AMD Says Intel Nehalem Microarchitecture Copied Their Design

enigma067

Distinguished
Jun 29, 2007
208
0
18,680
0
AMD Says Intel Nehalem Microarchitecture Copied Their Design

Today, AMD’s top CPU and GPU executives, Randy Allen and Rick Bergman, covered a number of key industry topics that are sure to get lots of attention during IDF in a conference call with the press today. They disclosed the usual AMD news about upcoming products, but this slide took the cake. AMD included the slide as a joke and mentioned that imitation is the greatest form of flattery!!

Posted by Nathan Kirsch | Fri, Aug 15, 2008 - 12:50 PM

http://www.legitreviews.com/news/5090/
 

JonathanDeane

Distinguished
Mar 28, 2006
1,469
0
19,310
6
Intel stole something ??? My faith in corporate ethics is severely shaken.... I think I am going to have to sell my Enron stock now *sobs*




The preceding post has been a joke thank you for reading.
 

spuddyt

Distinguished
Jul 21, 2007
2,114
0
19,780
0
look, we've gone over this with thunderman already - intel and AMD have both copied each other at various points in their histories, get over it, go away and stop trolling
 

JonathanDeane

Distinguished
Mar 28, 2006
1,469
0
19,310
6



No that would mean Intel copied AMD's designs they clearly state that Intel stole them!!! I hope AMD's designers can remember at least bits and pieces of the work so they can at least make something competitive!!!

Edit: oops it does say copy LOL

Well I guess if AMD does release the same chip the benchies should be a mirror image and at that point it will break down to price ?
 

aevm

Illustrious
Funny slide indeed.

There's something I don't get though: if AMD is indeed ahead of Intel when it comes to processor efficiency, how come the Phenom 9850 is listed as 125W while the Q6600 claims only 95W? Both processors are based on 65nm, and they trade blows in benchmarks. If anybody can explain it, I'd appreciate it.



 

E3210

Distinguished
Aug 9, 2008
137
0
18,680
0
@ jimmysmitty

300 dollars for a processor then will be 150 in a year. And you don't think they aren't going to screw you over on the x58 chipset? I will be shocked if it is anything less then two hundred dollars.
 

shadowthor

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2008
1,128
0
19,280
0
only ppl with a lot of money on there hands will jump on nehalem when it first launches, as most ppl know, wait for a few months until later revisions come out then jump on board with nehalem. Its not that much different right now, processors still range into the 300 and if nehalem is about that price it isn't half bad, but ddr3 sticks will be expensive although prices are starting to drop. How exactly is Intel going to screw ppl over on the x58 chipset when it is cater to the enthusiast market and not mainstream?
 

random1283

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2007
222
0
18,680
0
Lol slide is funny
But Don't forget AMD has also "Copied" Intel's ideas before.
This is nothing but Propaganda for AMD Fanbois
 

Just_An_Engineer

Distinguished
Feb 18, 2008
535
0
18,990
1


Maybe "screwing people over" isn't the best choice of words, but I think the point being made is that Intel will likely drastically overcharge for the chipset. Intel has somewhat of a bad record regarding performance chipset as of late. You may remember that some months ago when the X48 chipset was released several review sites found that it was little more than a rebadged X38 with the FSB speed set a little higher at the factory, and yet it cost significantly more.
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator


Of course it will drop in price. Everything drops in price. Look back at AMDs Athlon X2 back when it was kicking the bejebus out of Pentium D. They were priced very high. Then Core 2 came and the prices dropped. Thats alwasy how it goes and its due to it actually costing less for the company to make them.

Second part, Intel charges a certain amount for the chipsets yes but its not going to be $200 dollars. The chipsets are cheaper than that. Its the mobo makers who decide the final price of the mobo.

I don't care whats going to happen with Nehalems release cost wise because I am waiting for Westmere, the 32nm shrink of Nehalem. My reasoning is because it will allow more cores, run cooler and also improve on the original Nehalem design.
 

Reynod

Administrator
good points there.

Actually the first lot of 939 X2s were damn expensive (never mind the FX
s were just priced in the stupid range) and didn't drop much in price for ages.

My 4400+ was $700 new ...

The core2 competition pushed the AMD prices down quickly.

And even helped them get rid of their excess inventory of D's too ... a bit of "halo" effect I imagine.

Now we need Deneb to be a halway decent product to ensure Nehalem is cheap too.

Still ... anyone with a reasonable X2 or any E6xxx series or better processor with a decent graphics card can play any games currently out there now ... at the lower resolutions anyway.

We need the applications to make the most out of the extra cores ...

Otherwise the hardware is just going to sit idle.

The programmers need to catch up.

Wouldn't it be nice if the OS made decent use of the extra cores too ... I don't see the third and fourth cores doing much at all most of the time here.

 

amdfangirl

Splendid
Herald
^ must hurt if you can get 6000+ for ~$100 these days =(

That's why I always buy extremely old high performance tech =) Got my Athlon XP during the Athlon 64 age =)



I like waiting until the nm is half the amount of my previous processor... Good way of knowing when to upgrade... Also most programs aren't even optimised properly for dual-core let-alone quad-core...

Looks like I'll be keeping the Athlon X2 for some time =)
 

lolitha

Distinguished
May 24, 2006
364
0
18,780
0
anyone remember thunderman ... may be this could be his reincarnation . BTW Even they copied from amd they are doing it right at the moment, taking down all the benchies ...
 

JonathanDeane

Distinguished
Mar 28, 2006
1,469
0
19,310
6


I think it might have something to do with AMD using SOI and Intel went with Hi-K or something like that (I could be utterly wrong here) Also AMD has to power its on die memory controller so who knows how many watts that uses ?
 

Similar threads


ASK THE COMMUNITY