Is AMD Ever Gonna Make A Great CPU?

[melikepie]

well first off look at this
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/computers/intel-says-future-atom-processors-will-match-amd-phenom-ii-performance-in-2015/6453

well i guess intel is getting better every year but amd is getting worse every year but i really dont know what there gonna do next like they have a great gpu buisness and they have a lot of people helping them by buying a lot of GPUs and i think there great priced and there 7000 series offers tons new things and i think there doing well but while there doing that the CPU stuff is really gonna make them go bankrupt. amd does best at going bankrupt and there spending more and more money on bulldozer when basicly there gonna be spending more money then they are getting and i think some people should get fired. i really think that they hired rats for there marketing or intel workers got hired at amd either way they are probaly gone soon and im wondering i amd will EVER make a cpu that will work as well as intels but if it is as good as ivy bridge... they better be sure thats when ivy bridge is the best intel can offer at that time.

 

[jimmysmitty]

The ring bus actually made its debut in the Nehalem-EX Xeon 6500/7500 CPUs. I do agree though, Nehalem is essentially Core + IMC + HyperThreading, while Sandy Bridge makes a few more tweaks to the underlying microarchitecture.

Either way though Intel is still using the base Core design and I doubt they will change that unless they find something beter.

It goes even farther back than that. Core (as in Core 2) is the Pentium M/Core (Core as in the original "Yonah" Core Duo) P6+ design modified a bit to handle 64-bit operation, beef up FPU power, and the ability to issue a fourth instruction per clock. P6+ is the original Pentium Pro/PII/PIII P6 design changed to add updated SIMD, op fusion, and the P4's QDR FSB. So in essence, Sandy Bridge is a (highly) tweaked Pentium Pro.

As far as going with something entirely new, I wouldn't bet on it. The last three attempts Intel had at that turned out fairly poorly. Itanium sunk. NetBurst flamed out. Atom wasn't intended to be a very powerful chip, but it didn't even hit those targets very well and gets its butt kicked by AMD's Bobcat and isn't even all that much better than far cheaper and cooler-running ARM CPUs. I'd suggest Intel stick with continuing to modify their tried and true P6+++ architecture 😉

I know all about the Core history. Its a good design overall, and I know Intel probably wont move from it. As I said its only if they find another arch that is more efficient/powerful. It could happen but I doubt it anytime soon.

As for Atom, I think it met its goal easily. It was meant to be cheap and low power, and it does that very well. Bobcat may have the IGP advantage but in terms of power, our AMD ITX has a fan while our Intel ITX does not. The AMD ITX uses a standard ATX PSU, the Intel uses a laptop style outer adapter.

Now its being put into smartphones and looks to have about the same power draw overall as ARM based CPUs while providing equal to or better performance (last performance rumor I saw was showing it more powerfull than the Samsung GSII which is one of the top phones currently.

Thats not even with 22nm. I think Atom will do fine.

It is a strange thing though when the clock per clock advantage Nehalem has over C2Q, is bigger than the clock per clock advantage SB holds over Nehalem.

I think the per clock is dependant. Nehalem did have some minor tweaks but it still wasn't a major change arch wise from Core 2. SB however is and performance wise, its actually quite a bit more than some think.

 

[MU_Engineer]

I think the per clock is dependant. Nehalem did have some minor tweaks but it still wasn't a major change arch wise from Core 2. SB however is and performance wise, its actually quite a bit more than some think.

Intel putting the IMC in Nehalem gave a pretty decent bump in performance, despite there being very few changes to Core's microarchitecture. Platform and CPU layout can play a big role in performance too.

 

[de5_Roy]

congrats jimmy, amdfangirl and mu_engineer on making moderator 😍

 

[amuffin]

congrats jimmy, amdfangirl and mu_engineer on making moderator 😍

What amdfangirl is now a mod!!! I want to be a mod... 🙁 BTW did all the community reporters suddenly become moderators? I see that rubix is now a mod.

 

[de5_Roy]

^^ i read it.
you hijacked a done thread and trolled for a long time.

 

[jaguarskx]

@JimmyBean, all you are doing is comparing a single synthetic benchmark (3DMark11) for the various CPUs.

 

[aqe040466]

well first off look at this
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/computers/intel-says-future-atom-processors-will-match-amd-phenom-ii-performance-in-2015/6453

well i guess intel is getting better every year but amd is getting worse every year but i really dont know what there gonna do next like they have a great gpu buisness and they have a lot of people helping them by buying a lot of GPUs and i think there great priced and there 7000 series offers tons new things and i think there doing well but while there doing that the CPU stuff is really gonna make them go bankrupt. amd does best at going bankrupt and there spending more and more money on bulldozer when basicly there gonna be spending more money then they are getting and i think some people should get fired. i really think that they hired rats for there marketing or intel workers got hired at amd either way they are probaly gone soon and im wondering i amd will EVER make a cpu that will work as well as intels but if it is as good as ivy bridge... they better be sure thats when ivy bridge is the best intel can offer at that time.

Well I guest all the best computer engineers around the world are hired by Intel, that is why AMD can't make a great CPU anymore.

 

[de5_Roy]

also, the overclocked fx 4100 of mine had a lower cpu clock speed of the overclocked intel i5 2500k cpu

so like i said..

the fx4100 beat the stock/overclocked intel i5 2500k


what is hard to understand ?

yes the i5 gpu isnt overclocked and that helps a lot,,, what it shows is for an i5 2500k to beat the fx 4100, a higher cpu clockspeed alone wont do it

i have never said when both fx 4100 and intel i5 2500k are pushed to the limits the fx won

but still.. cpu o/c 2500k with stock gpu speed lost to an over clocked fx 4100

why and where is the argument point ?


for what it is, the fx 4100 is awesome

strong is cluelessness with this one. ipc heard he never of.
ahem...
even reviewers who use synthetic benchmard like 3dmark and futuremark don't use it as an absolute measure of performance.
ghz numbers mean nothing.
fx4100 gets defeated by a mere dual core sandy bridge pentium, for gaming.
fx4100 is better for encrypting compared to core i3 and pentium, but one would be better off with an fx8150 or core i7 2600/2600k for all day encrypting workload.
core i5's igpu has nothing with it beating the fx4100. it's just another advantage it has against the 4100.
only one here who understand does not, is you. you're simply another guy who feels threatened by other cpus. you're only defending your purchase, so you have a strong bias towards the fx 4100. 😀
ps: i looked at your config and your vcore is ridiculously high. zambezi lineup is really power inefficient.

 

[a_tractor]

i think amd is good but isnt quite as good as intel at the moment. i think amd radeon graphics are better then nvidia because there technology is better at the moment.

 

[noob2222]

why isn't AMD as good anymore? When I bought this AMD X2 6000+ weren't they the time?

I also use to have an AMD 64 3400+. I think it was one of the best during it's time.

How did Intel become the best?

Intel (illegally) paid vendors not to buy AMD products. This in turn strangled AMD of R&D budget. In the mean time Intel dumped billions into R&D.

Well, the outcome is obvious, BD and AMD Fusion APUs got delayed 3-5 years. Time can never be regained, the damage done is permanent. Yes, they settled out of court, doesn't change anything, doens't get AMD back into the game because there was no time given back, only some money.

 

[zyzz]

Intel (illegally) paid vendors not to buy AMD products. This in turn strangled AMD of R&D budget. In the mean time Intel dumped billions into R&D.

Well, the outcome is obvious, BD and AMD Fusion APUs got delayed 3-5 years. Time can never be regained, the damage done is permanent. Yes, they settled out of court, doesn't change anything, doens't get AMD back into the game because there was no time given back, only some money.

wow talk about doing anything to get the edge

 

[Shenaya]

The latest Micro Devices new trinity chip does not transfer the performance trifecta important to threaten Intel’s market leading position, as most initial estimations describes...
Read Full Article Here,
http://www.geekscover.com/2012/05/amd-intelwho-wins-race-chip/

 

[Shenaya]

The latest Micro Devices new trinity chip does not transfer the performance trifecta important to threaten Intel’s market leading position, as most initial estimations describes...
Read Full Article Here,
http://www.geekscover.com/2012/05/amd-intelwho-wins-race-chip/

 

[dedekind]

Interesting thread

I changed from my 486 to a 75 Mhz K5 (without really knowing what AMD was) and I really liked it. My next upgrade was to a 400 Mhz K6-II, which I managed to overclock to 450 Mhz (messing with the motherboard.. back then there was no BIOS stuff).

Then I upgraded to an Athlon XP 2000+, which was just great at that time. Much better than Intel CPUs.. after that I left the desktop world for laptops, one of them having a Turion 64x2 CPU, which wasn't bad.

Now I'm back to the desktop business with a high-end computer, and it's an Intel CPU. It must be because I really have high-end needs, and AMD doesn't really fulfill them, unless the price was exceptionally low.

Anyway, the bottom of the line is that AMD could make a "great CPU" (meaning something that at least will compete with Intel on the high-end market) anytime in the following few years.. things change all the time and you can't predict that AMD is not going to catch up. I remember people saying similar stuff when I got the K5, that AMD is worse and cannot compete with Intel. Then Athlon came..

I guess that's what the OP means in the thread about "great cpu". If you broaden your point of view, then "great" could mean what AMD is actually planning to do (and starting already): aim for the mass market of low to mid-range computers with great CPUs that do what they need to do at the correct price. If you add to that the HSA plans then AMD will be in a very good position in the forthcoming years I guess.

 

[beethree]

so I was going to post something else but a remark on AMD having next gen consoles really hit my brain.

Think about this. The last console generation (PS2, Gamecube, Xbox) everyone counted Nintendo out of the game. They said PS3 was going to be the king of the consoles and or Xbox 360, because their hardware was far more advanced.

The Wii came out and changed how consoles were played with, a system that didn't fight for the top spot in power, but went in a different direction, mainstream.

I think with AMD APU's they have a chance not to fight for the top spot in CPU power, but right where MOST people want them to be. In their laptops or cheaper desktops giving them the right balance of CPU and GPU performance to make their overall experience enjoyable.

That has a bright future for AMD and I think Trinity is going to make it even better.

 

[Faye_Kane_girl_brain]

Theres laws and rules in place about monopolies so its in Intels interest to not actually utterly destroy AMD.

'Fraid it don't work that way, ray. Before I wised up, dropped out, and slacked off, I was a programmer for DOJ antitrust in the Microsoft case. Contrary to popular belief, the antitrust laws do NOT prevent monopolies. They prevent a monopoly company from leveraging that to prevent new competition. Example: MS can screw windows users over as much as they want (it's legal), but they strongarmed OEMs by telling them that if they sold a Linux PC, they had to buy a copy of windows for it anyway, or they'd raise the price of windows for that OEM (illegal).

Reminds you of the Mafia?

Also illegal: paying websites not to support netscape, rigging your media player so it will play all music formats except Apple's, and forcing windows users to run IE by denying the API to other browser manufacturers (which they're trying to again now that their probation for being an evil monopolist has expired).

Basically, you can do anything you want if you're a computer monopoly, including charging obscene prices and hurting people because you're evil. But you can only do things that make YOUR product better, you can't take actions that suppress someone else's product.

Surprisingly, unless they're being bribed by a monopoly, republican lawmakers generally support antitrust laws, because those laws don't protect individual people, they protect other businesses. When a law only benefits the citizens at the expense of evil corporations, they will oppose it every time. That's why you can't do your taxes by filling a form on the IRS web site, and you can't file electronically yourself—you have to do it at some business' web site, even though that's worse for the citizens.

HP includes a chip in their ink cartridges that kills the cartridge after a fixed number of prints even if there's plenty of ink in it, to force you to buy another one when you don't actually need it yet. And they won't let anyone else produce those chips. As ugly as that is, crippling their own cartridges is legal because it only hurts people who buy an HP printer. But they CAN'T make the printer accept only HP cartridges because that hurts competition (i.e., other businesses).

The government will let AMD die as long as Intel doesn't strangle it in its hospital bed.

-- faye kane homeless brain

 

[Faye_Kane_girl_brain]

Oh amd did make a good CPU FYI, it's called the Athlon.

Yes, the 7750 was truly amazing. But what's the matter with the chip I got after that, the 6-core Phenom II 1100 black ed? It's fast as all-to-be-damned. I can O/C it almost (but not quite) to 4 GHz with a modified window air conditioner as the CPU cooler.

Is it the price of AMD chips? They're cheaper! And I don't care about price as long as the chip is worth the price. Intel is WAAAY overpriced, at least when I bought the Phenom.

Sure, intel owns the high-end 16-core server CPUS, but I don't want one of those.

Whaddya got against the phenom II?

Whatever it is, I'm sure it's legitimate. I just can't imagine what you don't like about it.

-faye

 

[nekulturny]

I am elaborating on people saying "without amd, intel processors will jump from a $200 dollar cpu to a $500 dollar cpu"

I think you're very young and while clearly a very intelligent young man, you have much to understand about how the real world works.

Corporations are not human beings with morals and a sense of ethics, they are a cold, calculating primal animal who will do anything they can get away with to serve their own purpose, they will feed on their own offspring if it suits them. Intel has already displayed a willingness to cross the legal line, and they have FTC and European Union fines for antitrust practices to prove it.

As far as laws in place to prevent monopolies, this assumes we live in a perfect world with no special interest group lobbyists and a world where congressmen are not for sale.

 

[nekulturny]

Whaddya got against the phenom II?

-faye

Being the owner of both a Phenom II rig and a more expensive i5-2400, absolutely nothing. Contrary to popular beliefs there are no fancy magic tricks the i5 can do that the Phenom II can't do, it doesn't walk on water, cure cancer or even solve world hunger.

 

[wr6133]

The question of this thread is flawed anyway AMD still make great processors for people building cheap boxes for home/htpc use or light office use...... this is the MORE PROFITABLE route for them high performance make a very small segment of the total market and a segment that costs a vast amount in R&D then if your high performance CPU isn't as good as the competition it will flop amongst the small group that would have paid top whack for it. Making cheap and cheerful (llano) aimed at the larger bulk of the market just makes better sense if your a smaller company dwarfed by a giant with R&D budgets that you can only dream of. It may be nice for us in terms of price if AMD could compete with the highest Intel offerings but it wouldn't be so nice for AMD especially as I doubt they could maintain a price war with Intel were that to happen.

 

[skitz9417]

amd is cheap than intel and also crap to oc well the old one but i think the amd phemon II x4 cpu are good

 

[Reynod]

This topic has been closed by REYNOD