AMD vs. Intel: Refuting Historical Inaccuracies

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.


Bulldozer.... you mean the CPU AMD planned to come out after 2011 based on 32nm while Intel will be pushing towards 22nm the following year?

Probably not unless it has some sort of super kick Intels ass feature.

It will bring them to competition with Nehalem and Sandy Bridge most likely but not beyond that.

Then again I need to shut up and wait for results.
 
well competition is good but i think it will just be another phenom/phenom II, the second will be good and then AMD will come out on top after Bulldozer cuz then it will have more money for R$D, or maybe better markteting
 

AMD, marketing!!
biglaugha.gif
 
HAH!!!! AMD and Marketing. Sorry but thats just funny.

AMDs marketing is pretty much just their YouTube channel fileld with comparisons of super high end and cost Intel parts and mid end cost AMD parts.

Bulldozer itself might bring competition for whats already out from Intel but remember Intel has a great strategy. 32nm is coming now, then a new arch next year then 22nm and so on and so forth.

While AMDs strategy from its Athlon 64 was: Release, dual core, set on it for a while, K10, K10.1 @ 45nm (Phenom II), set on it for a while, 6 core variant of K10.1. That kind of strategy will get them in the same position as they are in and thats in the low to mid end arena.

Not really trashing AMD but they don't have the best of stratagies all becaus their funds are low and well thats due to buying ATI more than anything.

Intel Tick-Tock strategy is great since it releases a new arch with new features and innovation and then taking that same arch and enhancing it while shrinking it and lowering power consumption and enhancing performance. I believe Sandy Bridge is set to have a new instruction set that will cut time into a quarter for certain apps. Its much like SSE in that way but I forget the name.
 


LIES!!

AMD's CPU is just more innovative in every way than its Intelcrap counterparts. AMD was the first to 1Ghz (the one that actually counts), the first the develop the HyperTransport technology, and the first real dual core, and the first real quad core. AMD is the savior of the world, where Intel is the evil! If you buy Intel today, you would definitely regret it when you're bed ridden with cancer, because only AMD can save you!

I mean, AMDzone agrees with me, BM agrees with me, and the PHD welding sharikou agrees with me, so it must be true!

damn Intelliot...
 


My grandfather has a PHD too.

Its also known as a Post Hole Digger.

😀
 
He got it from http://forums.hexus.net/images/smilies/biglaugha.gif

On the marketing front, neither Intel or AMD do any marketing here, Intel still has majority market share, so I'm dubious about how beneficial that would be for AMD. Getting more support/buddybuddy with Dell/HP etc would do them wonders, and I think having two brands as well (like Toyota and Lexus), so people don't associate their high end products, with low end systems on cheap motherboards that fail a lot (which isn't AMDs fault, but people make that association in their mind).

 


You don't make money without taking risks.

ATI was pushing their marketing. Even had a thing like nVidias "The Way its Meant to be Played". First game they had it on was HL2 and even Gothic 3. but after AMD took them in that all ended. Nope. No marketing.

AMD just doesn't understand that part of the picture. You can have the best ever product but word of mouth is only good to get you started. Marketing, true marketing not YouTubeing, is what gets you beyond where AMD is right now.

Thats a huge reason why Intel is and always has been the dominant player in the market. Intel has unique advertising setups. The Blue Man group during the Pentium III/4 days was brilliant since the Blue Man Group just hit and was very popular. Its why you see major compannies advertising. Its a way to notify people of your presence one and two to intice people to buy your product.

A good example is Verizons FiOS. When ti first becomes available, Verizon hits people on all possible fronts. They do TV advertising, Mail advertising, door to door and even internet advertising. Its how Verizon was able to wipe the floor with Time Warner in New York city.

When AMD recognizes that, they will become a more dominant player even if their CPUs are not the best of the best.
 
not necessarily, cuz they will have better marketing and exposure but people will stay with Intel just because they know better.

For example, say AMD gets tons and tons of marketing in 2012, like TV, Magazines, OEM companies, etc.

The average consumer will think AMD is a company started only a few years ago like 2010 just got a break, so in order to stay on the safe side they will stick with Intel cuz that company has been around for over 30 years, where as AMD is a 10 year old company

That is what the average joe will think even tough AMD has also been around for 30 years
 


Nope, just FUD.

Native is a nice design, but when it came down to benchmarks Core 2 Quad first off was uncontested for a year, and when Phenom I X4 came out it simply stunk.

AMD had lots of yield issues. Problem with a native design is that your chip is only as fast as its slowest core.

However, the MCM (aka non-native, double cheeseburger, glued, etc...) design allowed Intel to pair like dual core chips together. This was a great compromise until Intel was able to improve its manufacturing process so they could make native quads.

The ultimate question is, does the consumer care more about whether a processor is native or MCM, or does the consumer care more about performance? I'll take performance.

The tables have actually turned now, as AMD will be coming out with Magny-Cours, which is actually an MCM, going against everything that the AMD Fanboys and AMD marketing has been telling us for the last few years.
 

There was a notable amount of talk about the Phenom (or perhaps the Phenom II) being "smoother" than the Core 2 Quads, even when they appeared to be slower in benchmarks. I can't say I ever noticed the "stuttering" that I was supposed to be getting with a C2Q.
 

That is an overhyped problem that wasn't going to affect most people. The fix for it caused a major slowdown so alot of people didn't want it. The real problem with Phenom is it just plain sucked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.