Intel users - all ignorant and uninformed!

[Red_Pepper]

let us drop this.

fair enough. I'm done with it as of...
...now.

But I mean really- what the heck else do we have to talk about? The Northwood is here, the Tbred not. There are no major wars to fight in the CPU section . Until AMD releases some new stuff for MeltDown to bash, it could be boring around here. (thus all of the politics talk)


Mmmm... Red Hot

 

[Matisaro]

sometimes they want a quiet system that won't be hot enough to fry an egg on (it's been done), or they live in korea and are tired of being screwed over.

Lol, willamette was hotter than the axp.
and the only people getting screwed in korea was amd.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[rcj187]

i think wat kristijan is trying to say is that both amd AND intel users can be ignorant and misinformed at times. one is no better than the other. an intel user calling an amd user ignorant is himself ignorant and vice versa.therefore this thread is pointless.

how do you set a laser printer to stun?

 

[lhgpoobaa]

religious talk huh?

my imaginary friend is better than yours!!!


You're an embarrisment to nature you know that?

 

[buddry]

He may be doing that, and it is probably true. But is there any need for this to be pointed out? All it looks like is an AMD fan just taking a shot at intel. Can't we just get along instead of resorting to flaming threads like this.

Whatcha gonna do when the trolls run wild on you?!?!?!

 

[buddry]

We already know that when they are compared that AMD has more bang per buck. If money is no object, why not go with intel? The high end chips are basically for the really uniformed, people with a lot of money, or people that need a lot for computing power. The only bad part is the uniformed if you have a slick salesmen trying to tell somebody that they need the newest when they can't really afford it, but get talked into it.

Whatcha gonna do when the trolls run wild on you?!?!?!

 

[rcj187]

it would be nice if we could all just get along but it doesnt seem to work like that. mainly because neither side will admit that the other has a decent product. both are as bad as the other (or as good as the other :tongue: ). i personally prefer amd and i dont like the way intel operates sometimes but they do have a good cpu! just not as good as amd's j/k


how do you set a laser printer to stun?

 

[bdaley]

Damn, I run Intel and AMD, so I guess I'm double-ignorant, uneducated and uninformed.

I'd better go get a VIA processor.

"There's no such thing as gravity, the Earth just sucks."

 

[Kemche]

No, I don't think intel system runs hotter. If it was running hotter then how come mfgr are using the P4 desktop processors in laptops. Can you say that about Athlons, I don't think they can be used in laptops.

KG

<b>"Hey! It compiles! Ship it!"</b>

 

[FatBurger]

Athlon 4 laptops even came out before P4 laptops (which only just arrived).

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft

 

[Matisaro]

No, I don't think intel system runs hotter. If it was running hotter then how come mfgr are using the P4 desktop processors in laptops. Can you say that about Athlons, I don't think they can be used in laptops.

The willamette was hotter, and there are moble athlons, ever hear of the athlon 4, 1600+ is the fastest mobile speed.

The northwood is cooler, but when the tbred comes out it should return to baseline.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[eden]

Would that mean that Tbred is going to be cooler per clock than Northwood, if the relativity was that Willy was hotter than Tbird and Palomino?

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!

 

[Matisaro]

If the willamette was copper and not aluminum, I would say yes, but since as I have said, the northwood shrunk the process AND went to copper, most comparisons would go out the window.


There is a good chance that the tbred will be cooler per performance than the northwood yes.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[eden]

So then where are the limits or the factors that would make OCing a Tbred much less effective? I know Fugger spews FUD out and lies, but still how can we know of its overclockability?

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!

 

[Guest]

So then where are the limits or the factors that would make OCing a Tbred much less effective?

Well, I don't know if you remember Intel engineers to an Athlon XP apart and examined it under a microscope. They found that the core was using below 0.18 micron at places. This suggests that maybe AMD had to shrink the core at strategic places in order to make it clock higher than the old Thunderbird. Of course, now when they are moving to 0.13 micron technology, they same "below 0.18 micron" places has to be made with "below 0.13 micron" in order to "fit" with the rest of the core.

Now, I'm just wild guessing and trying to figure out why they used below 0.18 micron at various places in the core for the Athlon XP.

Certainly it could explain the delay (it's difficult to make "below 0.13 micron" with todays technology) and also reported problems with overclocking.

/Copenhagen

 

[Kemche]

I Know there are Mobile Athlons and there are also Mobile P4. I was talking about putting the Desktop Processor in the Mobile plateform. And I don't think you can put the Desktop Athlon in Mobile platform. Thats not the case for P4 northwood. Please report the fact.

KG

<b>"Hey! It compiles! Ship it!"</b>

 

[FatBurger]

That doesn't necessarily mean that they're using "below .13 micron" in the Thoroughbred. Thunderbird was all .18 micron, there's no reason it can't be done.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft

 

[FatBurger]

So you're saying that the desktop and mobile P4s are the same chip? It's not. Different packaging and sleep modes are the only big differences, but that's the same differences the Athlon 4 has. A quick trip to Intel.com and AMD.com verified that, except for the Athlon 4's packaging, which I was unable to be sure about, although it appeared to be a normal socket A.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft

 

[Guest]

Thunderbird was all .18 micron, there's no reason it can't be done.

Yes, Thunderbird was all .18 micron, and that was able to take it to 1400MHz, at which speed it was hot like hell. The Athlon XP got copper interconnects, i believe, and also these "below 0.18 micron" gate designs at various places, according to Intel. The Athlon architecture was never designed for really high speed in the same way as the P4, and I think that AMD was foorced to implement "below 0.18 micron" in order to push it further than 1400MHz.

/Copenhagen

 

[RaPTuRe]

Anyone also notice that AMDMeltDown tends to shutup when he's out numbered. Wat, is he like a 12-year old?

"The answer to life's problems aren't at the bottom of a beer bottle, they're on TV."

 

[Kemche]

I know Mobile P4 and Desktop P4 chips are not the same. Let me re-start. We have different cpu for mobile and different cpu desktop. Their core design is same. They mostly differ in packaging and implementation of power requirement. You made a point in the previous post that Intel processor produces more heat then AMD processors. I just wanted to correct that because it's not true anymore. If P4 are producing more heat then Athlons then I don't think vendor would put the same desktop chip in the mobile platform. There are laptops available from different vendors which uses desktop P4 cpu instead of mobile P4 cpu. So what I was trying to make a point is that if it was producing more heat then Athlon then Why don't we see Athlon desktop processor in mobile?

KG

<b>"Hey! It compiles! Ship it!"</b>

 

[FatBurger]

I say it produces more heat because mine does, not because I'm guessing at why manufacturers do what they do.

BTW, which OEMs use the desktop version? That would chew through batteries like there's no tomorrow.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by FatBurger on 04/11/02 03:00 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[eden]

The Athlon architecture was never designed for really high speed in the same way as the P4,

Well that was pretty obvious, the same could be said for the PIII too. P4 is a new architecture, much different, so we can't compare high speed attainement for both. However the Hammer might have better speed ramping thanks to SOI, IHS, 0.13m and 12 Stage pipeline.
About that Intel research on AMD's gate lenghs, personally, if AMD was able to use 0.13m technology so early on, then I would congratulate them on such good refinement and well researched. It got the Athlon core more than it wanted at 0.18m!

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!

 

[Matisaro]

Well, I don't know if you remember Intel engineers to an Athlon XP apart and examined it under a microscope. They found that the core was using below 0.18 micron at places. This suggests that maybe AMD had to shrink the core at strategic places in order to make it clock higher than the old Thunderbird. Of course, now when they are moving to 0.13 micron technology, they same "below 0.18 micron" places has to be made with "below 0.13 micron" in order to "fit" with the rest of the core.

The gatelengths were .13 class which are not a direct result of small process size, intel was basically spouting fud. If the smaller gatelengths of the axp have any effect on the max clock of the tbred it will be minimal.


My 40-55% guess was based on the p3>tuallitin shrink which comes the closest to the axp>tbred shrink in pure change./


The top speed of the p3 .18 was 1.1ghz, the top speed of the tually is around 1.6-1.7ghz, there is no physical reason this would be different for the axp>tbred.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[Matisaro]

The Athlon XP got copper interconnects, i believe, and also these "below 0.18 micron" gate designs at various places, according to Intel.

The gate lengths were smaller, this is sign of a refined process, NOT a direct relation to process size, also the tbird had copper ics already.

The Athlon architecture was never designed for really high speed in the same way as the P4, and I think that AMD was foorced to implement "below 0.18 micron" in order to push it further than 1400MHz.

Raystonn said himself the p3 was designed to top out at 1ghz, and now the tually can reaCH 1.6GHZ, we dont even know what speed the axp was designed to run, but I guarentee you it is not near the limits of its design by a longshot. The p4's intrinsic advantage has already been accounted for in the fact that while it gains 655-65% top speed, it is gaining it from 2.2ghz putting them roughly at 3.5ghz+, whil;e a 55% gain on the axp will put it around 2.4ghz or so, probably more, which is much slower in pure clock than the p4.



The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark