Bye Bye Clawhammer...

[imgod2u]

I should mention that while the Opteron SpecInt scores did surpass that of Itanium 2 at 1 GHz, so does a P4 2.8 GHz. Itanium and its successor were never very good at integer performance, merely decent. It's FP that is what it's a powerhouse in.
A P4 at 2.8 GHz gets somewhere around 970 in SpecInt I think, the Opteron's was 1100 or so.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.

 

[Guest]

Oh well. No normal people would have use for apps that benefit from x86-64 anyways. I wish they would quit screwing around and give us some good FSB speed or something.

 

[eden]

The motherboard article worries me. I thought they integrated the NB on the die?!
Now we're back to FSB?!

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne

 

[Guest]

Maybe the references to the FSB speed really mean CPU-memory bus speed, and maybe there are still a couple of former northbridge functions in need of a chip.

 

[Guest]

yo! nice name!

 

[knewt]

thanks, I did a double-take when I saw yours. LOL

 

[eden]

Hmm but then that makes you wonder, is AMD pushing for a future 200MHZ FSB with DDR400?
Would definitly not be bad, Hammer will be much more memory intensive (look at Opteron Sledge and its Dual Channel) and that could provide a sizeable boost over 166MHZ FSB.

For the picky ones like shadowbaby, he was complaining why they don't say 533MTs/sec than 533MHZ, well now they did for Hypertransport, according to those chipset map pics.

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne

 

[slickstaa]

The AMD decision to focus on the server market seems very smart to me with the current state of the economy/market. Most people really don't need a whole lot more out of their desktop systems right now that what they can already get, but there is still demand for faster and faster servers. When a business or organization buys all new servers, they like to stick with them for a while, not upgrade/replace them every month like pc enthusiasts. However, though I think it is best for amd, I'm not going to be buying any servers in the near future, so I am quite dissapointed in their slacking off on Claw. I may end up in the intel camp after all...(at least for a while in the next 6 months~year.) All of this said, the most common system I build for someone is a 1~1.3 duron based rig. The sad truth is, that's all most people need, and want to pay for in a computer these days. AMD is still the best way to go in the low-mid range market.

<font color=blue> If it ain't broke, don't fix it...tweak it.</font color=blue>

 

[knewt]

I agree with what you are saying, but how is the public going to respond to another clawhammer slip? I think AMD should be worried about this with all the bad press they have received lately about paper launches and launch dates being pushed out. Their reputation is slipping rapidly and I see this making it worse. The only way they can prevent losing market share is to have a competitive product that the public can actually get their hands on and focusing on the server market will not get this done.

 

[slickstaa]

thats just the thing...AMD is sort of dropping out, essentially dropping enthusiasts and those who want "the best of the best" for their PC. However, like I mentioned, their lower priced procs are ideal for low to mid range systems. However, I do agree that the paper launches are just pathetic.

<font color=blue> If it ain't broke, don't fix it...tweak it.</font color=blue>

 

[knewt]

Low and midrange systems will continue to drop in sales also if the high end desktops cant compete. Think about it, the low and midrange pentiums not to mention celerons are quite competitively priced with AMD right now. What will happen in the consumer's mind when they are shopping for one of these computers? They will see Intel clearly dominating AMD on the high end systems and will naturally assume low and midrange Intel products are better. What benefit would it be to buy a computer with lower performance for approximately the same price.

 

[chuck232]

One think I noticed... Didn't AMD discontinue the lower end models like the XP1600+? Yet they seem to be everywhere and it's not just left over inventory either, cause they're making new stepping ones.

When Intel cut the 1.6A, it seemed to almost immediately disappear.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...

 

[chuck232]

I don't usually trust The Inquirer, but they came out with a nice tidbit I think.

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5839" target="_new">Here</A>

If this goes by the usual ratings, it'll be vs. a t-bird, but seriously now, when they're selling to the *uninformed* customer, it'll be basically compared to a P4 clock speed. Now if this means anything, the first ClawHammer will be 3000+, which mean it'll be basically like a P4 3.06GHz... <i><b>BUT</i></b> Hammer is now expected to be out in mass in 2H03 (as stated by an AMD official), whereas the P4 3.06 will be here this November. By 2H03, I'm sure we'll see Prescott 3.2+GHz, which doesn't look good for AMD.

Just some more of my thoughts.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...

 

[eden]

Link content is not showing!

Also what the heck does DT stand for?
I kind of like that nomenclature, feels like a car model or something!

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne

 

[slickstaa]

it was there last night....blank now...strange....oh well.

<font color=blue> If it ain't broke, don't fix it...tweak it.</font color=blue>

 

[eden]

I recall when they go blank it's due to that it was unconfirmed news that was confirmed to be a hoax.

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne

 

[Schmide]

The whole site is down. At least the information is missing...

Complicated proofs are proofs of confusion.

 

[chuck232]

It seems like it's back:

Clawhammer nomenclature, PR rating revealed

By Paul Hales: Friday 18 October 2002, 13:15


THE CLAWHAMMER ATHLON still due in Q1 2003 will be called the Athlon DT, according to documents seen by the INQUIRER.
Indeed, you can see them too, by wibbling over to Tom's Hardware guide to what they say is the very first motherboard for the chip, sporting the VIA K8T400M chipset.

The eagle-eyed Frenchmen over at x86-secret.com spotted the details on an AMD roadmap posted on Tom's pages.

They've saved the roadmap here, just in case it suddenly disappears, they say.

According to the documentation, the 'Performance' chip in the Athlon range will be the Athlon DT 3000+, sporting the Clawhammer core.

This wil be the first Clawhammer Athlon to be released, the roadmap suggests.

Elsewhere in Tom's piece, we note it says the Athlon DT will run at a clock speed of 1.6GHz. µ

Most likely not true since it came from The Inquirer... :tongue:

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...

 

[eden]

Not only this but either one of the two, Inquirer or THG, is stretching the truth: THG claims the XP3200+ is 1.6GHZ while here it says DT 3000+ at 1.6GHZ. (frankly I think both are, it's absurd to have such a rating at 1.6GHZ if the 2GHZ Opteron tests showed fairly close performance against the 2.8GHZ) Also I don't see where your "compared to Tbird" claim you said earlier is.

One thing that's odd, is VIA's use of 400 in their chipset. Makes you wonder if they are not expecting a 400MHZ Bus as well since DDR400 isn't officially supported, so why would they create more than 3 chipsets with 400 in them!

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 10/19/02 07:17 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[chuck232]

All I'm saying is that the AlthonXPs are usually compared to P4s so if Hammer is released at XP3000+ and released in 2H03, Intel'll have their Prescott at 3.2GHz+ and that wouldn't be so great for AMD.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...

 

[eden]

But I also say that AMD is not gonna care much for CH and Desktop market competition for now. They really are determined to push into the server market. And if they succeed, the desktop market will be easier to tackle, with more money to spend, more R&D and some money aside for perhaps a rare one: TV commercials.

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne

 

[chuck232]

LOL... I have never seen an AMD TV commercial, although I've heard they've had ones before.

I agree with you that the desktop will be easier to tackle after gaining some share in the server maket, but the desktop market is a bigger market (isn't it?) and even the higher margins in servers may not negate the money they're losing in the desktop market.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...

 

[eden]

If AMD cannot keep up the competition of the desktop market, nor want to stop competing there, why not HALT it?
They aren't off, they will simply not focus on it. It's a "I don't give a hoot" attitude towards Intel, so competition will not be much evident, therefore complying to my prediction's results.

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne

 

[chuck232]

Halt it? In what way? Stop producing chips destined for desktop systems and let Intel win nearly 100% market share. After a while it'll be even tougher for AMD to re-enter that market.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...

 

[spud]

Keep forgetting that their are other competitors in the server market not just Intel and AMD. Just like Intel is haveing a bitch'n time getting a foot hold in high end servers AMD will face the same problem but with some bags as well. AMD's previous image as second rate will follow the company for years to come. The corporate sector isnt soo forgiveing as the cluesless desktop market (no offence to current parties). Food for thought buddy also dont rule the Prescott out. The biggest baddest CPU manufacture in the world isnt going to notice a bad ass CPU like this and will most likely have something to deal with it.

-Jeremy

<font color=blue>Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood blue man </font color=blue>