Can AMD Survive Another Core 2 Duo?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow its so sad truly. Amd has the best IGP on the market and the best Low end CPU. 780G + 4X50e is a total domination. And lets face it most peopel don't really need anything more or less then a amd build. Intel has no CPU in the price range of a 4x50e that can outperform or be more energy efficient. The only time when Intel wins is when you go upp to E8x00 series. A CPU like that is for gamers mostly. But if you look at price/performance AMD can deliver the same gaming performance. So we are left with the TOP line CPU. Well Intel is raping AMD here. BUT who the fuck has the money to buy a 1000$ CPU?

I just don't get it. AMD has a better lineup and most people would benefit from getting a AMD system. And still they get a more expensive Intel system that gives you less performance for the money.
 
[citation][nom]genored[/nom]Wow its so sad truly. Amd has the best IGP on the market and the best Low end CPU. 780G + 4X50e is a total domination. And lets face it most peopel don't really need anything more or less then a amd build. Intel has no CPU in the price range of a 4x50e that can outperform or be more energy efficient. The only time when Intel wins is when you go upp to E8x00 series. A CPU like that is for gamers mostly. But if you look at price/performance AMD can deliver the same gaming performance. So we are left with the TOP line CPU. Well Intel is raping AMD here. BUT who the fuck has the money to buy a 1000$ CPU?I just don't get it. AMD has a better lineup and most people would benefit from getting a AMD system. And still they get a more expensive Intel system that gives you less performance for the money.[/citation]

Cause Geeks want top end performance and the average clueless consumer walks into the store when they get a new computer and the first thing they say is, "I want an Intel" because they have no clue what AMD even is.

Back in my college days I would honestly have customers walk into Best Buy and not ask for a computer, they would ask for an Intel. Even when I tried to educate them about the AMD product line they were like, "Stop wasting my time and give me a product I have heard of."

AMD can compete with Intel still at many levels but unfortunately this is competing on PRICE which is never a trend a technology company should be happy taking. Now that i7 has stole one of their greatest achievements (ODMC) cranked up the bus speed, and created a web with it between all cores one can only imagine the performance to increase further. I like AMD as much as anybody else but my next machine is more then likely going to be Intel given the anticipated and already shown performance coming off pretty much the maiden voyage samples A0? A1?
 
A better question would be can Intel Survive Another Core 2 Duo because they only seem to be replacing there old high end with new. There high end dual cores are over priced and can only compete in games against phenom. The Q6600 is the best Intel has to face AMD in their price range. From a price stand point Nehalem is only replacing penryn quads.

Point is Intel dropped their 6 core Penryn and doesn't seem to plan a octal core Nehalem launch unless AMD catch up. Intel has more to fear that quad Nehalem doesn't perform enough over quad penryn or G0 kentsfield for enthusiast's.
 
Wheat_Thins ya sadly its the way it is people just don't know. Oh i am also gonna get a i7 even if it hurts my pride getting an ITEM with an i in the beginning of them name. Still most of use that know something are gonna get a amd HD4780 1gb or a 4850x2
 
AMD's holding on its "balanced system", for AMD to catch up Intel's CPU, the next CPU generation, it will need to be faster than the current Phenom 100%. AMD is fighting a hard battle, the current HD4000 series is a big success, but It won't able to push NVIDIA back like Intel did to AMD with its Core 2 Duo.
AMD still have a long way to go. Both AMD and Intel have their full "system", with CPU, GPU and Main chipset, what about NVIDIA? If Intel's GPU solution really a success, NVIDIA will be in dipshit.
Atleast AMD still can hold on to its "balanced system".

Intel: CPU, GPU, CHIPSET.
AMD: CPU, GPU, CHIPSET.
NVIDIA: GPU, CHIPSET.
 
I have heard that Toms Hardware has become very biased. It looks it might true. I do agree that AMD has seriously dropped the ball, but this article is very biased against and negative towards AMD. I do believe AMD is going to struggle against Nehalem. Shangai does however give serious competition against Penryn. The reason Dirk Meyer said that they will be 6 month ahead, is because Intel's 45nm was only realy comercially available since a couple of months ago because of "delays."

AMD has struggled to commit to their launch dates. If however they can come through with Shangai they could be only 6 months behind Intel. Shangai runs on current motherboards and the core is still basically Barcelona. That should mean that the processor would actually be available in retail. Lots of speculation, but I'm just trying to see what Dirk might mean.

Lets give dues where they are deserved. Intel has made a wonderful comeback with Core2. AMD has a wonderful platform. Intel's G45 can't even render HD videos and the graphics are pathetic compared to the competition. How can this be unimportant? I do think you still need convincing! Many of my customers are less and less worried about the CPU's performance. I still customers who overspend on CPU's and underspend on the rest.

 
Of course AMD will survive. They are just a bit lower than its competition when it comes to bringing new products to the market, mainly in regards to is CPU line.
 
Well, it's not so negative. Intel has an advantage at this moment in production technology and capacity. It allso tells why it's not wise for AMD to release too much of it's upcoming products.
And just like the article said: "We need strong AMD to keep the development on and competition in the market."
 
[citation][nom]hannibal[/nom]Well, it's not so negative. Intel has an adwantage at this moment in production technology and capacity. It allso tells why it's not wise for AMD to release too much of it's upcoming products.And just like the article said: "We need strong AMD to keep the development on and competition in the market."[/citation]

I suppose you are right. I am a bit too critical. The last paragraph does save the article a bit. It still is quite amazing that AMD could have survived agains a giant like Intel. Intel almost makes in a quater what AMD is worth in total - shocking. Maybe we should ask the question why on earth Intel actually struggled against AMD at all concerning performance of the P4? Even the Core2 relies mostly on P3, which was a better performer than P4 per clock.

We should also ask why it took Intel so long to come up with i7. AMD had this technology for years now. Intel spend again more on RND than what AMD is worth. They should have been much further by now. And maybe we should give AMD more credit for being able to compete.

This could be a conspiracy... Intel and AMD secretly meet in a back ally after work. "This time it is your turn to win."
 
Yeah, AMD will survice, they will struggle through this. Shangai will give Penryn some competition, but I doubt it will out-perform Penryn. What about the up-coming Nehalem? When Shangai out AMD will still stay where it is right now, 1 step behind Intel.
 
I've never seen an AMD commercial. But i have seen lots of intel commercials. AMD needs to start some new marketing strategy they need to teach consumers!!!
 
Money money money... Intel struggled to innovate, so they advertised! AMD does not have the spending power of Intel. AMD relies on retail salesmen to help educate people.

Unfortunately they are generally also uneducated.
 
AMD claims that Shangai actually outperforms the current Xeons. It should not outperform Nehalem. They only need to outperform the current Xeons to stay in the game. The Nehalem requires a completely new and more expensive platform. New platforms takes time to settle in the market. That would give AMD time to make a bit of money. Shangai may just be underestimated. It is not the 3870 vs 4870, but we might be surprised.

Intel's strong marketing arm might kill that though. I have a hunch though that not everything about Nehalem is going to go Intel's way - just a hunch though.
 
i've never had anybody in a computer store pitch amd to me...

i was pretty happy w\ my last 2 systems that were AMD based and i am still sticking w\ ATI cards but having moved to a Q9450 from an amd X2 6400+ i'm going to stick w\ the intel processor i think...

maybe the 6400 would have been better had it been water cooled too like my 9450, which was showing a bios temp of 13c last night when i was operating on my poor system.
 
[citation][nom]genored[/nom]Wow its so sad truly. Amd has the best IGP on the market and the best Low end CPU. 780G + 4X50e is a total domination. And lets face it most peopel don't really need anything more or less then a amd build. Intel has no CPU in the price range of a 4x50e that can outperform or be more energy efficient. The only time when Intel wins is when you go upp to E8x00 series. A CPU like that is for gamers mostly. But if you look at price/performance AMD can deliver the same gaming performance. So we are left with the TOP line CPU. Well Intel is raping AMD here. BUT who the fuck has the money to buy a 1000$ CPU?I just don't get it. AMD has a better lineup and most people would benefit from getting a AMD system. And still they get a more expensive Intel system that gives you less performance for the money.[/citation]


Why are you so surprised? Never heard of Apple?
People on the whole buy names, not products. People on the whole are dumb and wouldn't know the difference in any case.

In any case, I have no problems with AMDs PR strategy.
Worked a damn treat with the 4800 series didn't it? blew nVidia out of the water with vastly superior cards for VASTLY VASTLY superior pricing..

Granted there's only so much luck they can have, but who knows. It makes sense if you look at it in light of the 4800.
 
[citation][nom]joker96[/nom]I've never seen an AMD commercial. But i have seen lots of intel commercials. AMD needs to start some new marketing strategy they need to teach consumers!!![/citation]


AMD said it best a number of years ago, no way they can come close to matching Intel marketing, and why should they? If Intel spends lots of money marketing and people go to Best Buy to purchase computers what do they usually buy? Often they buy the cheapest computer with seemingly the most options. Which often means AMD reaps rewards from the Intel marketing machine. I do or would agree AMD should market more within the enterprise segment.

I hope as most do that AMD get's their shit together and starts producing better processors so we can keep the competition flowing.
 
When AMD's processor's outperformed Intel's clock-for-clock, AMD gained market share. Now the tables have turned a complete 180.

Intel Processors clock higher and run cooler. Not to mention they are more efficient clock-for-clock. The only advantage AMD still has is in the scalability in multi-core environments. The FSB is a major bottleneck for multi-core/multi-socket configs. Hence Nehalem. Once that bottleneck is removed, AMD's ship will sink. Unless there is some new more efficent architecture on the way? Oh wait, that was supposed to be K10.

AMD got a ~30% boost in performance by putting the MCH on the chip. They should have planned for Intel's same ~30% boost for doing the same thing. AMD doing it first was not revolutionary. Both companies had the option of doing it, Intel opted to wait. Now that Multi-Core/Multi-Sockets demand the bandwidth, it apparently is the time.

AMD is known for jumping the gun on these types of tech's. They tout them as revolutionary, but really unnecessary at the time. Anyone remember when we HAD to get Athlon 64 for its 64-bit processing - some day?? Who the heck is running Vista 64 on an original Clawhammer? Answer: No One! But at least it was 64-bit ready.

Let's face it. No matter how much you hate the company that is Intel, they have some pretty fricken smart engineers over there. And they can afford to have a lot of them.
 
It's a shame to see this. AMD has had - and continues to have - some fantastic products. It just does not have the resources to compete on price and manufacturing capacity. Who was first to have native quad cores? Who was first to have an onboard memory controller..a hypter-transport system? You were given server technology in a desktop product, and for a great price. Who is 'still' first to offer the lowest energy-consuming chipset, complete with HD playback and great 3D rendering capability?

AMD needs to find a niche, and I still think the A64 architecture is better geared for that niche. There's a valid reason why servers and cluster admins use AMD, because it's better by design and more scalable. Seems to be similar to the Commodore Amiga days..a much better product meets a much bigger competitor. Or imagine how VHS won over Betamax..not because it was better, but because it was bigger. I think one area where AMD can really kick Intel where it hurts, is in the IGP field and if it can deliver some killer apps to utilise that power, no amount in Intel hardware is gonna be able to keep up especially if AMD can get there first and develop the required hardware/software protocols. It's a shame to see people attack AMD, because as has been said here there's a lot of ignorance and hatred..some of us are old enough and wise enough not to fall for it, some are old enough to remember the dark old days when Intel really did monopolise the market. If AMD is keeping quiet then I really do hope it's for a good reason and one that only AMD can deliver.
 
People also ask, why buy AMD solutions? Well, if the global economic downturn holds true, more people are going to want an even bigger bang for the buck - can you really see them rushing out to spend 100's of dollars on an expensive processor? Nothing from Intel can compete with an AMD chipset and a low-power AMD processor, one that is capable of performing most tasks. Let's also remember just how well AMD is doing with those Radeon cards..you've got Intel users interested in buying those cards. Just imagine an ultra low-power, low cost platform that could accelerate GPGPU tasks such as plug-ins for Windows Movie Maker, or say, Photoshop or Sound Forge. AMD has always been able to deliver innovative products and I think this could really open up the creative arts or home entertainment markets. And let's not forget: if it's OK for Intel to copy AMD's ideas, don't assume the same can't work in reverse as and when required..only, at a much lower cost and a better performance/power ratio. Interesting times.
 
[citation][nom]genored[/nom]Wow its so sad truly. Amd has the best IGP on the market and the best Low end CPU. 780G + 4X50e is a total domination.[/citation]

That's just for now. Though from what I've heard, G45 still doesn't perform on 3D, NVIDIA's GeForce 9300 is coming (though still in the process of coming). I would really like to see what's AMD's response to E5200+GeForce9300. Unless they can get some cheap 45nm tri-core to pair with 790GX mATX boards, they would lose the big money during holiday season.

This is just AMD's trash talk before a major Intel event. Much like the kind of trash talk we see too often on WWE shows before Wrestlemania. In spite of these trash talk, they should really be working hard to come up a solution to replace their now obsolete dual cores and not-very-impressive tri-cores. Even aging E4300 with lower clock speed still beats 4850e by a large margin in certain applications.

When it comes to heavy multi-threaded/shared-memory application with need for large memory access (at least twice the size of L2 cache), AMD X2 scales much better than Intel C2D. It is just that desktop operations are so not that way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom