AMD becomes Intel as trio socket switch frenzy

[eden]

THANK you.

Geez, if a product is doing well, and a new one promises even more performance over the current one, not just a small speed grade, then why the heck am I pro-Intel for looking excited about it?

And yeah, fanboy has become generalized. Nowadays you label anyone fanboy whenever he criticizes a company and praises the other's product.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A>
PS: New sexy users' sites now added!

 

[eden]

RE: Eden...I was here a couple years ago when Eden was clearly enjoying the smacking Intel was receiving during the early P4's.

That was very true, but that's the only thing I can agree on. Since I was close-minded back then, and now have completely reversed that, the rest will be corrected below.

Eden seems to enjoy supporting the king chip at the time

Isn't that just what everyone SHOULD do?
Or are we going to go into the fanboys who can't give up supporting the underdog, even though they will lose more in the long run? I support recommending AMD for low-end, always will. Canadian pricing is horrible, and AMD does big here in low-end. But to say I recommend the right chip, being an enjoyment while it should be what everyone should do, is either hypocritical or foolish.

When Intel is the best (for at least a month), Eden points out why they are doing well
When AMD is the best (for at least a month), Eden points out why they are doing well

Again I fail to understand why such view is only put on me when any user here should have such open-mindedness. Instead of saying "AMD IS STILL KING, INTEL HAS BAD IPC, AMD WINS HANDS DOWN BECAUSE OF LOW MHZ, AND IF THEY HAD BIG MHZ, THEY WOULD KILLLLLLL" like idiots do, I know what I see and what the collective opinion is. Besides, I hardly even think that the new 800MT chipsets are good. I in fact criticized each new Intel chipset out this year. IMO they all suck in efficiency. Canterwood goes about 10% more for 50% higher bandwidth in bus/memory. To me that only points to inefficient chipset design. But, since it extended their lead SIGNIFICANTLY, (take the 2.4 C, and see how it even manages to win the majority of benchmarks against the top of the line 3200+), I simply can't stay blind and not admit it has done a good job. Still, it's far less than it should be, and I blame Intel's engineers for that crap work.

Maybe popey isn't a fanboy, he he, maybe it's meltdown.

Pope's a hypocrite, Meltdown, well, I always suspected Meltdown was a user in disguise here, having fun.

when Intel is being spanked, he stands up for Intel

Meltdown stood up to AMD?!! Holy crap, pigs DO fly!

And I have to admit, I'm curious how the chip race is going to go. I think we're really all fence-sitters at this point in time (especially because both companies are having process issues with their respective chips) I say first week of september for AMD64 - PAPER LAUNCH and 2nd week of October for Prescott/P5 - YOU CAN BUY FROM DELL, WAIT 3 WEEKS BEFORE BEING ABLE TO BUY ON Pricewatch, newegg, etc. AMD64 will have low Ghz, but will compete with p4 3.2 800 quite well (let's say...it wins 55% of the tests). Prescott will come out, be very expensive (~$697), but will stomp the AMD64. In mid December the 64-bit Windows will finally become fully optimized for x86-64, and will bring AMD64 performance up to Prescott levels...but alas, AMD will have missed the Christmas season (because benchmarks will only show 32 bit results until it's too late). Amd will end Qtr 3 and 4 with losses and will have to refinance their loans...AGAIN.

Assuming a "new" (and I quote that very loosely) core like the K8 SHOULD carry a premium, I worry that A64 will not only have problems competing, but it will cost as much as a Prescott if not more. I hope I am wrong though. What could very well save AMD, is if they turn the 3400+ as not a flagship, but a mainstream costing CPU. At 300$, this CPU can easily grab a huge portion of the crowd to it, as its P/P ratio will be far beyond any CPU out there.

Anyone else up for looking in their crystal balls? (BTW, i think this is the best case scenario for AMD...does anyone seriously think 64-bit arch is going to give much of a performance boost for day to day apps?)

Yup, don't expect THAT much. AMD64 greatly helps...for server purposes. THG's Opteron benchmarks demonstrated that. But for home use, other than using the extra registers, it's of no use really, and you have to wonder if it's really THAT much helpful right now.

Anyways, I respect your opinion, but I wish you'd explain yourself after what I debated back towards my behavior.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A>
PS: New sexy users' sites now added!

 

[eden]

Dude, going to a 64-bit support Windows is already in progress for Opteron. It's soon to be out. Do you honestly have such a wide-view? You're being quite silly IMO.

It should not take longer than this year at best. The only tough job is porting drivers to 64-bit, but other than that there is barely anything else other than integrating AMD64 into WindowsXP, which is not a hard thing at all. (It's being done for Opteron)
If it took that long, it'd be the death countdown for AMD. That ain't happening. It's not some huge job, it will finish pretty soon in fact. They've been in the talks for a long time.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A>
PS: New sexy users' sites now added!

 

[NMDante]

I never said that Windows w/ 64-bit support for Operton and A64 wasn't being developed...I said that I didn't think it would be available by December. Even the beta version of the O/S hasn't been seen or heard of yet, but both AMD and MS said that it would be beta by mid-year.

Unless someone has gotten hold of the beta version of "Anvil" and kept it a secret, I still believe that A64/Operton "consumer" based O/S from MS will come with it's new O/S release "Longhorn". Or maybe MS will simply add some 64-bit instructions to the existing WinXP, until they develop a true A64/Operton O/S for consumers....

<A HREF="http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2003/Apr03/04-09AthlonOpteronPR.asp" target="_new">Microsoft Statement</A>

Just my opinions....


How many watts does it take to get the center of CPU core?

 

[pIII_Man]

There's was a tom's hardware article where they used an a64 laptop and played unreal tournament on a beta version of windows xp 64 bit edition...

If i put my k6 in a Ferrari it would be faster than your your pentium 4 or Athlon XP :tongue:

 

[spud]

Best option here is all you guys can go f@ck yerself's with sand paper then go eat [-peep-]... LoL seriously who cares anymore Intel has more money the Athlon 64 doesnt look so damned promising anymore we all can see it from the Opteron benchs... just get over it as far as Im concerned AMD is going the way SUN and SGI and ALPHA did, welcome to the Intel dominated semi conductor world... and it aint about to change been this way for 35+ years.

-Jeremy

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5341387" target="_new">Busting Sh@t Up!!!</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm=1400777" target="_new">Busting More Sh@t Up!!!</A>

 

[NMDante]

Yes, I saw that article, but was it really a pre-released version of Win64 or just WinXX with 64-bit instructions added to run demos. You can't really tell by looking at an Unreal screenshot.

Again, I don't doubt that Microsoft and AMD are trying to get a 64-bit O/S developed, I'm just wondering if it will be readily available by Athlon64 launch time or within 2 months of it. If there is no 64-bit O/S to take advantage of the 64-bit instruction set of the A64, then why would anyone pay the price to have the CPU, when a cheaper, more viable AMD solution is still available?



How many watts does it take to get the center of CPU core?

 

[ChipDeath]

Same reason people buy a P4C 2.8 when they already have a P4B 2.53... to get higher benchmarks mostly.

---
$hit Happens. I just wish it would happen to someone else for a change.

 

[wolverinero79]

I wasn't saying your behavior was bad at all, i think you misunderstood the point of the post (which is understandable, I'm not very clear). I was just saying it seems like you enjoy backing up the lead chip maker more than most people do. Many people have a bias towards one company and praise them when their up, but are quieter when they are down. Others simply state what's going on in a relatively objective manner. But you kind of have a conditional bias that shifts with the King Chip. I'm not saying that's bad, i'm just pointing it out and saying it's interesting. One could hardly call you biased.

To answer your question, though, if everyone (i mean worldwide) displayed the attitude you did, there would be much more heated competition (because when one of the companies was lagging behind, they would be crucified), which might actually be a lot of fun.

So once again, don't mistake my comments for criticism. You enjoy this race, and that's cool.

I'm just your average habitual smiler =D

 

[slvr_phoenix]

If there is no 64-bit O/S to take advantage of the 64-bit instruction set of the A64

Hello. <b>LINUX</b> is already running in 64-bit on Opterons. An awfully large number of people are chomping at the bit to setup and run (or sell) ultra-cheap 64-bit servers using A64 + Linux.

M$ is only useful for the people who want 64-bit because they think that it'll actually double their performance.

"<i>Let's see what <b>Paragraph 84-B</b> has to say about it.</i>" - Thief from <A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/daily.php?date=030724" target="_new">8-Bit Theater</A>

 

[MaximumGoat]

"Uh...nope.

Intel power consumption problems are rumors, until someone with a "real" release die proves them true. Hell, it's like the whole mobo incompatiblity rumor a few weeks ago."

according to an inquirer artical today 100w is confirmed. and also it is apparently confirmed that no prescotts will work on existing motherboards, unless mobo makers say otherwise i suppose, inquirer is reliable normally.

 

[NMDante]

Hello. LINUX is already running in 64-bit on Opterons. An awfully large number of people are chomping at the bit to setup and run (or sell) ultra-cheap 64-bit servers using A64 + Linux.

M$ is only useful for the people who want 64-bit because they think that it'll actually double their performance.

I know Linux exists and is running Operton servers...but my point is that most consumers (ie. those people who buy Gateways, HPs, pre-built and the like) won't want to have to use a Windows Emulator, or get new software that runs on Linux, especially MS Office apps and such.

You take two systems on the sales floor, one that is running Windows and one that is running Linux, and try to sell either to someone...I would guess that 7 out of 10 or even higher would buy the Windows system, cause most are familiar with it, and probably think Linux is far too advanced an O/S for them....

But, if A64 can sway people to buy it, using 32-bit Windows, until the 64-bit versions arrive, they might have a good chance...



How many watts does it take to get the center of CPU core?

 

[NMDante]

according to an inquirer artical today 100w is confirmed. and also it is apparently confirmed that no prescotts will work on existing motherboards, unless mobo makers say otherwise i suppose, inquirer is reliable normally.

Uh, nope. It says, according the article that spoke to another unnamed Intel executive:

"He said that Prescott does have high dissipation and that 100 watts was close to that number, while Intel is already working on a new core revision that could cut this dissipation."

Close to that number does not confirm or deny 100W....Also, the ever reliable Inquirer took what was started on Anandtech and ran with it about the mobo situation...which no one has yet to officially confirm or deny, so they are both still rumors, until hard facts come out....



How many watts does it take to get the center of CPU core?

 

[eden]

I still disagree on your POV, on account that most people will support recommending the winning product. I ain't in no way pro-Intel now. I am just happy that their next product will rock, and that the current winners offer tons more than the competition, not just in forms of performance, but features. (HT)

I am not motivated by A64 for such reasons. Lack of features. HT would make K8 a living behemoth. Having 9 IPC units working much more thanks to HT would create at least a 30$-more-per-clock Athlon.

But, I still disagree on that I back up the chip leader. If I am not happy with AMD lately, in no way does that quickly infer I support Intel. Actually, to spice things up a bit, could you point out some things proving what I am behaving as? This is all in good humor though, no harmful debating at all. I'm open!

I'm just your average habitual smiler =D

DAMN IT! Where did I hear that one before? It's so familiar, refresh me mind!

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A>
PS: New sexy users' sites now added!

 

[eden]

Heheh Spuddy, if I were to say it that way, I'd easily be labeled pro-Intel. Even though it's mostly true....except for sand paper jerking off and eating excrements. :lol:

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A>
PS: New sexy users' sites now added!

 

[slvr_phoenix]

But, if A64 can sway people to buy it, using 32-bit Windows, until the 64-bit versions arrive, they might have a good chance...

Maybe I didn't make myself very clear, but that was my point. The vast majority of the people hoping to buy an A64 are either wanting to use it with Linux in the first place, or are too uneducated to even know the difference between a 32-bit and 64-bit version of Windows, so would be more than happy to have 32-bit WinXP Home pre-installed on their A64.

Basically AMD <i>does</i> have as good of a chance as any. The lack of M$ Windows optimized for the A64 just doesn't really make much of a difference.

<font color=purple><pre><A HREF="http://www.winamp.com" target="_new">Winamp<b><font color=blue>3</font color=blue></b></A> and freeform skins, the best thing since sliced llama loaf. (Now with more beef.)</pre><p></font color=purple>

 

[slvr_phoenix]

according to an inquirer artical today 100w is confirmed.

No, according to 'the inquirer' an unnamed schmuck at Intel said that 100W is <i>around</i> where it's at. No specific numbers were given by Intel. 95W is <i>close to</i> 100W. As is 110W. It could be better <i>or</i> worse than this magic floating 100W guesstimate.

and also it is apparently confirmed that no prescotts will work on existing motherboards

The monkeys at 'the inquirer' didn't even get confirmation from Intel on this. As far as their article specifies they could easily just still be passing around the same old rumor.

unless mobo makers say otherwise i suppose

Which they have! This is why the whole rumor is nonsense. The voltage specs from Intel have been available and unchanged for a long time. Anyone who designed a Springdale or Canterwood mobo had more than enough opportunity to follow these specs. So any motherboard company that claims they support Scotty <i>will</i> support Scotty because there isn't one single reason why Scotty won't be compatible with the very specs that Intel released. I <i>know</i> that Asus is providing this support and if I remember correctly Gigabyte is too.

inquirer is reliable normally

<sarcasm><i>Yeah, and trans-fats are good for your health, and money grows on trees if you plant a silver dollar under a full moon.</i></sarcasm> Please. The day that 'the inquirer' is reliable or even <i>close</i> to a reputable news source is the day that Winamp sucks and llama jokes aren't funny. (Or the day that Intel buys out AMD if you want something more serious.)

<font color=purple><pre><A HREF="http://www.winamp.com" target="_new">Winamp<b><font color=blue>3</font color=blue></b></A> and freeform skins, the best thing since sliced llama loaf. (Now with more beef.)</pre><p></font color=purple>

 

[wolverinero79]

it was from one of the two women who were on this board but left...

I'm just your average habitual smiler =D

 

[slvr_phoenix]

it was from one of the two women who were on this board but left...

There have only been <i>two</i> women here? Are you sure? Granted I can only think of one off of the top of my head, but still that number seems a tad low.

It's a shame that they all keep leaving though. We've really got to stop scaring them away. :O

<font color=purple><pre><A HREF="http://www.winamp.com" target="_new">Winamp<b><font color=blue>3</font color=blue></b></A> and freeform skins, the best thing since sliced llama loaf. (Now with more beef.)</pre><p></font color=purple>

 

[wolverinero79]

What i meant is one of the two women that have left that i remember.

In this case it was girlnamedlou

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=283287#283287" target="_new">Go here</A>

I'm just your average habitual smiler =D

 

[NMDante]

Maybe I didn't make myself very clear, but that was my point. The vast majority of the people hoping to buy an A64 are either wanting to use it with Linux in the first place, or are too uneducated to even know the difference between a 32-bit and 64-bit version of Windows, so would be more than happy to have 32-bit WinXP Home pre-installed on their A64.

True, but if AMD pushes the advancements of 64-bit over 32-bit, and buyers don't see the advancement (similar to HT, in the beginning), it will make people think they were deceived.

I mean, if AMD claims that it's 64-bit CPU will run programs faster, but doesn't...couldn't consumers see this as false advertising?

Basically AMD does have as good of a chance as any. The lack of M$ Windows optimized for the A64 just doesn't really make much of a difference.

I think you're right, but it won't make getting an A64 worth it, IMO. If my old CPU runs 32-bit Windows equal or better than the A64, what's the point of upgrading to it? It needs a consumer friendly O/S, that takes advantage of it's 64-bit instructions, to help sell it to non-Linux using peeps.

Just my opinions....



How many watts does it take to get the center of CPU core?<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by nmdante on 08/06/03 11:58 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[slvr_phoenix]

True, but if AMD pushes the advancements of 64-bit over 32-bit, and buyers don't see the advancement (similar to HT, in the beginning), it will make people think they were deceived.

I mean, if AMD claims that it's 64-bit CPU will run programs faster, but doesn't...couldn't consumers see this as false advertising?

That's a good question. Ask Apple. They're paving the road for this very situation. He he he. 😉

Seriously though, if a consumer isn't smart enough to know why 64-bit does or doesn't help them, then how are they smart enough to know if it is or isn't faster as claimed? :O

Is it deceptive? Yes. Looking at AMD's most recent marketing though do you really think that AMD will care about being deceptive?

I think you're right, but it won't make getting an A64 worth it, IMO. If my old CPU runs 32-bit Windows equal or better than the A64, what's the point of upgrading to it? It needs a consumer friendly O/S to help sell it to non-Linux using peeps.

I'd love to agree with you except that there's still the one major flaw in this whole situation: It has yet to be proven that there really <i>is</i> a point in upgrading to the A64 anyway since an AXP and a NorthwoodC (and thus extremely likely Prescott) will significantly beat the A64 in pure 32-bit apps anyway. And in Intel's case beat it by so much that even software specifically optimized for the A64 will tie or lose to pure 32-bit software.

So the real question is: What point <i>is</i> there in upgrading to A64? It's certainly <i>not</i> performance. Which brings us right back to the beginning. Those who buy A64 either do so because they actually need it's 64-bitness or because they're just following the fad and not educated enough to know better. The former people will generally prefer to run Linux anyway, and of the latter people most won't even know the difference if they have a 32-bit OS installed or a 64-bit OS.

I readily admit that I could be wrong and would love to hear any explanations on why someone thinks so. But I still stand by the thought that when all is said and done, M$ really won't impact A64's sales one way or the other.

<font color=purple><pre><A HREF="http://www.winamp.com" target="_new">Winamp<b><font color=blue>3</font color=blue></b></A> and freeform skins, the best thing since sliced llama loaf. (Now with more beef.)</pre><p></font color=purple>

 

[Makaveli]

First of all don't call me little one i'm probably older than you, Secondly I never once said you were a fanboy. I was just agreeing with what some said before. I could care less who u like better or if your running a cyrix processor.

Drop the attitude I'm not here to battle like some juvenile!

 

[eden]

Your post easily molded with the others that seemed to accuse me of so.

So I ranted, since I knew tons of others would easily label me for simply appreciating a product.

Still, you came VERY late, dunno why you'd bump such an old dropped thing.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=green><b>A sexual experience like never before seen</font color=green></b></A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.

 

[MaximumGoat]

"It has yet to be proven that there really is a point in upgrading to the A64 anyway since an AXP and a NorthwoodC (and thus extremely likely Prescott) will significantly beat the A64 in pure 32-bit apps anyway"

errrr... check out amdzones article on the 2 and 2.2ghz opterons (i.e. 940/939 pin A64 performance). It completely and utterly whoops the AXP 3200, and comprehensively beats the 3.2ghz P4c, admittadly the benchmarks are slightly athlon orientated but there is no doubt that the 2.2ghz is faster than a 3.2ghz P4c, and that is all on 32bit, with opteron using cas 2.5 memory (others had cas2).

"keyboard error or no keyboard present, press F1 to continue or DEL to enter setup" spot the deliberate mistake