptops. Hence the atom was for laptops. Low end specifically.

 

You can have HOPE intel will jump back into mobile, so do i to be honest because we need mobile x86 chips for convergence and AMD don't seem to care much, but for all intents and purposes they have given up or postponed their efforts (depending on how optimistic you are) in the mobile market.

[vm'N]

Sorry, but on the point 'intel did all they could', no. Intel ENTERED the market. In the UK, where we tend to get phones half a year later if at all, we got two phones - the san diego and the razr i, both of which I owned. Intel updated the former to 4.0 and the latter to 4.1 and then gave up. The san diego has had no update and the razr i is being dragged to 4.4 without support from intel. When a good chunk of major android apps were found to have issues with their phones and their phones alone, they did absolutely f-all and left motorola to deal with it. The number of people owning my phone were not small, because despite the fact the razr i was the only phone from a major manufacturer with an intel chip in a crowded market, and despite the fact iplayer is UK only, BBC tried several times to fix the issues, and eventually revamped the app, splitting video playback from the app to get it compatible.

 

I never said it was intel's fault that there was app incompatibility, but it was their problem and they should have at least attempted to fix the issue, rather than just ignoring it like they did. They did not OPENLY work with motorola or the android community, in fact they REFUSED to work with them.

 

They have been entering the market for a good few years now. Intel have recently been showing or hinting at nothing, and have been focussing far more on ultrabooks and 2 in 1's. They shifted their focus. It's not something that can really be argued, because they already did it.

 

The atom was a netbook chip and that alone. Netbooks fall under laptops. Hence the atom was for laptops. Low end specifically.

 

You can have HOPE intel will jump back into mobile, so do i to be honest because we need mobile x86 chips for convergence and AMD don't seem to care much, but for all intents and purposes they have given up or postponed their efforts (depending on how optimistic you are) in the mobile market.

You are still blaming the wrong side. Intel is manufacturing the processors, they are bringing a component for their phone. Intel is NOT responsible for software not optimized for their hardware. The CPU manufacturer can only do so much to support(That will be releasing sources on optimizing software for their hardware, which Intel have done (every processor company does this)).

This current generation Intel have especially focused on higher-end tablets too. You have to realize that what Intel is trying to accomplish cannot be accomplish within one generation. They are working down to it. Intel haven't been going into the market for mobile-phones yet, as that require even lower-voltage consumption and more on-die components that Intel can currently offer. But they are working down to it, and for each generation we see Intel grabbing another bite of the mobile-market.

Saying the entire Atom product line is for laptops is purely wrong, it is a very wide product line, which goes from servers to SoC to tablets. You should make even more specific of which sub-product line you are referring to.

Also do you have any source on Intel refusing to cooperate? It sounds a little to unrealistic for me. Any source would be appreciated.

[Judist]

If I wanted to build an alternative to Ps or Xbox (steambox) for <$400ish I'd certainly consider AMD. And I could probably do a decent build.

 

While "I" dont need (nor want) a console performance platform, a lot of gamers dont seem to mind, hence console market.

 

1080p @ 25-50fps sub-ultra is fine for many, just not for me. To each their own I guess.

[patrickjp93]

Unfortunately you don't really know the facts in Greece...   I don't think i can discus about Greek politics with you, but the only thing you need to know is that people don't have money to spend... Now if your parents give you pocket money and it is enough for you that is totally difference from the real life my friend........

I earn my money currently on service jobs and my assistantship. My parents haven't paid a dime for me since Sophomore year except when I come home for the summer and eat a little food and use a little electricity.

[ZeroBreaker]

You are still blaming the wrong side. Intel is manufacturing the processors, they are bringing a component for their phone. Intel is NOT responsible for software not optimized for their hardware. The CPU manufacturer can only do so much to support(That will be releasing sources on optimizing software for their hardware, which Intel have done (every processor company does this)).

This current generation Intel have especially focused on higher-end tablets too. You have to realize that what Intel is trying to accomplish cannot be accomplish within one generation. They are working down to it. Intel haven't been going into the market for mobile-phones yet, as that require even lower-voltage consumption and more on-die components that Intel can currently offer. But they are working down to it, and for each generation we see Intel grabbing another bite of the mobile-market.

Saying the entire Atom product line is for laptops is purely wrong, it is a very wide product line, which goes from servers to SoC to tablets. You should make even more specific of which sub-product line you are referring to.

Also do you have any source on Intel refusing to cooperate? It sounds a little to unrealistic for me. Any source would be appreciated.

 

Intel already went headfirst into mobile. They partnered with some manufacturers and released several handsets. The ones i remember are the san diego, razr i and a zte grand model. The san diego was released to the UK in 2012. They already understand the mobile market well enough, and have good enough chips. Other issues clearly have stopped intel from going further. Tablets are a lucrative market, but phones and tablets are two completely seperate beasts with seperate markets, and knowledge doesn't necessarily scale - it took hardware manufacturers several tries each to make a dent in the tablet market, and that was with great knowledge of the mobile market. It's not clear cut or simple in any way. I am simply not convinced intel's ambitions for mobile will be realised in the near future. They tried, and for all intents and purposes failed to make their mark, despite their powerful medfield chip and awesome battery life on all the phones with said chip (mine lasts 2 days with medium to heavy usage after a few tweaks).

About the 4.4 update, I'm struggling to find the link, but a motorola rep was saying that despite pressure from google to make updates more frequent, they couldn't do much with the razr i because of the closed source drivers. Aside from that, just the fact it took them half a year longer to even announce android 4.4 for the razr i, hence it took them half a year to have the confidence to say 'we can do this', screams to me of either lack of interest or lack of cooperation on intel's part.

[thebennyboy]

Intel has more competition with AMD's fanboys than AMD alone. The majority of them still think their 8350 is futureproof and better than a i7.

 

The 8350 is more future-proof than a i7 4-core processor as the current DirectX version only utilizes about 2 cores, 4 at the most. With the 8350 and 8320 for that matter being 8 core processors they current are at the disadvantage by the poor multi-core load balancing in DirectX 11. DirectX 12 will likely improve the performance a fair amount or those using 6 and 8 core processors in general as it has MUCH better multi-core load balancing, thus making the 8350 (and other 6 - 8 core processors too) future-proof. Please use your brain before you write crap like that.

 

EDIT: Mantle pretty much does what DirectX 12 will do, to back myself up i'm going to link to my DirectX11 vs Mantle thread regarding Thief. I get a 29.2% improvement in performance thanks to the optimizations made with Mantle. Thread: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/163329-mantle-vs-dx11-thief/

[vm'N]

You know how much of an idiot you look saying something like that? The 8350 is more future-proof than a i7 4-core processor as the current DirectX version only utilizes about 2 cores, 4 at the most. With the 8350 and 8320 for that matter being 8 core processors they current are at the disadvantage by the poor multi-core load balancing in DirectX 11. DirectX 12 will likely improve the performance a fair amount or those using 6 and 8 core processors in general as it has MUCH better multi-core load balancing, thus making the 8350 (and other 6 - 8 core processors too) future-proof. Please use your brain before you write crap like that.

 

However it is not that simple. the FX 8350 isn't more future proof than the core I5 4670k.

First you have to realize what the "8 core" really refer to. Then take a look at both piledrivers and haswells architecture. You can go through every step of the pipeline, and you will then realize why the "8 core piledriver processor" with atleast 4.5GHz is slower than a 4 core haswell processor clocked at 3.5GHz.

[thebennyboy]

Not sure if troll or not. However it is not that simple. the FX 8350 isn't more future proof than the core I5 4670k.

First you have to realize what the "8 core" really refer to. Then take a look at both piledrivers and haswells architecture. You can go through every step of the pipeline, and you will then realize why the "8 core piledriver processor" with atleast 4.5GHz is slower than a 4 core haswell processor clocked at 3.5GHz.

 

Please re-read my post, i have made some edits. With DirectX 12 it is likely that you will see more of a performance gain on a 8350 than a 4 core i5 processor. Thus at this point in time, making it more future-proof.

[vm'N]

Intel already went headfirst into mobile. They partnered with some manufacturers and released several handsets. The ones i remember are the san diego, razr i and a zte grand model. The san diego was released to the UK in 2012. They already understand the mobile market well enough, and have good enough chips. Other issues clearly have stopped intel from going further. Tablets are a lucrative market, but phones and tablets are two completely seperate beasts with seperate markets, and knowledge doesn't necessarily scale - it took hardware manufacturers several tries each to make a dent in the tablet market, and that was with great knowledge of the mobile market. It's not clear cut or simple in any way. I am simply not convinced intel's ambitions for mobile will be realised in the near future. They tried, and for all intents and purposes failed to make their mark, despite their powerful medfield chip and awesome battery life on all the phones with said chip (mine lasts 2 days with medium to heavy usage after a few tweaks).

About the 4.4 update, I'm struggling to find the link, but a motorola rep was saying that despite pressure from google to make updates more frequent, they couldn't do much with the razr i because of the closed source drivers. Aside from that, just the fact it took them half a year longer to even announce android 4.4 for the razr i, hence it took them half a year to have the confidence to say 'we can do this', screams to me of either lack of interest or lack of cooperation on intel's part.

Of course they partner with manufactures. There aren't exactly any "build your own phone" service I know of, so they need to partners. This is the very first initial step.

Intel are been realistic, and are waiting for the future architectures before entering the mobilephone-market. They are currently not competitive in that specific market (however they are competitive in the overall mobile-market). You are still putting the blame on the wrong people.

Intel is NOT responsible for updates to their software, just like how ARM manufactures aren't responsible for the software. This is ENTIRELY the OS-devs mission to accomplish this.

As Intel did bring an entire new architecture-model to the market, you will see how the devs will have issues with supporting it. It happens in EVERY market. Look at AMD introducing CMT back in the days. Something that required and complete different optimization. All AMD could do was to release information about their processors and ISAs.

Just wait and see, you can see for every architecture update, Intel will bring more and more support for the entire mobile market.

As said early, Intel have said that they would pay for the components they cannot feature on the die, which some ARM processor can. This is a huge expense if they aren't trying to enter the market.

Intel is NOT responsible for delayed OS updates.

Please re-read my post, i have made some edits. With DirectX 12 it is likely that you will see more of a performance gain on a 8350 than a 4 core haswell processor. Thus at this point in time, making it more future-proof.

Do as I instructed in my previous comment and you will realize that wont hold true.

[ZeroBreaker]

Of course they partner with manufactures. There aren't exactly any "build your own phone" service I know of, so they need to partners. This is the very first initial step.

Intel are been realistic, and are waiting for the future architectures before entering the mobilephone-market. They are currently not competitive in that specific market (however they are competitive in the overall mobile-market). You are still putting the blame on the wrong people.

Intel is NOT responsible for updates to their software, just like how ARM manufactures aren't responsible for the software. This is ENTIRELY the OS-devs mission to accomplish this.

As Intel did bring an entire new architecture-model to the market, you will see how the devs will have issues with supporting it. It happens in EVERY market. Look at AMD introducing CMT back in the days. Something that required and complete different optimization. All AMD could do was to release information about their processors and ISAs.

Just wait and see, you can see for every architecture update, Intel will bring more and more support for the entire mobile market.

As said early, Intel have said that they would pay for the components they cannot feature on the die, which some ARM processor can. This is a huge expense if they aren't trying to enter the market.

Intel is NOT responsible for delayed OS updates.

 

First of all, i was talking specifically about mobile phones, not the mobile market in general, as patrickjp93 referred specifically to phones. My fault for not making this clearer, but yeah - intel tried and failed and doesn't seem to be getting any further in that regard.

Second of all, get involved with xda and then tell me it is that simple. With the razr i, one of the more specific issues is we have not been able to find an alternative to the closed source 4.1 sound drivers (super important on a mobile phone) that works on a newer android version. This is ABSOLUTELY intel's responsibility, in the same way it is Nvidias responsibility to keep up with drivers on their graphics cards. It works differently in the mobile space, and intel needed to understand that to succeed. Plainly and simply, they didn't and so they basically failed - no support means customers that took a chance with intel, myself included, have been extremely dissappointed and unlikely to approach the next intel mobile device with the same enthusiasm as the first. It was not the OS itself that was the problem, it was driver compatability. This was intel's closed source software and thus THEIR responsibility to support.

[thebennyboy]

Not sure if troll or not. However it is not that simple. the FX 8350 isn't more future proof than the core I5 4670k.

First you have to realize what the "8 core" really refer to. Then take a look at both piledrivers and haswells architecture. You can go through every step of the pipeline, and you will then realize why the "8 core piledriver processor" with atleast 4.5GHz is slower than a 4 core haswell processor clocked at 3.5GHz.

 

Do as I instructed in my previous comment and you will realize that wont hold true.

 

If you looked at the thread and the thread that i linked then you'll realize my argument currently has more weight than yours. Where is your proof that a haswell 4-core is more future-proof than an 8350? I have backed up my original point by providing some evidence of what DirectX12 may potentially bring. Please provide some proof, atm you are talking out of you ass.

[vm'N]

If you looked at the thread and the thread that i linked then you'll realize my argument currently has more weight than yours. Where is your proof that a haswell 4-core is more future-proof than an 8350? I have backed up my original point by providing some evidence of what DirectX12 may potentially bring. Please provide some proof, atm you are talking out of you ass.

You thread simply shows the difference between APIs. But both processors will be running DX 12, so BOTH processors will benefit from the better API.

Do I really need to go through both architectures to tell you wrong? If so, I will start tomorrow, as it is quite late.

Do you have any understanding under CPU architecture? Else it would be pretty pointless, as you wouldn't understand what half of the components in the CPU does.

[thebennyboy]

You thread simply shows the difference between APIs. But both processors will be running DX 12, so BOTH processors will benefit from the better API.

Do I really need to go through both architectures to tell you wrong? If so, I will start tomorrow, as it is quite late.

Do you have any understanding under CPU architecture? Else it would be pretty pointless, as you wouldn't understand what half of the components in the CPU does.

 

The architecture has little to do with how future-proof it is going to be. Yes, Intel's current architecture at this point is far superior to AMD's current architecture. You are also right that it will also provide benefits to both processors, Mantle already proves there is future-proof in the 8350 and seeing as AMD even admitted Mantle is pretty much what DirectX12 is going to be. We are yet to see what improvements DirectX12 will bring to haswell 4-core processors so at this point neither of us are right and neither is wrong.

[vm'N]

The architecture has little to do with how future-proof it is going to be. Yes, Intel's current architecture at this point is far superior to AMD's current architecture. You are also right that it will also provide benefits to both processors, Mantle already proves there is future-proof in the 8350 and seeing as AMD even admitted Mantle is pretty much what DirectX12 is going to be. We are yet to see what improvements DirectX12 will bring to haswell 4-core processors so at this point neither of us are right and neither is wrong.

"The architecture has little to do with how future-proof it is going to be" - and that was a huge mistake to say. By the architecture you can calculate how well the processor will function in certain workloads. The architecture tells you everything about the processor.

So I guess I shall go through the architecture of both processors tomorrow? I can try to make is as simple as possible.

EDIT: Dx12 was supposed to be an combination of dx11 and mantle (from what I have heard).

[Bloodkil933]

You thread simply shows the difference between APIs. But both processors will be running DX 12, so BOTH processors will benefit from the better API.

Do I really need to go through both architectures to tell you wrong? If so, I will start tomorrow, as it is quite late.

Do you have any understanding under CPU architecture? Else it would be pretty pointless, as you wouldn't understand what half of the components in the CPU does.

Intel's IPC is only about 20% better than AMD's. In Haswell it's in .86 and Piledriver it's .68, when fully unlocked the 8350 will perform AT LEAST on par with with a 4770k, as the video by Logan shows.

[patrickjp93]

You are not addressing the facts i mentioned in my previous comment, never mind anything else. I told you there were many people standing up and proposing reasonable countermeasures and even more reasonable courses of action for the government to take. There were people in the government who spoke out and tried their damnest to get greece in a stable position. It didn't work because of the actions of the few.

How about an example closer to home. If obama made the decision to invade syria, regardless of the protests of liberals and the cheers of the republicans, and you opposed the decision (for argument's sake, at least), wrote to your local congressman, took all the reasonable steps that a citizen of the united states can do, and obama still invaded syria, and caused huge loss of life for both syrians and your army, who would be at fault? Would you accept responsibility? I dare say you wouldn't and of course you shouldn't because it was not your choice and you opposed the decision. It is preposterous to say that someone like george galloway, who opposed the iraq war with all his limited power, was somehow at fault because he lives in the UK which was heavily involved. This is precisely the argument you are making.

People in greece did not sit on their empty wallets while greece crashed and burned. They spoke out, they raised awareness, and they did pretty much all they could as citizens of their country bound by their legal system, but it didn't help. The reasons why are numerous but likely the biggest factor was corruption of the government. Surely you understand that power corrupts? Surely you understand that democracy is a system to limit that corruption but no political system can combat human nature? It seems i cannot expect common sense from you.

 

I wasted my time with this conversation. You clearly cannot use the logic and reason you were born with in any meaningful sense.

Still my fault for not getting enough people on my side to sway my congressman's opinion.