This is true. But I still think that if AMD was making a little more bling bling it would result in an increase in the tech tree. It is clear that AMD research is far superior to Intel's so if one of them should have the extra bread then I would preffer that it be AMD. As demand for the AMD chips increases so too will the supply of them. AMD is not stupid, they will fill the supply if they want to make more money. Right now they fill the supply, and if there product had higher demand they would increase supply.
dunklegend
Distinguished
- Apr 7, 2005
- 2,079
- 0
- 19,810
So this means we should start recomending Intel's CPUs, to prevent shortages for ourselves?.

<font color=red>Left to themselves, all things go from bad to worse</font color=red>

<font color=red>Left to themselves, all things go from bad to worse</font color=red>
>Does anyone actually believe for a second that if all
>consumers were educated and saw the benefits of AMD over
>Intel that AMD could actually provide the sheer quantity
>needed to fill that demand?
Error: Div/0
There is a direct relation between supply and demand, so one can not answer that. Of course, AMD is unable to supply 100% of the market (especially at current prices), but if 100% of the customers where convinced that AMD offerend a better product, demand would surge, supply would still be limited to little more than it is today, so prices would surge until it found an quilibrium again.
euhm.. reading on, thats basically what you said, so I guess we agree for once.
Not all is lost though, AMD is about to triple its capacity
= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
>consumers were educated and saw the benefits of AMD over
>Intel that AMD could actually provide the sheer quantity
>needed to fill that demand?
Error: Div/0
There is a direct relation between supply and demand, so one can not answer that. Of course, AMD is unable to supply 100% of the market (especially at current prices), but if 100% of the customers where convinced that AMD offerend a better product, demand would surge, supply would still be limited to little more than it is today, so prices would surge until it found an quilibrium again.
euhm.. reading on, thats basically what you said, so I guess we agree for once.
Not all is lost though, AMD is about to triple its capacity
= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
slvr_phoenix
Splendid
- Dec 31, 2007
- 6,157
- 1
- 25,780
I would have to greatly disagree with this. Intel by far has superior research. They just unfortunately have managers that keep castrating the plans of their engineers. So what great potentials Intel has are often dashed by a rush to respond to AMD.
Basically Intel is extremely wastefull of their R&D effots, where AMD squeezes every last ounce out of what R&D they have without wasting a drop.
Me too. AMD uses their resources a lot more wisely than Intel, so short of someone at Intel finally growing a brain (or backbone?) I'd expect greater things of AMD.
Hardly. Right now AMD has an exceedingly limited production capacity compared to Intel and has had to do a number of restructures so that they could reuse the same production lines for multiple product lines. If demand increased significantly, AMD would be screwed. It's one of the reasons why they can't win over Dell, it's why Apple turned to Intel instead of AMD, and it's why most of their major OEM sales are budget procs instead of high end procs. They're just not good at quantity. They're working on improving, but it's something that they should have taken the risk on years ago instead of waiting for so very long so that it wasn't much of a risk.
😱 <font color=purple>یί∫υєг ρђŋίχ</font color=purple> 😱
@ 191K -> 200,000 miles or bust!
slvr_phoenix
Splendid
- Dec 31, 2007
- 6,157
- 1
- 25,780
If AMD's availability slipped, I certainly would. (At least to people who deserve it.) :O
😱 <font color=purple>یί∫υєг ρђŋίχ</font color=purple> 😱
@ 191K -> 200,000 miles or bust!
slvr_phoenix
Splendid
- Dec 31, 2007
- 6,157
- 1
- 25,780
And wouldn't that suck? Fortunately Intel is very good at marketing, even if their managers should pretty much all be shot. (But then isn't that true of most managers?)
Stranger things have happened. 😉
And it's about damned time too! AMD should have been increasing production capacity years ago. Hell, they should have done it when they won the 1GHz race. They could have easily been reaping the benefits with Willy as competition for a good while if they'd just taken the risk to spend money on increasing production and advertising. But noooo. They didn't have the balls to stand up to their stock holders and take a risk. :\ Stupid AMD. Intel wastes R&D and engineering skill and AMD wastes opportunity.
I guess it could be worse though. We could have VIA as a major player and be seeing frequent and nasty bugs and <i>really</i> bad FPU performance. :O
😱 <font color=purple>یί∫υєг ρђŋίχ</font color=purple> 😱
@ 191K -> 200,000 miles or bust!
dunklegend
Distinguished
- Apr 7, 2005
- 2,079
- 0
- 19,810
I think this is because Apple sells a brand just like Intel.
It doesn't matter how much better AMD is if people doesn't know.
Outside of the enthusiast community people think that AMD products are less expensive because they're cheap.
<font color=red>Left to themselves, all things go from bad to worse</font color=red>
slvr_phoenix
Splendid
- Dec 31, 2007
- 6,157
- 1
- 25,780
If it weren't for how well Opteron is doing lately (and how suited Opteron would be as a replacement for a dual G5 box) I might be tempted to agree with your reasoning.
😱 <font color=purple>یί∫υєг ρђŋίχ</font color=purple> 😱
@ 191K -> 200,000 miles or bust!
😱 <font color=purple>یί∫υєг ρђŋίχ</font color=purple> 😱
@ 191K -> 200,000 miles or bust!
There's a few points that I think you are forgetting here...
1. To build Fab 30, J Sanders almost bankrupted the company. It was a do or die strategy and fortunately for AMD the Athlon was a HUGE win. Unfortunately, this meant that AMD was fully extended financially for a number of years after Athlon was introduced...i.e they couldn't AFFORD to build another Fab until now.
2. AMD will have MORE than triple capacity starting in 2006. Besides Fab36, they will have 300mm lines at TSMC as well. They will also have production capacity at IBM's East Fishkill for the 45nm parts when they come out.
3. Apple chose Intel because Intel can afford the development costs and AMD can't. I read an interview with an AMD exec (can't find it now) who said that even if Apple had come to AMD, they wouldn't have been be able to help.
Cheers,
Charles
1. To build Fab 30, J Sanders almost bankrupted the company. It was a do or die strategy and fortunately for AMD the Athlon was a HUGE win. Unfortunately, this meant that AMD was fully extended financially for a number of years after Athlon was introduced...i.e they couldn't AFFORD to build another Fab until now.
2. AMD will have MORE than triple capacity starting in 2006. Besides Fab36, they will have 300mm lines at TSMC as well. They will also have production capacity at IBM's East Fishkill for the 45nm parts when they come out.
3. Apple chose Intel because Intel can afford the development costs and AMD can't. I read an interview with an AMD exec (can't find it now) who said that even if Apple had come to AMD, they wouldn't have been be able to help.
Cheers,
Charles
thematrixhazuneo
Distinguished
- Jun 17, 2005
- 84
- 0
- 18,630
Do we know by any chance if fab 30 is going to be a 300mm production? And will they transition 90mn to 65nm or go straight to 65nm???
thematrixhazuneo
Distinguished
- Jun 17, 2005
- 84
- 0
- 18,630
The German site has the final Update plus video. Here is the Google of one paragraph show they don't know whats up.
Wow they don't notic anything about low proity, or the 3 of the apps the AMD machine did better it was only low proity of the dvd rip that it did not do well.
thematrixhazuneo
Distinguished
- Jun 17, 2005
- 84
- 0
- 18,630
The final update is here on the US site, all I have to say is that its complete horse crap!
"When multiple applications are running, the clear conclusion is that the Intel Pentium 840 Extreme Edition is superior to the AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+. "
How do they get the conclusion that intel is "superior" because it won on dixv - mind you that thats the only app it won and AMD got the 3 other apps w/HT enabled on the intel rig!
I hope people dont take this conclusion seriously, because then we might as well just all buy Intel and be done with it. This $hit is getting out of hand...
laterz....
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by thematrixhazuneo on 06/24/05 03:12 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
"When multiple applications are running, the clear conclusion is that the Intel Pentium 840 Extreme Edition is superior to the AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+. "
How do they get the conclusion that intel is "superior" because it won on dixv - mind you that thats the only app it won and AMD got the 3 other apps w/HT enabled on the intel rig!
I hope people dont take this conclusion seriously, because then we might as well just all buy Intel and be done with it. This $hit is getting out of hand...
laterz....
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by thematrixhazuneo on 06/24/05 03:12 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Don't worry, nobody really believes THG anymore...they've become the National Enquirer of reviewers.
But by printing all of the blatant spin, they certainly are generating a lot of hits!
I can't wait for them to start advertising as the "Fair and Unbiased" reviewer...sigh...
Cheers,
Charles
But by printing all of the blatant spin, they certainly are generating a lot of hits!
I can't wait for them to start advertising as the "Fair and Unbiased" reviewer...sigh...
Cheers,
Charles
mpasternak
Distinguished
- Apr 27, 2005
- 533
- 0
- 18,980
I'm an intel fanboi
and what a load of sh|t that THG just claimed
omg. the intel performed like aarse. even I'll admit that.
and what a load of sh|t that THG just claimed
omg. the intel performed like aarse. even I'll admit that.
Yes the final update came in with all of their "final conclusions". It was pretty funny to read.
-The P-EE was stable on an Intel board... well not with the memory they were using, so I see that being an issue.
-The P-EE faster with 4 applications running... Well DivX struggled getting CPU cycles because of Window's load balancing, but beat the P-EE by quite a bit in 2 applications still.
-The Athlon64 X2 was only faster with single applications... well only by 30% on average and is likely just as fast with 2 applications, but according to them running more than one favours the P-EE. Where the heck did they get that conclusion?
-Power draw on the P-EE is 30% more... Well yes, but they failed to turn on Cool and Quiet and they were using an NF4 chipset that also draws more power.
-The cost per year for the exra power draw was ~$50... well I do not know what they were talking about, but businesses around here in the US pay 5x as much for power and for each watt you draw you need to cool the same amount so he needs to (at a minimum) double that. Now you need to worry about density.. yes these are not rack mounted XEONs, but you cant throuw 20 of these in a room with a little window AC unit. The density in racks would make this CPU impossible. The real power draw turns out to be almost 150w, which is not something you could put more than one in a 1U rack.
-Down time... well he said nothing about this, but I know where I work just a terminal on the floor is $100 an hour for downtime and a server is likely messured in the $1000s easy. Now how many people and hours did it take to make that system stable. I would not be supprised to see 20 hours spent on that system with phone support, swapping out parts, testing, and monitoring... I would expect most IT guys to make at least $25 and hour, so that would be a minimum of $500 if not more like $1000.
So lets see. The P-EE system was faster only in only with 4 applications running and only with one particular application. It cost $100 extra in electricity extra for the higher power draw and cooling. It uses up more space do to the heat issues. THG spent the equivalent of $50,000 down time and $1000 support. Humm, so the Intel system cost THG as much as 20x the cost of the system in the total cost of ownership.
-The P-EE was stable on an Intel board... well not with the memory they were using, so I see that being an issue.
-The P-EE faster with 4 applications running... Well DivX struggled getting CPU cycles because of Window's load balancing, but beat the P-EE by quite a bit in 2 applications still.
-The Athlon64 X2 was only faster with single applications... well only by 30% on average and is likely just as fast with 2 applications, but according to them running more than one favours the P-EE. Where the heck did they get that conclusion?
-Power draw on the P-EE is 30% more... Well yes, but they failed to turn on Cool and Quiet and they were using an NF4 chipset that also draws more power.
-The cost per year for the exra power draw was ~$50... well I do not know what they were talking about, but businesses around here in the US pay 5x as much for power and for each watt you draw you need to cool the same amount so he needs to (at a minimum) double that. Now you need to worry about density.. yes these are not rack mounted XEONs, but you cant throuw 20 of these in a room with a little window AC unit. The density in racks would make this CPU impossible. The real power draw turns out to be almost 150w, which is not something you could put more than one in a 1U rack.
-Down time... well he said nothing about this, but I know where I work just a terminal on the floor is $100 an hour for downtime and a server is likely messured in the $1000s easy. Now how many people and hours did it take to make that system stable. I would not be supprised to see 20 hours spent on that system with phone support, swapping out parts, testing, and monitoring... I would expect most IT guys to make at least $25 and hour, so that would be a minimum of $500 if not more like $1000.
So lets see. The P-EE system was faster only in only with 4 applications running and only with one particular application. It cost $100 extra in electricity extra for the higher power draw and cooling. It uses up more space do to the heat issues. THG spent the equivalent of $50,000 down time and $1000 support. Humm, so the Intel system cost THG as much as 20x the cost of the system in the total cost of ownership.
- Jan 30, 2004
- 7,366
- 0
- 30,780
flippin_waffles
Distinguished
- Jun 25, 2005
- 3
- 0
- 18,510
well, i've held out as long as i could. the final update has broken the camels proverbial back i'm afraid. i had high hopes for the final analysis being unbiased and forthwrite, but alas it never came to fruition. granted, THG did hit the mark on 1 or 2 points, but failed miserably on the rest. among the most blatantly obvious f*ups is this statement:
*****
With the AMD platform you've only got one option, which fortunately is stable: to combine the AMD platform with a motherboard based on NVIDIA's nForce4 SLI chipset.
*****
well, i'm sure glad i never used THG for a basis for an informed decision on this purchase. had i, i would have thought that this A8V wouldn't support my X24400+, which contrary to THG works just fine. imagine that. then, according to AMD's recommended motherboard list, which is ever growing, KT800, Nforce4, and express 200 are currently listed as compatable. others have also used Nforce3. so, i'm wondering where they pulled that notion from.
give credit where credit is due, this is absolutely pathetic.
i'll be sure to steer clear of any advice ever given by THG.
*****
With the AMD platform you've only got one option, which fortunately is stable: to combine the AMD platform with a motherboard based on NVIDIA's nForce4 SLI chipset.
*****
well, i'm sure glad i never used THG for a basis for an informed decision on this purchase. had i, i would have thought that this A8V wouldn't support my X24400+, which contrary to THG works just fine. imagine that. then, according to AMD's recommended motherboard list, which is ever growing, KT800, Nforce4, and express 200 are currently listed as compatable. others have also used Nforce3. so, i'm wondering where they pulled that notion from.
give credit where credit is due, this is absolutely pathetic.
i'll be sure to steer clear of any advice ever given by THG.
Yes I thought it was off enough to send the head edittor (since they do not list the e-mail addresses for all three of the articles writers). I pointed out pretty much what I stated above and that the integridy of the whole stress test has been in doubt pretty much through the whole test and one of the biggest groups complaining comes from their own message boards.
Its just pathetic... the whole time I was trying to keep an open mind and I will even state that I really wanted them to be unbiased. I realize that our community is only tied with them in name, but it still pains me that our name has to be tainted by them. I am to the point that I want a new name on our forum. I consider myself a member of one of the most knowledgeable forums on the net, and this kind of crap taints us. The guys over at the anandtech forums are laughing at us right now, and it makes me feel somewhat ashamed.
You know they set the perameters of the test and should have left them alone only replace componants with the same componant and only after the system fails to run. The's see how the P-EE did. The fact that they rate the CPU as only drawing 130w and then have it draw 150w is pretty tough on the board makers. And if running dual cores gets finicky on the memory because of thier new crossbar or whatever, then that is Intel's problems. THG went into the test to show the bad side of the Athlon64 X2 compared to the P-EE by hand picking the number and type of programs. The fact that the X2 performed pretty good under those situations means a lot. Consider this the "worste case sinario" and the X2 still looked pretty good.
But like I said before... THIS WAS A STRESS TEST and the PEE failed misserably. Everybody pointed out the choise of applications was just stupid. We also pointed out that the load balancer in Windows sucks and the hardware version, in the form of HT on the P4 architecture, works better. That has always been the P4 good point.
The X2 can only make up so much by going to dual cores and performed rather good considering. If they had likely picked a better program for encoding to DivX or dropped DivX all together for something more relevent like DVD Shrink, the performance numbers would have likely be differant. I bet they spend days looking at what programs they could use to favour the P4.
I still like Anand's choice better. Doom3 (actually several differant games) and DVD Shrink:
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=13" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=13</A>
The X2 4800+ scored 97.5FPS and the P-EE 840 scored 72.6FPS. Those two running together is a "real life sittuation". Those are both applications that are CPU bound. Heck if this had been an SLI test, the P4 would have suffered more as according to THG it can not do SLI yet. That puts AMD WAY ahead. 😀
OK I ranting, but this is about the worse I have seen THG do so far.
But like I said before... THIS WAS A STRESS TEST and the PEE failed misserably. Everybody pointed out the choise of applications was just stupid. We also pointed out that the load balancer in Windows sucks and the hardware version, in the form of HT on the P4 architecture, works better. That has always been the P4 good point.
The X2 can only make up so much by going to dual cores and performed rather good considering. If they had likely picked a better program for encoding to DivX or dropped DivX all together for something more relevent like DVD Shrink, the performance numbers would have likely be differant. I bet they spend days looking at what programs they could use to favour the P4.
I still like Anand's choice better. Doom3 (actually several differant games) and DVD Shrink:
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=13" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=13</A>
The X2 4800+ scored 97.5FPS and the P-EE 840 scored 72.6FPS. Those two running together is a "real life sittuation". Those are both applications that are CPU bound. Heck if this had been an SLI test, the P4 would have suffered more as according to THG it can not do SLI yet. That puts AMD WAY ahead. 😀
OK I ranting, but this is about the worse I have seen THG do so far.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
Question Proposed system upgrade - opinions & what old components can be kept?
- Started by CaptainObviousau
- Replies: 3
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram