Advanced Micro Devices May Be Acquired – Analyst

[halbhh]

As you pointed out recently in this thread, it's really just modifying the mobile arch. Nice tweaks. Curious if you think there are *major* new design changes probable (instead of tweaks and expansions) in the next Intel arch.

 

[niz]

Smart people who are concerned about the ENTIRE industry and neither CPU company knows AMD is the little engine that could.
/quote]

..could what? get even close to core2 performance? which is actually the real and current issue. um big Bzzt on that one.

People don't care about arguments stating that AMD chip internal design is nicer for some technical reason, they care about actual desktop performance. AMD has been out of that picture for too long now.

I don't like AMD's products personally, but I really don't want them to continue to fade away because every company needs strong competition otherwise they turn into Microsoft.

 

[halbhh]

That makes sense. What I'm really trying to ask is there some big change in the offing? Is there something on the horizon that should make us think the next arch could do more than 30% improvement over the current?

 

[quantumsheep]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20070215235758.html

Can this be good?

That well isn't going to happen. Unless for some reason IBM decides it wants to aquire an x86 uArch.

 

[niz]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20070215235758.html

Can this be good?

That well isn't going to happen. Unless for some reason IBM decides it wants to aquire an x86 uArch.

Woo.. It would be cool to see IBM release an x86/linux-powered games console or mobile platform.

 

[quantumsheep]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20070215235758.html

Can this be good?

That well isn't going to happen. Unless for some reason IBM decides it wants to aquire an x86 uArch.

Woo.. It would be cool to see IBM release an x86/linux-powered games console or mobile platform.

Cool, yes. Necessary? No.

 

[zeezee]

Let's leave personal insults and name calling aside.

However the argument is still flawed. If, clock for clock, the performance via instructions retired increases (in C2D case substantially), then the logical conclusion is the architecture changed, hence improved, hence is new.

Following your logic, an increased cache size which yields a higher IPC will be a considered an architectural change.

Sorry, no. Smell again.

 

[halbhh]

K10 (Barcelona, which I now call K10) --- this will be a big jump for AMD. In fact, Hans Devries made a note that there appears to be an extra decoder unit in the K10 die shots --- AMD may in fact be increasing the width and just not disclosing that, or leaving the 3-issue rumor alone so that not to tip their hand. In any event, realtive to K8, K10 will be a big jump... relative to C2D my guess is to surpass in FPU (AMD is very strong here), pull just short to even with integer clock for clock.... the big quesiton mark is what will Penryn do with clocks and can AMD's lower clock, higher IPC initiatives overcome the clock speed deficit.

For Intel, Penryn will show modest IPC improvements maybe 5% (more like 2-3% in my opinion) with the larger cache. So nothing exciting here just higher clocks and lower power. Nehalem though will be interesting to watch, the two big ticket items here are the integrated memory controller and CSI --- basically pulling up even to the AMD design on the interconnect front. Two things here, CSI will be slightly faster than the HT 3.0 from what I have gathered, as I understand it, CSI will do a differential frequency modulation over a band of fequencies so in one serial connection you could have many different frequencies transimitting data in parallel --- I am not sure on this though, I read it and now cannot find the link so take this with a grain of salt. On the IMC side, I am wondering if they will use this as a means to lower the cache size since cache is primarily there to decrease latency and demand on the bus, will they cut back now that they do not pay the latency penalty for far memory calls.... other than those two items, the rest of Nehalem is a big question mark. I would not venture a guess into the relative % improvements of Nehalem.

Jack

Thanks, Jack, for your take.

 

[qcmadness]

Following your logic, an increased cache size which yields a higher IPC will be a considered an architectural change.

Sorry, no. Smell again.

Do you think that Northwood-to-Prescott transition an architectural change?

 

[kiwik]

They will come back with....



REVERSE HYPERTHREADING!

 

[tamalero]

Smart people who are concerned about the ENTIRE industry and neither CPU company knows AMD is the little engine that could.
/quote]

..could what? get even close to core2 performance? which is actually the real and current issue. um big Bzzt on that one.

People don't care about arguments stating that AMD chip internal design is nicer for some technical reason, they care about actual desktop performance. AMD has been out of that picture for too long now.

I don't like AMD's products personally, but I really don't want them to continue to fade away because every company needs strong competition otherwise they turn into Microsoft.

7 months?
how about the 3 years the k8 architecture slaped netburst?

you sounded preety viased towards intel, sorry pal!

 

[tamalero]

They will come back with....



REVERSE HYPERTHREADING!

they're WAITING FOR THE CORRECT TIME TO ATCK! XD

btw jack, that thing about 2 Mb vs 4 MB = architecture change thing sounds a bit weird..
I mean... then Allendale vs Conroe for your opinion are "diferent architectures"?

 

[niz]

Smart people who are concerned about the ENTIRE industry and neither CPU company knows AMD is the little engine that could.
/quote]

..could what? get even close to core2 performance? which is actually the real and current issue. um big Bzzt on that one.

People don't care about arguments stating that AMD chip internal design is nicer for some technical reason, they care about actual desktop performance. AMD has been out of that picture for too long now.

I don't like AMD's products personally, but I really don't want them to continue to fade away because every company needs strong competition otherwise they turn into Microsoft.

>> how about the 3 years the k8 architecture slaped netburst?

So what. Now is now. I don't care about history. Netbutrst is history, you can't hardly buy them any more but unfortuantely K8 is still the latest AMD core.

>> you sounded preety viased towards intel, sorry pal!

...and you sound preety mexican dude 🙂

 

[tamalero]

Smart people who are concerned about the ENTIRE industry and neither CPU company knows AMD is the little engine that could.
/quote]

..could what? get even close to core2 performance? which is actually the real and current issue. um big Bzzt on that one.

People don't care about arguments stating that AMD chip internal design is nicer for some technical reason, they care about actual desktop performance. AMD has been out of that picture for too long now.

I don't like AMD's products personally, but I really don't want them to continue to fade away because every company needs strong competition otherwise they turn into Microsoft.

>> how about the 3 years the k8 architecture slaped netburst?

So what. Now is now. I don't care about history. Netbutrst is history, you can't hardly buy them any more but unfortuantely K8 is still the latest AMD core.

>> you sounded preety viased towards intel, sorry pal!

...and you sound preety mexican dude 🙂

Im not hiding from where I come and live sire 😉
and btw.. nice excuse ..."its story now" lol..

Again 3 yrs is techinically not correct.the narrowing of the competition happened as soon as 18 months.The T2000 series core duo mobiles were competeing neck and neck with amd as a 32bit core.which cuts the lead down to 2 yrs and 7 months.

you said it yourself.. "MOBILE"..
mobile != entire cpu market
but yeah the Core and core duo laptops did amazingly well compared to these horrible netburst laptops.

*edit* fixed a typoo

 

[dasickninja]

What Netburst laptops? The Netburst u/arch was never brought to the mobile field in anything other than gaming laptops. Most laptops contained the Pentium M arch, which Core and Core 2 descend from.

 

[tamalero]

What Netburst laptops? The Netburst u/arch was never brought to the mobile field in anything other than gaming laptops. Most laptops contained the Pentium M arch, which Core and Core 2 descend from.

you sure?
I've seen plenty of P4 based laptops, specially from dell and HP ( of course, 2-3 years ago ) we're talking of the years back when K8 socket 754 was out, and 939 just went out

*Edit*
and as far I remember, noone of them were claimed to be "for gaming"
my P4 1.7 Ghz Dell Inspiron 8200 was suposed to be a "portable computer for home and student users"

Mobile capable mobo.s are available and were for that chip at the time.

and how many computers were sold with these? 😉
I remember the review of one of these mobos, who were preety expensive, even if it owned both p4 and k8 archs, they were just for "enthusiasts"

 

[dasickninja]

Then those must be 478 Pentium 4's, the cooler running P4's like Northwood. I'd hazard 90% of Intel based laptops ran either Pentium M or Celeron M processors. Prescott and Cedar Mill core Pentium 4's are too hot to bring to the mobile sector.

 

[tamalero]

Then those must be 478 Pentium 4's, the cooler running P4's like Northwood. I'd hazard 90% of Intel based laptops ran either Pentium M or Celeron M processors. Prescott and Cedar Mill core Pentium 4's are too hot to bring to the mobile sector.

no idea, in my country these were the afordable ones ( betwen 1,200 to 1,700 US )
the pentium m and core based were for "high end market(business)" forover 1,800 US

 

[dasickninja]

By what you said about the speed of that Pentium 4, then I'm quite sure that what you have is a 478 socketed Willamette or Northwood. No LGA775 Pentium was clocked below 2.6GHz, and 775 was never introduced to the mobile sector.

Matter of fact, if you still have it, CPUZ it and tell me what socket and core it is.

 

[tamalero]

By what you said about the speed of that Pentium 4, then I'm quite sure that what you have is a 478 socketed Willamette or Northwood. No LGA775 Pentium was clocked below 2.6GHz, and 775 was never introduced to the mobile sector.

Matter of fact, if you still have it, CPUZ it and tell me what socket and core it is.

unfortunately, sold it 3 months ago to get this beautiful dell XPS 1210 ( merom )

 

[dasickninja]

Ah well. Its no biggie. Congrats on your Core 2.

 

[qcmadness]

unfortunately, sold it 3 months ago to get this beautiful dell XPS 1210 ( merom )

At a good price?
Anyway, you will "leap ahead" 😀

 

[tamalero]

unfortunately, sold it 3 months ago to get this beautiful dell XPS 1210 ( merom )

At a good price?
Anyway, you will "leap ahead" 😀
it was just 1,300 US, the basic model ( taxes cost quite a bit here.. )

dasickninja: there might be a small probability I can talk with my inspiron 8200 buyer, maybe I can ask him to get a CPU-Z

 

[nilepez]

Then those must be 478 Pentium 4's, the cooler running P4's like Northwood. I'd hazard 90% of Intel based laptops ran either Pentium M or Celeron M processors. Prescott and Cedar Mill core Pentium 4's are too hot to bring to the mobile sector.

The desktop replacements that I saw were P4s (at least they were in 2004). I never saw a machine called a gaming laptop in stores. Alienware may have had them in 2004, but they weren't in stores, AFAIK.

 

[qcmadness]

unfortunately, sold it 3 months ago to get this beautiful dell XPS 1210 ( merom )

At a good price?
Anyway, you will "leap ahead" 😀
it was just 1,300 US, the basic model ( taxes cost quite a bit here.. )

dasickninja: there might be a small probability I can talk with my inspiron 8200 buyer, maybe I can ask him to get a CPU-Z

A quite good deal 😀