AMD K8L

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar

Who Will Win?

  • Conroe

    Votes: 59 27.3%

  • K8L

    Votes: 133 61.6%

  • Others

    Votes: 24 11.1%
  • Total voters
    216
Some intresting news ->

Inquirer


CyberLink Claims AMD is not ready for HD/BD


Will it b the same with K8L?
Click to expand...

:lol: :lol: :lol:

See, you've got to be your own filter when it comes to the latest news...

Hint: Any source is as good as any other, a priori.


Cheers!

Lol.. seems Cyberlink forgot to add the FX in there list.. as on my X2 4800+ all is well with there utility..😛Oh Boy!! Next thing we know, AMD fanboys will be crying that Intel is strong-arming CyberLink. :wink:
 
]Oh Boy!! Next thing we know, AMD fanboys will be crying that Intel is strong-arming CyberLink. :wink:
Click to expand...

"Worry not! I'm sure Intel failed to include a beta detector... either that or Cyberlink's page is a beta version, as well."


Cheers!
 
This is a a good question --- I think it goes to the early industry ramp of personal computing when computer costs were sky high, to buy a 90 MHz Pentium Pro, with a 50 megbyte hard disk and 2 megs of memory cost between 2000-3000 dollars, people blamed Intel and the high price associated is pegged on them.

Since then, your average high school lawn mower could not afford to purchase a cool computer getting only 10 bucks per lawn, so they wanted cheap.... AMD was cheaper so it suckered them in.... and it was hate intel because computers cost so much.

Who knows... it could just be people like to attack number 1, and cheer on number 2. Number 1 doesn't smell as bad though.

Jack
Click to expand...

Why could AMD provide cheaper CPUs and Intel couldnt.
AMD still has the low end market. How is it possible & Y cant Intel?
 
(Loss)
1994....2155.........469................................271
1995....2468.........222................................216
1996....1953.........(253).............................(69)
1997....2356.........(91)..............................(21)
1998....2542.........(163).............................(104)
1999....2857.........(321).............................(89)
2000....4644.........888...............................983
2001....3891.........(58 )..............................(60)
2002....2697.........(1225)............................(1303)
2003....3519.........(233).............................(110)
2004....5000.........222................................91

2005
2005..q1..1272.......(45)..............................(17)
2005..q2..1260.......(7)...............................(30)
2005..q3..1522........79...............................(31)
2005..q4..1838........205...............................96
===========================================================

AMD: Cumulative 11 year net income (-178 million)
(Source: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/InvestorRelations/0,,51_306_5147,00.html )

Up until these past 3 quarters, AMD has not recorded 3 successive quarters in the black since 2000. Albiet some of it was due to the sinking weight of flash, success only came after they ramped in a superior product.

Jack
Click to expand...

Sweet mother of murgatroid, look at 2002.
Looking at the numbers, not only is it a wonder AMD still exists, but that they've spent so much money this year. The old axiom, 'you have to spend money to make money' is true, but the kind of debt they're running in treads dangerously close to bankruptcy.

And to think Shariboob keeps whining "Intels going bankrupt, Intels going bankrupt"

Peace
 
Looks like u gave me a reason to try and go for an AMD processor. (even when performance of processor AMD = Intel or just a bit less (negligible))

To intel fanboys... I dont kno wats its like to b a fanboy (cuz i aint)
I think Intel fanboys always buy Intel products? (not sure)

But if its true then hear this-> Suppose AMD got bankrupt.. U Intel fanboys have to buy Intel processor paying 100% more!



@JumpingJack
Thanks for ur informative reply.
 
Looks like u gave me a reason to try and go for an AMD processor. (even when performance of processor AMD = Intel or just a bit less (negligible))

To intel fanboys... I dont kno wats its like to b a fanboy (cuz i aint)
I think Intel fanboys always buy Intel products? (not sure)

But if its true then hear this-> Suppose AMD got bankrupt.. U Intel fanboys have to buy Intel processor paying 100% more!



@JumpingJack
Thanks for ur informative reply.
Click to expand...

Sure, if AMD goes bankrupt, then Intel will have a true monopoly of the industry, and that would be bad for consumers.

But to buy a product that from a company for the simply reason of keeping it in business, even if their product isn't as good as the competitor's at the same price level is, imo, brand loyalty, which can be seen as fanboi-ism.

I use intel CPUs because I get them for free. If I had to pay, I'd look at the price vs. performance of the CPUs before deciding which one to get. Not if the company, that cares little about me, is the red or black. The only time I would support a company is if I owned a ton of stock, and needed the company to do well, to get a better return in my investment. If I had no investment, there is no loyalty.
 
But to buy a product that from a company for the simply reason of keeping it in business, even if their product isn't as good as the competitor's at the same price level is, imo, brand loyalty, which can be seen as fanboi-ism.
Click to expand...

I beg to disagree.

What you've just stated, might be called preference (everyone might have its own...); therefore, brand-loyalty has nothing to do with fanboyism; the later happens whenever someone's states that his/her own view is the right & only one, despite contrary evidence. Moreover, being a fan of something/someone (and despite the 'fanatic' origin of the term), might not have any pejorative connotation, as long as the previous statement holds true.


Cheers!
 
But to buy a product that from a company for the simply reason of keeping it in business, even if their product isn't as good as the competitor's at the same price level is, imo, brand loyalty, which can be seen as fanboi-ism.
Click to expand...

I beg to disagree.

What you've just stated, might be called preference (everyone might have its own...); therefore, brand-loyalty has nothing to do with fanboyism; the later happens whenever someone's states that his/her own view is the right & only one, despite contrary evidence. Moreover, being a fan of something/someone (and despite the 'fanatic' origin of the term), might not have any pejorative connotation, as long as the previous statement holds true.


Cheers!

True.

That's why I said it could be seen as fanboi-sim, not actual true fanboi-ism. I was just saying that saying that one would buy from a company to keep it in the black, is akin to fanboi-ism, since it would be buying a product, no matter what the cost or how the performance is, similar to fanboi-ism, since fanbois would continue to buy from a specific company no matter what price vs. performance issues a product would have.

Either way, I see you're point, and I was over-simplifying the issue.

=)
 
Ya it can be seen as fanboi-ism.

I was saying
*if price/performance ratio is negligible then go for AMD
*if price/performance ratio of AMD = Intel then go for AMD

Currently, in the high end market, the Intels price/performance ratio cannot b negligible so go for Intel.

I would advice to buy any Intel Core Duo 2 processors. They r highly overclockable!
&

If u dont buy a Core 2 duo then go for an AMD processor... those r better than intels older processors (Pentium D, Pentium 4, etc)
 
There's an argument used by AMD marketers: look at the platform price. With the prices AMD sell its chips at (see THG's articles about those), you can build quite complete platforms using AMD chips and save a few bucks over the same on the Intel side (performance and feature wise).

Now, about K8L: AMD is really tight-lipped about what they have in store: all we know for sure is that we'll have 4x4 and 65nm chips rolling in a while.

Considering financial numbers, the big dip in 2002 seems strange: it was either a BIG investment in new fabs or in research in new processor designs, the result of their complete disappearance from some markets (mobile market in Japan, see AMD/Intel trial), the huge drops in Flash prices... or a combo of all those.

Fabs started in 2002 should come into service soon - 65nm?

Now, anybody could create an AMD look-alike PPT presentation. Can this one be found on the AMD website?
 
If the K8 comes on 65nm, will there b any performance increase. As the components get closer, performance should increase a bit?

The K8L will have an exclusive L2 cache and L3 cache r8? But in theory an Inclusive cache is faster! cuz It saves a clock cycle.
Will it b better if K8L has an inclusive L2 or L3?
The conroe has an inclusive cache ?

Why Did AMD choose exclusive and Intel choose inclusive?
 
Considering financial numbers, the big dip in 2002 seems strange: it was either a BIG investment in new fabs or in research in new processor designs, the result of their complete disappearance from some markets (mobile market in Japan, see AMD/Intel trial), the huge drops in Flash prices... or a combo of all those.
Click to expand...

Probably due to buying Alchemy Semiconductor, Inc.:
In February 2002, AMD acquired Alchemy Semiconductor and continued its line of processor in MIPS architecture processors, targets the handheld and Portable media player markets. In 13 June 2006, AMD officially announced that the Alchemy processor line will be transferred to Raza Microelectronics Inc.
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD
 
Dynamic I/O bus introduced in K8L architecture

AM2 get upgraded to AM2+: AM3 is postponed!
Gud news + Bad news :!

AMD to enter K8L era in 2H 2007

AMD Quad-Core Altair upcoming in 2007 Q3

"X4 one targets for the mainstream segment with SMP (Symmetric Multi-Processor) technology."

"Based on K8L architecture, Altair has upgraded Instruction fetch to 32B, enhanced Branch Prediction and Out-of-order load execution, with Double Precision FLOPS/cycle, 128Bit SSE, and Load per Cycle. AMD claim that the new architect would get a great improvement with more than 40%!"
This is funny?

Edit: links
 
AMD claim that the new architect would get a great improvement with more than 40%!
Click to expand...
8O And you belive what AMD are claiming...... :roll:

I find it funny!
It makes me cry :cry: AMD were claiming 40% faster clock on 65nm SOI3 compared to 90nm SOI2....
 
AMD claim that the new architect would get a great improvement with more than 40%!
Click to expand...
8O And you belive what AMD are claiming...... :roll:

I find it funny!
It makes me cry :cry: AMD were claiming 40% faster clock on 65nm SOI3 compared to 90nm SOI2....


AMD Could be telling the truth about the 40% increase in performance, this is the same as what intel was claiming it would achieve with Conroe and we didn't believe them. But looking at some benchmarks it actually did bring about 40% performance increase.
 
... You do realized that:
a) You'll be flamed into next week.
b) The info that you are posting is old.
c) Never post info from *Shakirou* and take it seriously.
d) You're gonna get flamed worse, if you keep up at this.
and
e) It's pointless to believe in vaporware. Lets just wait till the new architecture before declaring anything.
 
I don't think it will be a Conroe killer, but AMD has a lot of cool things cooking up. I found the two most interesting to be:
Click to expand...

Conroe killer? Umm...its not even a conroe competitor, its a woodcrest competitor. We knew for some time that AMD's first QC will be a "true" QC, not just 2 dual cores on one chip like Intels. It'll be neat to see how they voth perform. :lol:

Proof positive that the typical AMD fanboy lacks education. The inabiltiy to perform simple math:

1 x 4 = 4
2 x 2 = 4
4 = 4
 
They *can* do math; they just do it a little differently:

AMD + 1337 = 4
6 - Clawhammer = 1
222 * 3 = Intel

In all seriousness, any advantages that AMD had by using the native quad-core approch are quickly being countered and defeated by Intel's superior architecture. Native QC isn't much of a selling point anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom