Intel bribing THG? Is it possible?

spud · Oct 1, 2003

OC'n is beyond spec thats not fair to compare and you know it. nForce2 stability with OC'n on early BIOS's was also shite while Intel chipsets come out of the gates with fairly good BIOS's.

-Jeremy

:evil:

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=faq&notfound=1&code=1" target="_new">Busting Sh@t Up In My Buddies Face!!!</A> :evil:

endyen · Oct 1, 2003

Fair? Ok the intel chips are. Ocing may be "beyond spec" but what it really is is a good measure of how a chipset deals with heavy load. Perhaps we will never push the limits of our intel chipsets, but the nvidia chipset is a step above.
That is beyond the point though. What I was saying is that the days of unstable amd solutions are past. In truth they ended with the sis 735 chipset. It is no longer a valid argument against the use of the amd platform. I am not saying that Intel chipsets are less than great.

spud · Oct 1, 2003

Its also not fair to compare different platforms. Intel VS AMD in this context isnt a fair compareision when nVidia releases its DDR2 chipset for the P4 next quarter we can talk about compareing them.

-Jeremy

:evil:

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=faq&notfound=1&code=1" target="_new">Busting Sh@t Up In My Buddies Face!!!</A> :evil:

ufo_warviper · Oct 1, 2003

Could somebody fill me in on what's happened in this thread? I wold read all 18 pages, but DANG, that would take forever to play catchup like that!

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!

virtuman · Oct 1, 2003

There are too many topics for this one post. I would love to see an admin split these up so they could all be addressed. Until that happens I’ll just address the ones I want.

Omid is an opinionated ass (I use the word ass because, in this industry, you can't have an opinion without being an ass). Good for him. It’s nice to see someone in a position that people normally think is “paid” that comes out and really screws the pooch. If we actually take the time to read the last few articles he’s written it’s clear that he has inserted the golden shaft of love directly into the nether regions of BOTH Intel and AMD. The only thing that I can get a fix on is that he thinks AMD and Intel are both screwing the donkey and he is just holding the ears. Kudos to him for pointing out that neither company has re-invented the wheel.

As far as the whole 64 vs. 32 argument; I don’t see anyone else driving the market toward 64-bit. I didn’t make up the term Itanic but I’m willing to bet most people reading this know what I’m referring to. Someone has to push the market forward and it usually isn’t two (or more) competitors working together to do it.

I applaud AMD for pushing the software developers. If it were software developers calling for 64-bit hardware I would applaud them (read which came first, the chicken or the egg). Is AMD’s solution for 64-bit perfect? Hell no. Does it apply some pressure to almost every segment of the market to wake up? Hell yes.

One thing we should all be considering is whether or not the near-term results of AMD’s venture into the 64-bit space will have a positive or negative impact on us, the end users. We really only have two solutions to compare and the one AMD presents I fell much more comfortable with than the alternative from Intel.

Terracide · Oct 1, 2003

When you can come up with any Intel solution chipset, that is as stable as the nforce, I will listen to you.

erhmm..?
My I850 runs rock solid?
Never had a blue screen of death, never had chipset problems, acutally never had any problems?
I'm still running on the 1.5 yeard old XP installation I made when I got my rig...
But would you like to document that Intel Chipset should be unstable?

Terra

Don't pretend - BE!

Zoron · Oct 1, 2003

When you can come up with any Intel solution chipset, that is as stable as the nforce, I will listen to you.

Considering Intel has built a reputation upon having rock-solid chipsets, that statement is beyond ludicrous. Intel has proven themselves in the corporate / public sector space. That is why they have the cash. Until AMD smartens the hell up and quits catering to a niche market only, they will NEVER make money.

They have a long way to go yet to prove themselves. AMD has never been able to keep up with demand the way Intel has. It's all about volume... and thus far AMD has not been able to deliver on that front. Corporate / public sector clients don't want to hear that they can't have their computers because there are not enough CPUs.

I'm not an Intel fanboy... I want AMD to succeed. What some of you fail to realize that in order to succeed, AMD HAS TO MAKE MONEY. They can't continue to undercut Intel while their own production costs are rising... that's a sure way to rocket themselves to bankruptcy. They have to start making a fair profit on their chips. I'll admit that paying $100 or $200 for a top-performing CPU is wonderful, but not at the expense of the company that makes them. Intel needs competition in the market to keep them from stagnating and to keep prices at least somewhat reasonable. AMD needs to make itself a viable company. It's time to stop being the underdog and start being the top dog.

 If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it.

Crashman · Oct 2, 2003

Sure, on an intel board those chipsets are super stable with some notable excetions, but put them on a board where you can oc, and they are not quite so good.

WTF? All my BX boards that were made for overclocking to 150MHz did so with 100% stability. The chipset was designed for 100MHz. All my i815 boards that were designed for overclocking went to at least 172MHz bus speed. They were designed for 133MHz bus. In both situations I was limitted by my CPU!

The i850 clocked so high they renamed it the i850E! From it's original speed of 100MHz bus, it can easily go over 170MHz! That's a 70% overclock! The 865/875 is made to clock up to 200MHz, overclocking boards hit at least 250MHz (25% overclock) and many go over 300MHz (50% overclock!).

Now I'm looking at lots of nForce2 boards that overclock from 166 to 200MHz, a 20% overclock. But not with 100% certainty! And the nForce2 Ultra 400...has anyone actually gotten that to 250MHz bus yet, for a simple 25% overclock?

Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!
Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!

saintbabs · Oct 2, 2003

I understand how things can get a little claustrophobic in Belgium, I do. You seem very frustrated in not having anything to say for yourself other than, "Yah boo, you suck!"

I never get this kind of attitude from people in Luxembourg. They seem to have resigned themselves to being in a small country, and instead of adopting small mindedness, they have chosen to broaden their horizons, and become damn good skiers to boot.

Belgium has some of the best beer in the world. Go drink some, if you are of a an age where beer drinking is lawful to you or, if you have as much age and sagacity as you imply, hopefully not worried about incontinence.

Enjoy yourself, and leave me alone.

The sound of one hand clapping is music to the ears of the deaf.

Omid

saintbabs · Oct 2, 2003

While I am appaled by the thought of putting a shaft anywhere near anyone, or anything's, nether regions - and all this talk of ass makes me very, very uncomfortable - I need to reply for no particular reason than my own amusement:

AMD is not putting pressure on the developers for 64-bit. Market forces and moolah puts pressure on developers, and AMD has neither.

AMD is assuming that by selling its usual complement of 32-bit Athlons, now carrying the Trojan Horse of 64-bit extensions, it can say, "Hey, dev guy, look at all those 64-bit machines out there. Go get 'em, dude!"

Yet, I have yet to see any compelling argument, except with niche applications, that the end user will want to buy 64-bit software. Photoshop, 3DS Max, games etc. etc.

Well, AMD gets those end users right now, particularly in the enthusiast and bleeding edge community. What's the big deal.

Where has AMD's strength among enthusiasts translated into profit, and mass market acceptance.

My argument has always been that they need to pander to another demographic, which upsets enthusiasts and fanboys, who are petrified of having to pay market rates for CPUs, instead of buying the excess AMD XP 2500+ and 1800+ inventory in the channel at under <$50 a pop.

So, what happens when the Athlon 64 price is driven down by Intel pricing, enthusiast reticence to spend top dollar for any AMD CPU, no matter how delightful its performance, and a software developer community that can't come up with a mainstream killer app for 64-bit?

Yeah, what is the killer app for 64-bit? Remember when that mattered and made or broke a platform?

Rhetorical question, no answer required.

Yours faithfully,

Omid Rahmat
GM & Publisher
Tom's Guides Publishing
www.tomshardware.com

Crashman · Oct 2, 2003

I APPLAUD those enthusiasts so enthralled with AMD that they would spend over half a grand to get the FX-51. The fact that it's neither a spectacular performer nor an exceptional value need not dissuade them! I understand AMD is relying too heavily on these enthusiasts to keep them in business, and that this isn’t working. But every little bit helps keep them “in the running” just a bit longer, right?

So I’m hearing a lot of criticism from you concerning their marketing strategy. And I even agree that it’s well deserved! But considering your expertise, I’d love to hear your suggestions for a solution!

You see, I believe the “cheap” A64-3200+ could put AMD back on the map if it were sold as an upper “mainstream” CPU, priced at around $200. That price should STILL be high enough to make it profitable in volume, even if the core does cost twice that of the old XP3200+! Of course, this leaves AMD with another dilemma, what to do next? They don’t have a viable future processor as far as I can see, because I don’t see how that one can scale very well. It’s going to have to hit at least 2.2GHz just to keep up with Intel’s Prescotts at launch time! If you were handed the reigns to this company, how would YOU correct their slow sales and low profitability?

Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!
Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!

Guest · Oct 2, 2003

>AMD is assuming that by selling its usual complement of
>32-bit Athlons, now carrying the Trojan Horse of 64-bit
<extensions, it can say, "Hey, dev guy, look at all those
>64-bit machines out there. Go get 'em, dude!"

Funny thing is, those developpers are indeed coding for those extentions, without pressure or huge financial stimulus. So maybe they find them usefull ?

>Yet, I have yet to see any compelling argument, except with
>niche applications, that the end user will want to buy
>64-bit software. Photoshop, 3DS Max, games etc. etc.

Gaming, 3D AND photoshop.. some nice niches you note there. Together maybe 90% of your benchmark suite, and the prime reasons people go out and buy high end hardware anyway. You are right though, 64 bit is not needed for websurfing or word. So ?

>Where has AMD's strength among enthusiasts translated into
>profit, and mass market acceptance.

AMD has around 50% of the world home PC market, in some area's over 70%. Thats where.

>Yeah, what is the killer app for 64-bit? Remember when that
>mattered and made or broke a platform?

It doesnt matter when its a perfectly valid 32 bit platform as well. That idea just doesnt doesnt seem to get into your brain. Even if no one needed 64 bit for the next 3 years, the A64 still is a compelling product, it doesnt need a 64 bit killer app, its an excellent 32 bit platform with tons and tons of 32 bit killer apps. but if you want one anyway, windows XP 64 + UT + HL2 ought to qualify.

I won't bother replying to the other post. If you think you just hurt my feelings for pointing out I live in a small country you are mistaken. And if you think that let's you draw any conclusions, that's pretty telling.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

NMDante · Oct 2, 2003

AMD has around 50% of the world home PC market, in some area's over 70%. Thats where.

Where did you get this information? 50% of the world PC market?!? That's huge news, since the last time I saw, AMD had, maybe, 18-20% of the world PC market.

Can you post your source of this information, cause it's news...no, huge news.

How many watts does it take to get the center of CPU core?

Guest · Oct 2, 2003

>Where did you get this information? 50% of the world PC
>market?!? T

 home market. Havent got a link at hand, but if I remember correctly, I read those numbers in AMD's quarterly report. Could be the INQ as well though. From what I remember, around 70% of the home CPU markets in Europe and Asia and about 35% of the home market in the USA. Those numbers are a few years old, so may have changed a bit, but not susbstantially. AMD holds near zero percent of the corporate desktop market, hence the low overall <20% figure.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

Guest · Oct 2, 2003

afterthought.. what was the killer app for MMX that justified twice the price over a similar non MMX pentium 200 cpu ? What about SSE on the first pentium 3 ? yet, did MMX/SSE sell ? Hell yes. Did it eventually become usefull and used, not to say indispencable ? You bet. Think of AMD64 as MMX on steroids, but then for free.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

spud · Oct 2, 2003

Difference between MMX/SSE/SSE2 comparisons is Intel had compilers that did the work. Something AMD is still lacking till the Linux community gets on the ball and drops developer’s good solid compilers. AMD can’t sell the 64bit aspect because they can’t push it without compilers.

Software Development costs are at a all time high. Programmers don’t want to have hand code enhanced code into their already working code. They like a compiler that’s why 90%+ of the software developers out there use some sort of MS Visual Studio or like compilers to fine tune their code.

The costs to add 64bit code to a majority of software out there isn’t necessary since they aren’t chewing at the 4 gig barriers.

AMD64 is 8 additions registers that’s all it is and all it ever will be. Don’t be comparing it to MMX/SSE/SSE2 its not even close to what they do. The technologies aren’t even remotely similar.

-Jeremy
Unoffical Intel PR Spokesman.

:evil:

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=faq&notfound=1&code=1" target="_new">Busting Sh@t Up In My Buddies Face!!!</A> :evil:

Zoron · Oct 2, 2003

From what I remember, around 70% of the home CPU markets in Europe and Asia and about 35% of the home market in the USA. Those numbers are a few years old, so may have changed a bit, but not susbstantially.

This is AMD's problem. There is NO money in the home market for PCs anymore.

AMD holds near zero percent of the corporate desktop market, hence the low overall <20% figure.

This, my friend, is where AMD needs to be. If AMD wants to be successful and viable competition against Intel, they MUST penetrate this market. They won't do it with ads on enthusiast websites or in enthusiast magazines. They won't do it with 'I want to turn my pad into a launching pad'. What they MUST do is emphasize their stability... both as a platform and a company. They have to deliver CPUs in significant quantity and on time. AMD MUST make money to survive. They won't do it in the home / enthusiast segment of the market... they can only make money in the corporate / public sector segment.

 If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it.

eden · Oct 2, 2003

home market. Havent got a link at hand, but if I remember correctly, I read those numbers in AMD's quarterly report. Could be the INQ as well though. From what I remember, around 70% of the home CPU markets in Europe and Asia and about 35% of the home market in the USA. Those numbers are a few years old, so may have changed a bit, but not susbstantially. AMD holds near zero percent of the corporate desktop market, hence the low overall <20% figure.

A few years old is the key expression dude.

Back in the day, the K6 was sold on IBM Aptivas and many others. AMD had big time low-end sales for these processors. Suddenly the killer core came out and their sales dropped. And the best guess was: Higher costing CPU, OR unable to supply the raging OEMs who wanted that excellent chip.

So before you start thinking that market dominance they supposedly have is any significant, it proves nothing, absolutely nothing. For all we know, 50% of these may be K6 CPUs and low-end 600MHZ Tbirds.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol:

eden · Oct 2, 2003

AMD64 is 8 additions registers that’s all it is and all it ever will be. Don’t be comparing it to MMX/SSE/SSE2 its not even close to what they do. The technologies aren’t even remotely similar.

Couldn't have said it better Spud. Touting its 64-bit capabilities is silly at best. No one is using 4GB at home for home use. If anything, we should tout the AMD64 FEATURES, not the 64-bit.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol:

eden · Oct 2, 2003

It doesnt matter when its a perfectly valid 32 bit platform as well. That idea just doesnt doesnt seem to get into your brain. Even if no one needed 64 bit for the next 3 years, the A64 still is a compelling product, it doesnt need a 64 bit killer app, its an excellent 32 bit platform with tons and tons of 32 bit killer apps. but if you want one anyway, windows XP 64 + UT + HL2 ought to qualify.

When will you get it through your THICK skull (yeah I can also use more direct statements just like you), that Omid is not bashing or demeaning AMD's products, but their goals and management?

Spud and so many are right, you divert the topic at hand. Once more an example:

>Where has AMD's strength among enthusiasts translated into
>profit, and mass market acceptance.

AMD has around 50% of the world home PC market, in some area's over 70%. Thats where.

Omid is addressing NOW. Where has AMD's strength among enthusiasts translated into profit RECENTLY, and mass market acceptance?

Come on, answer THAT which you and so many keep sidetracking.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol:

Terracide · Oct 2, 2003

Last i looked AMD had a marketshare of 17,5%(with red figures on the bottomline) and Intel had a 82% markershare(with a 51-54% profitmargain).
Those are facts...

Don't pretend - BE!

eden · Oct 2, 2003

Yup, and thank you for that update!

I could own a P2 350, but I sure as heck won't include that in recent profit margins for Intel's average CPU-per-home ratio to prove it is selling big time!

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol:

papasmurf · Oct 7, 2003

you're all missing the point. This should not be a debate over which company is better, the main complaint I saw here was that the review was biased. Why would you overclock a p4 to 3.6ghz for a review on an amd chip? Do you honestly think intel will release a p4 at 3.6ghz before it starts shipping out it's prescotts? The p4ee is not going to be priced well. It will be made in limited quantities for enthusiasts dumb enough to pay big bucks for a system that will be unable to be upgraded once prescott arrives and the socket dies. The p4ee was a last minute, half assed chip created only to continue the illusion that intel still has the fastest cpu. The truth of the matter is a server cpu is defined as a chip that costs more than all the others and is capable of more things than the desktop version. The desktop versions of all of these chips have been nerfed, the amd64 has a different memory controller than the fx and opteron lines if it's cheaper then it's a desktop chip, the FX is not for the average joe, it's for people who want the best but can't afford server quality. These chips all fit different markets. I wish you could all just see past the fanboy bias's you all have and look at reality I don't know about the rest of you but I want an accurate unbiased look at these products so that I can decide for MYSELF what I want to purchess.

Join the TomsHardware IRC channel <A HREF="http://skulls.sytes.net/tom/ " target="_new">http://skulls.sytes.net/tom/ </A>

eden · Oct 7, 2003

Lovely amount of stuff I can counter:

Why would you overclock a p4 to 3.6ghz for a review on an amd chip?

If you bothered to read pretty much any review's title, you'd get the slightest clue the Pentium 4 EE is included in the title of the match. If that is how Intel chose to attack, then reviewers will have to accomodate and review the best of the best.

The p4ee is not going to be priced well.

So as the Athlon FX.

It will be made in limited quantities for enthusiasts dumb enough to pay big bucks

So as the Athlon FX...

that will be unable to be upgraded once prescott arrives and the socket dies.

...coincidently, once more, so as the Athlon FX!

What's your point? Can you even try to argue without illogical facts? Do you even look at the entire picture? How up to date ARE you on this? You are acting the very same as with the nVidia issue.

The p4ee was a last minute, half assed chip created only to continue the illusion that intel still has the fastest cpu.

Hmm, considering the XP2800+ was never available before months, and was made to show nForce 2's power and not its (really, who was the star that made that big performance rise, the nForce 2 or the XP2800+'s slightly higher clock?), you've got a big mouth here. Not to mention Intel released the 3.06GHZ chip not too long after and reclaimed dominance.

The truth of the matter is a server cpu is defined as a chip that costs more than all the others and is capable of more things than the desktop version.

That's about the only smart thing that was actually THOUGHT out, that I agree with from your post.

the amd64 has a different memory controller than the fx and opteron lin

I never thought I'd see someone confusing an x86 technology pretended as a CPU compared to Opteron and FX.
And IF you meant Athlon64, which you should've tried to, then that proves as well how you don't even think. Prove with a real link that the memory controller isn't the very same.

Seriously, your post is "infested" with flawed arguments and misinformed statements as you always did with the nVidia issue. You have no proof, no basis. So now I am left wondering what will you come up in arguments.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </A> :lol:

slvr_phoenix · Oct 7, 2003

In reply to:
------------------------------------------------------------
the amd64 has a different memory controller than the fx and opteron lin
------------------------------------------------------------
I never thought I'd see someone confusing an x86 technology pretended as a CPU compared to Opteron and FX.
And IF you meant Athlon64, which you should've tried to, then that proves as well how you don't even think. Prove with a real link that the memory controller isn't the very same.

Um, Eden, the Athlon 64 uses only a single-channel memory line and runs off of standard non-registered RAM. The A64 FX on the other hand uses a dual-channel memory line and runs off of registered/ECC RAM only.

As quoted from <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030923/athlon_64-11.html" target="_new">THG's own article</A>:

The "normal" Athlon 64 is based on the new Socket 754, and the Athlon 64 FX has to be plugged into Socket 940. The different pin count of the two Hammer CPUs is due to the fact that the Athlon 64 FX has a dual-channel memory interface as well as three HyperTransport ports. The standard Athlon 64 only has one single-channel memory interface and one HyperTransport port.

Other than that though, you're spot on.

<pre><A HREF="http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20030905" target="_new">People don't understand how hard being a dark god can be. - Hastur</A></pre>

Intel bribing THG? Is it possible?

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Polypheme

Distinguished

Distinguished

Polypheme

Guest

Guest

Distinguished

Guest

Guest

Guest

Guest

Distinguished

Splendid

Champion

Champion

Champion

Distinguished

Champion

Distinguished

Champion

Splendid

Share this page