P4 Forum

[dhlucke]

This is the most interesting thread....people are really struting their stuff. Might as well be a cock fight.

I'm not going to get into who stole from who since we all know that espionage is a large part of the computer business. We can go back to the begining or xerox or whatever, and it's all espionage and thievery.

What interests me though is the release of products so early just to get the name out. Obviously we're talking about the 1.13Ghz, but the new P4 is a processor cut off at the ancles. And then of course we have VIA... And now I worry about getting a good DDR motherboard. Sure the innovation and competition is making everyone run for their money, but to what cost? The public is taking a beating with really bad products that should be awesome. I only hope that the next generation of processors will hit the market fully functional. At least with VIA, a bios update can fix the problem, but this new P4 really shouldn't be on the shelves. Why sell a product that is really only half of what it should be?

It's all about marketing. Every other commercial is the blue man team telling us what to buy...

"I think I brained my damage"

 

[jlbigguy]

Still ranting....

But at least we have a new term to use:

Fabricated Fugger Facts (or FFF for short).

Here are your words:

"AMD is not 100% compatable. is that hard to understand. AMD cannot put 100% compatable on anything due to the fact that its not and never will be.

its not just me saying that, its a fact."

Another fact from the heart, not from logic, not from any article, from your mouth to Gods. Fabricated Fugger Facts. I love it!

As far as AMD being a copy of Intel, so what? Knock offs always improve upon the original, either by being better or by causing the competition to improve. We would not have the chips today from Intel if not for AMD.

Ford was the originator of the modern car. Chevy, Olds, Pontiac, Toyota, and all other brands of cars are copies. Do we only buy Fords? Of course not. Some of the copies are better then Fords, some are not. Why are there different brands of major products (television, radio, CD players and so on)? Someone took someones elses idea and improved upon it. Computers are not different. As for Intel being the originator, they copied a simple idea and improved upon it as well. The mechanical adding machine. The first CPU chips were not much more then glorified adding machines (faster of course then the mechanical ones), and have evolved into the modern CPU chips of today, which are still not much more then very fast programmable adding machines.

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Hey, I have no problems with clones. Heck, I used to own a Tandy.

And I don't even have a problem with AMD. I like them ... at least I will if they put thermal protection into their CPUs. I used to have a lot more complaints against AMD, but they're FINALLY doing things right. (Like making their own chipsets again, and like supposedly working on making multiple AMD chip systems a reality.)

Compared to the P3, AMD makes faster chips with better FPUs.

But I look towards the future more than I look at the present. And that's one area where AMD just doesn't impress me. They only copy other people. They don't work with other people to expand the possabilities of a computer. They just fight against Intel to make the faster chip. While that's nice because it lowers prices, it's useless for any future PCs.

Meanwhile Intel works with other companies and experiments with technologies. Sometimes their experiements aren't successful in themselves. But each time they try, they always come away with something that is usable out of their efforts that can be used in future PCs.

Intel drives the future. AMD drives the present. It's really that simple.

And for anyone who thinks that patents in-and-of-themselves are a measurement of innovation, think again. You can't patent a concept, only the means of achiving that concept. Say I want a blue dot on my screen. I can't patent putting blue dots on a screen. I can only patent my METHOD of putting that blue dot on a screen. But there are nearly an infinite number of methods that can be used to achive any end. So patents don't prove that someone is doing anything original. More often than anything else, they only prove that someone is finding new means to accomplish the same thing that someone else has already accomplished.

What shows innovation is when you come out with something that no one else has come out with yet. AMD has yet to do anything innovative. All that they have done is take other people's innovations and put them together in a nice package.

Which indeed makes AMD chips good products.

But it won't be AMD that solves any problems or paves the way into the future with new concepts. If you want those new concepts, you have to go with someone else. If you want to wait to use old concepts that have been improved upon, then AMD is your company.

Both ways have their advantages. As going with either AMD or Intel has it's own set of advantages ... and disadvantages. I just find Intel to be a lot more interesting and know that their products will be the first to use new concepts.

To me, it's worth the price to have the most interesting product. To others, it may not be worth the price. Such are the joys of individuality.

- Sanity is purely based on point-of-view.

 

[Lucol]

Dude, before you make statements like that one about AMD's simulator, maybe read up on processor design and arquitecture a bit, you'll see what I'm talking about.
It's a necesity man, everyone has to do it, even Intel, DEC, MIPS, Motorola, IBM, you name it, they make a simulator before they actually even produce the processor, or even make a prototype.
I will agree though on one thing, I don't understand why the hell they don't make their own simulator. They designed the processor, they should know enough about it to make a simulator, but I guess software is most definitely not their strong point...and don't get me started on them not making a compiler, that just really pisses me off.

 

[jlbigguy]

Very well said, and I agree. However..

"Intel drives the future. AMD drives the present. It's really that simple."

I hope that this statement does not turn out to be true. When one company leads into the future, the future is defined by that company alone. This results in "tunnel vision", which does not necessarily result in the best product for the consumer. The best future is defined by multiple companies competing for the market, resulting in innovation as each tries to out do the other. To drive the future, Intel needs competition. Not only from AMD. I hope the Samuel II from VIA turns out to be a better chip then expected. It would help to shape that future.

 

[HolyGrenade]

Is the hammer series also supposed to be a clone?

"There is no time like the present"

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Oh, I agree. I'd prefer it not to be true. But at least for the present it is.

AMD just isn't driving the future of technology.

Intel is. But it's not always Intel alone. A lot of times they work with other companies to perfect an idea or technology. So it's not just one company alone driving the future. It's just driven mostly under the name Intel.

And I have absolutely no expectations from VIA. They've thoroughly proven that they don't even belong in the hardware business. They make horrible bugs, blame it on other companies and other products, and then quietly fix them, hoping that no one notices that it was their fault after all. And they take years to finally produce mature products.

I definately won't count on VIA for squat.

I would however like to see mayne NVIDIA join the fray or even merge with AMD. NVIDIA at least knows how to do R&D and drive the future of things. They should make CPUs, or at least motherboards and mobo chipsets. Then we'd see a world of change in PCs. And all for the better.

- Sanity is purely based on point-of-view.

 

[tfbww]

I have a little trouble with this statement...

Intel drives the future. AMD drives the present. It's really that simple.

What does that mean? Without getting too metaphysical, if Intel "drove the future" in the past but AMD drives the present, then I am quite fine w/ Intel acting as AMD's R&D arm. I don't give a rats ass who thought of something, I care about who implemented it best. Kind of along the car lines: Ford may have been the thinkers behind the modern auto but I would much rather own a BMW, Audi, or Toyota because they are much better. (The difference btwn the two analogies is that what is better is actually cheaper when it comes to chips.)

I find it ironic that people would side w/ Intel simply because they thought of some idea (or influenced the market a la SSE) rather than who does a better job of implementing. If AMD can copy from now until eternity but do it better, faster, and cheaper then Intel will be in serious trouble.

-------------------------------------
Nature abhors a moron. -- HL Mencken

 

[Sojourn]

Intel makes back-room agreements and abuses its market leadership to force it on the consumer. How is this a good thing? And what's this crap about AMD not working with other companies? Do their chipsets just appear in a puff of smoke? Has their work with Tramseta been a media hoax?

Name one truely "new" invention from Intel. The IC? Nope, sorry. The "computer" then! Oh wait, nope, they didn't quite get there first. Fabrication processes? Eep, not that either. So what is this completely new innovation that came from the labs of Intel? I'd really like to know. Everything in the computing industry today is merely an improvment on previous designs.

As far as the future is concerned, I find the AMD Hammer MUCH more interesting than anything coming from Intel. It has had dual-CPU emulation since the beginning, which is why it will perform well in 32bit applications. It has expanded on what it has learned from its double-pumped Athlon FSB, which was in the market long before Intel produced its quad pumped P4. It also looks like it will be delivered, unlike the last score of Intel products. Intel has a pretty big lead in both time and money on 64bit processors, but their first attempt was a complete failure. They are now working on someone else's design to get a working product to market.

/Athlon-1.2GHz@1370MHz(137MHz*10)/Asus_A7V133/

 

[Guest]

Here's my analysis of a recent conversation I had at a show.

Intel Rep: Look, here's a Pentium 4 with NetBurst.
Intel Rep: ...and a 400MHz processor bus.
Me: No, actually 100 Quad Pumped. BTW, that's only a third faster than 266.
Intel Rep: Oh, they didn't tell me that.
Me: No, they didn't tell the chip designers either.
Intel Rep: But it has a superior archatecture!
Me: Superior to what? The Empire State? The C64?
Intel Rep: No, superior to our previous chips.
Me: So it's pretty lame then.
Intel Rep: It comes with RAMBUS!
Me: Yeah that's what I said, it's pretty lame.

... and so on.

Oh yeah:

No one knows the difference between your and you're

"Look they're!, there dog is on you're lawn again, its messing up the flowers over their. Are roses our being damaged. Lets call a exterminator."

Please obey the rules of grammer. They're there for a reason. Where I come from we understand our own language.

(\/ additional signature added for posterity \/)

~ Please leave your Celerons at the door, this is an Intel free building. ~


~ I'm not AMD biased, I just think their chips are better ~

 

[slvr_phoenix]

tfbww, I don't argue with the concept. That's why if I had to build a system right this second, I'd use an AMD chip.

But here are the differences:
AMD won't come out with anything that can properly compete against the P4 until the Northwood has been out for a while. (And possibly AMD will never compete with it.)

And, if Intel were to cease to exist, AMD would no longer have anything to do but further improve on their own designs. I'd doubt that they would ever do anything original ... at least not for a few years.

----------

Sojourn, you're so anti-Intel, it's funny. You don't think AMD doens't try to force things on consumers? What about their "Hyper Transport" bus to replace PCI? Hmm? Just because it might be usefull it's okay to force it then? Your logic is flawed.

Face it. The goal of any company is to make money. AMD and Intel are both blatantly guilty of it. And there is NOTHING wrong with that, at least to me, because that's the only point of a business in the first place.

The 'back-room agreements' that Intel has done were for Intel's benefit. And when Intel benefits, we benefit. We may not have appreciated how they practically forced RDRAM on their P3 users. But then they DID offer SDRAM support. AND, I might add, AMD didn't offer DDR SDRAM support for the longest time either and they didn't even give their users the benefit of their own AMD chipset. Instead they forced their customers to use the faulty VIA chipsets. Yeah, I love AMD for that. Ha.

And now, Intel IS trying to convince other chipset makers to support Intel CPUs with DDR SDRAM because they know that their hands are tied to Rambus and they WANT the consumers to have DDR SDRAM. And you can't deny that the P4 architecture definately benefits from RDRAM more than it would from DDR SDRAM. Unless, of course, the DDR SDRAM happens to be the exact same FSB frequency as the CPU.

Yes, AMD works with other companies. But unlike Intel, they do it because they lack the competancy to do the work themselves. Where as Intel does it to expand the future of computers and give other companies credit where it is due instead of just stealing it from them.

And Intel HAS come up with several improvements implemented into the P4. Their branch prediction methods are completely new. The longer pipeline is something most people call crazy, yet it serves a purpose. SSE2 is, of course, useful. The P4 utilizes memory bandwidth a lot more efficiently than any previous chip. Need I go on?

Personally, I find the AMD Hammer a little scary. It reminds me a LOT of Sega. Remember way back in the days when Sega had their little 8-bit system, just like Nintendo had? Nintendo came out with a true 16-bit system, the SNES. Meanwhile Sega just strapped two 8-bit processors together for their Genesis and called it a 16-bit system. Then they went so far as to strap four 8-bit processors together for their 32X. And everyone laughed at Sega because they were being stupid. The Genesis wasn't a TRUE 16-bit system. The 32X wasn't a TRUE 32-bit system. Sega became the laughing-stock of the console business. Their consoles could run 8-bit code extremely fast, but they their 16-bit and 32-bit performance was horrible.

AMD's Hammers are sounding a lot like that. And if they are, then AMD is about to become the laughing-stock of the PC business. For everyone's sake I really hope that AMD's Hammer chips are true 64-bit chips. Otherwise they'll suck compared to a true 64-bit chip.

I like AMD. I just want them to become more than they are. And until they do, Intel seems the smarter bet for the future of PCs.

But for a current system, I'll go with AMD. ... Until Northwood comes out.

- Sanity is purely based on point-of-view.

 

[FUGGER]

Intel works on future technologies

AMD works on todays technology making it better.

Hammer line is rumored to be SMP on a chip 2x 32 bit.
http://www.amd.com/products/cpg/64bit/pdf/x86-64_overview.pdf

Notice how all software has to be recompiled, notice 32 bit operand ONLY, notice 32bit Dword.

Read more on compatability mode vs legacy mode. calling it compatability mode sure makes me feel warm and secure about software I might want to run on it. maybe the recompile is giving me mixed feelings. or is it the SMP on a chip 2x 32bit != 64bit. zero extending 32 bit address code to run in compatability mode 64bit...

Sure todays SMP machines run x86 software better than non SMP machines, duh.

Alot in that AMD .pdf file not spelled out for you guys to completely understand. I like the use of "compatability mode" as in 64 bit compatable. woohoo

Why didnt they make a true 64 bit chip. instead of making x86-64 hybrid? SMP works and I give credit to AMD for coining the term double pumped to fool market into thinking true FSB Mhz was actually 200Mhz when it was 100Mhz.

Sojourn, SSE2, now STFU. thanks. try visiting www.intel.com and notice hundreds of products they make. GG

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Doesn't it just scare you to think that the Hammer might be a dual 32-bit system instead of a true 64-bit system? God, how much that would suck for running 64-bit software... Hell, if I want to 32-bit processors, I'll buy two 32-bit processors. Heh heh heh.

If this turns out to be true, I'll be laughing at AMD for years and years to come. I might even have to be sedated just to stop laughing.

- Sanity is purely based on point-of-view.

 

[tfbww]

Well, Sega sold GOBS of Genesis consoles (I've owned 2 myself having just bought a used one for $10). I don't think they were much of a laughing stock so much as an ENORMOUS threat to Nintendo. In fact, Genesis is one of the best consoles ever (as compared to its competition). The 32x WAS a joke though.

Your argument that AMD can't compete w/ the "P4 until the Northwood has been out for a while" is kind of misleading. First of all, AMD kix the P4's butt right now (except for my gripe session in another thread). Second, the P4 will only *become* competitive once the Northwoods come out. Given my most recent AMD experience and similar problems from Intel w/ the P3, I don't "believe in" a processor until its been in consumers hands for a couple months. So, first, Intel must regain its competitiveness in order for AMD to have to be challenged to then catch up (as my old Lotus 123 would put it: Circ Ref Err).

Your last point to me is also a non-sequitor. Intel is not going out of business anytime remotely soon. If that were something to seriously consider, then MAYBE I'd be worried. Even then, however, AMD could simply hire the Intel engrs.

-------------------------------------
Nature abhors a moron. -- HL Mencken

 

[jlbigguy]

HolyGrenade,

There is no telling what Hammer will be until it is released and tested. I personally hope it will be all AMD says and more (only because I just bought AMD stock while it is low). However, for all of the hype of speed and new features of "Willamette", the P4 resulted. Not quite what the last 2 years of speculation was about. The promise of high clock speed was achieved, but not performance.

Now others will argue that when the new optimized software for the P4 comes out, the P4 will scream. That may be, but by the time that comes about, we will all be upgrading to then next generation of chips. How many of us (hobbyists) keep a cpu for more then 2 years?

Thanks to the competition from AMD, we can afford to upgrade our systems frequently. How many of us could really afford to buy a new Intel cpu on a yearly basis 4 years ago? Whether you like AMD or Intel, you have to admit that the competition between them is the best thing to happen to the consumer.

 

[jlbigguy]

The next generation (Hammer?) of AMD chips is supposed to have the same level of thermal protection as Intel chips.

What will the "others" complain about then? All that will be left is VIA, which they should be complaining about now!

 

[jlbigguy]

Verteron,

"Look they're!, there dog is on you're lawn again, its messing up the flowers over their. Are roses our being damaged. Lets call a exterminator."

Great Stuff!

Unfortunately, here in the United States, one can graduate High School without acquiring any knowledge at all. We take our problem students and push them through graduation so we don't have to deal with them. A pity, as you can see by the evidence.

 

[ksoth]

Are you sure with your Genesis analogy? Cuz, I think you are wrong. I mean, AMD Hammer will be able to process 64 bit code. Now, did Genesis actually process 16 bit code, or was it just a dual 8-bit system (like a dual Pentium) that processed 8-bit much faster, but only called 16-bit for advertising sake? It is true though, that Genesis was an awesome system for its time, and I think much better than Super NES (besides Nintendoes 256 color and Genesis stuck with crap 64 colors). If that were the case with Genesis, in terms of what code it processed, the Clawhammer really can't be compared with it. I'm not scared at all, because I won't be using a 64 bit system when it comes out. I only care about 32 bit performance, which should rock. Anyways, the Hammer and Clawhammer are different chips. The clawhammer is basically 2 hammer chips on the same die working as the same. To me, that seems much different than what Sega did with genesis.

All you people getting your panties in a bunch over this are pretty silly. I think AMD processers are better because of their price/performance ratio. It just totally blows Intel away. You're talking about AMD not having any innovations... What about 3DNOW!? I'm not an expert but isn't that an AMD specific feature? Also, what about their new Lightning Data Transfer thing... They are working with Transmeta with that, but they came up with it. Seems like a good, unique innovation to me from what I've read about it.

The fact remains that Athlons are better processers than Pentium III, and even the current Pentium 4. You know an Athlon 1.5 gHz will smack around a P4 1.5 gHz. Now, the one person said you can't give credit to AMD for making Athlons better than PIII because they came out later. Now, Intel came out with P4 MUCH later than Athlon, and it is a far inferior product than what AMD has to offer. The next generation P4 isn't that much better than the current ones, correct? Now, when the .13 micron Athlons come out (Thouroughbred and Appalossa), they will also probably kick the crap out of Northwood P4, especially with DDR solutions coming out. No reason why they shouldn't, as they will have SSE2 support as well as other improvements.

Intel also is very good. But, you have to realize that Intel is the 800 lb gorilla in the industry, and AMD doesn't have the billions upon billions of dollars in R&D funds that Intel has to create such different processers like the P4. I damn well bet that if AMD had the R&D budget as Intel, AMD would be even more superior than Intel.

I think Intel has done some pretty crappy things in the past, both intentional and non intentional. The 820 debacle, the OG pentium (had that bug that caused incorrect computations of large numbers or something), 1.13 PIII, P4 in general, RDRAM is all pretty sad. I don't see AMD doing this sort of thing. Of course the 760 chipset isn't what it was hyped up to be, but it's just delayed and not really faulty like Intels.

The only beef I have with AMD is their lack of chipsets. I mean, Intel has over 10 to choose from (including third party solutions), which AMD pretty much only has 3 or 4 right now (VIA KT133(A), 750, SiS 730). But, that will all change and is changing with their current efforts.

So, I say don't resort to childish name calling and boo-hooin, so be civilized, please.

 

[Guest]

Sega just strapped two 8-bit processors together for their Genesis and called it a 16-bit system... AMD's Hammers are sounding a lot like that.

What the heck are you talking about? AMD Hammer will be two chips in one package (the SledgeHammer anyway, but not the ClawHammer I believe), but one chip will be 64-bit and one 32-bit. So by your logic, AMD will produce a 96-bit chip.

Obviously (and I'm talking to you all, not just to slvr_phoenix) you people have read nothing about the new AMD chips, and the fact that AMD will be the manufacturer to push 64-bit and x86-64 in the consumer market, not the server market, while maintaining faster-than-athlon 32-bit performance. What could be better?

I'd like to see the Itanium Emulator running 32-bit code at any speed. The latest CERN benchmarks (that's the European particle lab which invented the world wide web for you Americans) show that the first 733MHz Itanium is much slower than a 800MHz PIII Xeon, on code performing the same task but specifically compiled for the two archatectures (so no emulation or code morphing involved). Yes I know they can address huge amounts of memory, but with performance like that, coupled with the expected cost, who will care? (I should know, my company runs web servers...)

In addition, everyone thinks that the G4 is 128-bit. Nope. It's a 32-bit chip with a '128-bit rapid execution engine' which requires some compiled code support. Now everybody knows that the G4 is faster than any Intel chip at a similar clock speed, so the Hammer looks very promising indeed... Certainly sounds like innovation on AMD's part (according to most of you they have none).

Sure, the P4 may be a faster chip, but once the 760MP arrives, I can probably buy two AMD chips for the price of your P4. The P4 seems to shine in encoding, etc, which are all helped by two processors. I'd like to see your P4 1.5GHz beat two Athlons at 1.0GHz in any task like this.

I am not anti-Intel. I am not AMD-biased. I buy whatever provides the best performance/price combination. At the moment, this is (by far) AMD. But believe me, I'd have no loyalty if Intel chopped their prices to below the AMD levels.

~ I'm not AMD biased, I just think their chips are better. ~

 

[ksoth]

Actually, the 64-bit AMD Clawhammer is two 32 bit Hammers on the same die that work as one chip (so totally different than 2 pentiums in an SMP system). The problem I see with pushing a 64 bit system to the consumer market is that consumer markets are currently 32 bit only, and will probably remain that way for quite some time. But who knows, maybe in 2002 wieh Hammers come out things will be different. I don't bet on it though. I think the Clawhammers are for server markets, but they can also work in consumer 32 bit systems and perform those tasks extermely well, effectively turning the 64-bit server chip into a dual 32-bit consumer chip...

 

[Grizely1]

Sadly enough, you've failed to notice that Face Intel is <i>against</i> Intel. LOL

-----------------
"648kb is all the space anyone would ever need!"

Bill Gates, 1980s

 

[AmdMELTDOWN]

Sadly enough, you've failed to notice that <b>I DID NOTICE!</b> that Face Intel <b>IS</b> <i>against</i> Intel. LOL!


oh, griz you're a dope!

"Amd cpu...Gone in -60 secs!"

 

[Grizely1]

you can talk all you want about Intel this Intel that, I know everything Intel does! I visit Face Intel.

Sure sounds otherwise.

-----------------
"648kb is all the space anyone would ever need!"

Bill Gates, 1980s