Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Core 2 Duo & Socket AM2/K8L Discussion

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 12, 2006 3:38:04 AM

Here you will find large amount of data and a friendly atmosphere to discuss and show off your findings. Feel free to contribute.

More about : core duo socket am2 k8l discussion

March 12, 2006 3:42:07 AM

If AMD took hit after hit without winning, then I suspect they are strong enough to regroup and go after the low end market or create some new market.
I see no need to worry yet, and companies are just like people, they have a natural survival instinct and you learn and grow stronger due to mistakes... They are still a young company with more flexibility than Intel, enabling them to react to market trends faster if needed.
March 12, 2006 3:44:52 AM

No, just no. They'll always have their army of cheapskates and fanboys :p 
Related resources
March 12, 2006 3:46:36 AM

[/slaps head]
March 12, 2006 3:49:03 AM

Quote:
[/slaps head]
Leave me alone Im tired :p 
March 12, 2006 3:55:48 AM

Not to worry.
Conroe is just so much hot air. Amd will crush ti no problem.


Okay, now that I've pi$$ed off the idiot inside croud, I will let you know that Amd isn't exactly small potatoes. True, they are not the big ugly gorrila that Intel is, but with a net worth of $18 billion, they aint exactly chopped liver.
Besides, if conroe does crush them, that would be monopoly competition, and the courts would award Amd enough cash to stay afloat, and cover R&D for a new chip.
March 12, 2006 3:57:20 AM

That was fun.
March 12, 2006 3:58:44 AM

if amd's performance of m2 isnt enough theyll find a way. they cant just die. well see how amd does with m2. they like to keep secrets
March 12, 2006 4:01:26 AM

Quote:
Okay, now that I've pi$$ed off the idiot inside croud


LOL!
March 12, 2006 4:10:35 AM

Hmm, I wasn't aware that the courts were in charge of giving hand-outs. The courts would only award something if Intel is proven to be actively anti-competitive, rather than winning through technology enhancement. Squeezing out the competition is part of capitalism afterall.

In any case, the chances of AMD going out of business is somewhere near zero. Even if Merom, Conroe, and Woodcrest live up to hype, it's only one battle. Dual and quad FSBs will serve Intel well in the 2 and 4-way markets, but I'll have to admit that without an OMC or some advances in interconnects the Opteron has the 8-way and higher market pretty much covered. I don't even know what Intel is going to do with the Itanium, especially with the Montecito delays and reduced specifications.
March 12, 2006 4:17:59 AM

As yo said, Amd is not about to go anywhere.
As to the
Quote:
The courts would only award something if Intel is proven to be actively anti-competitive, rather than winning through technology enhancement. Squeezing out the competition is part of capitalism afterall.

well, not exactly. If an action on the part of Intel sets them up as a sole provider, they would be found guilty of monopoly competition.
Capitalism is based on competition, just because you can wipe out the little guys, doesn't make it a good idea. That's why there are anti-monopoly laws.
March 12, 2006 4:18:56 AM

I really don't think that there is anywhere near that much at stake. AMD has a loyal enough fanbase now that they will stay afloat until they can do a redesign in the worst case scenario.

I think a lot of people are counting them out becuase they haven't been discussing their future plans with the media, which makes people think they have no future plans.
March 12, 2006 7:47:28 AM

Its not the courts that award money, its... Intel.
Well... Intel likes to buy all of AMDs stocks rather than being split up (who would want his own company to be split up?).
a b à CPUs
March 12, 2006 8:18:28 AM

Quote:
Someone said earlier that if AM2 is completely stomped out by Conroe(I mean COMPLETELY), then it will result in an enormous blow to AMD possibly causing their demise. I thought of this for a while, and decided it could possibly be true. I mean Intel is quite a bit larger than AMD, and both companies have been playing leapfrog in terms of making a better processor. So IF AMD fails and doesn't come up with a counter measure to Conroe, what is gonna happen? I aknowledge that I am about to get a shi7storm of angry posters coming at me with flaming hot Prescotts claiming I'm some sort of Intel fanboy, if anything, I'm an AMD fanboy. Take that into account before you post.


Well if AM2 gets released and no one buys it because of conroe it would be a great blow, they never faced a chip thats everything - Cheaper, Faster, More Efficent, but knowing AMD they will offer there CPUs for a bargain price like the Athlon XPs (and every other cpu they made except the FX and X2) - i remember the Celeron 1800 was the same price as the AMD AthlonXP 1800.

Time will tell, AMD fanboys will help AMD survive (as Intel fanboys would) and so on.
March 12, 2006 8:45:23 AM

Quote:
if amd's performance of m2 isnt enough theyll find a way. they cant just die. well see how amd does with m2. they like to keep secrets



Yes this is VERY true :D 

They like to play dead sometimes.
March 12, 2006 1:38:55 PM

Quote:
Okay, now that I've pi$$ed off the idiot inside croud, I will let you know that Amd isn't exactly small potatoes. True, they are not the big ugly gorrila that Intel is, but with a net worth of $18 billion, they aint exactly chopped liver.
Besides, if conroe does crush them, that would be monopoly competition, and the courts would award Amd enough cash to stay afloat, and cover R&D for a new chip.


Oh, Great!!! Welfare AMDroid Babies!!!
Just more handouts counted on as a corporate performa... Take that to the bank... ;) 
March 12, 2006 2:13:34 PM

GIME MY HANDOUT!
March 12, 2006 2:15:04 PM

Well the exact opposite could be said if Intel flubbed these benches or they run into a problem before they get the chip to market.

It could also be more disastrous for Intel because they've shown there hand 6 months before the launch, letting Amd know a bit of what they have.

Can you imagine what will happen if Intel were to miss the mark they've set now? If the chips they manufacture don't have the same gains now that they've shown they will basically single handedly undermine the release they just made.

It's very risky to do what they did. If they execute flawlessly they have nothing to worry about, but look to Intels past history and you'd know things are never that certain.
March 12, 2006 2:23:22 PM

Quote:
Well the exact opposite could be said if Intel flubbed these benches or they run into a problem before they get the chip to market.

It could also be more disastrous for Intel because they've shown there hand 6 months before the launch, letting Amd know a bit of what they have.

Can you imagine what will happen if Intel were to miss the mark they've set now? If the chips they manufacture don't have the same gains now that they've shown they will basically single handedly undermine the release they just made.

It's very risky to do what they did. If they execute flawlessly they have nothing to worry about, but look to Intels past history and you'd know things are never that certain.
Intel has done this before, and they are the same as any other large company, monopolizing, bullying, backstabing, though the same can be said about our beloved AMD. They will get worse as they (hopefully) grow. That being said, I guess we shall respectfully expect good products from both companies this term.
a c 103 à CPUs
March 12, 2006 2:30:17 PM

Both of the companies historical track records would indicate that statement is hype and hogwash, both companies have had the lead at times in this so called CPU superiority race.

Market competition is great for us all, it keeps prices reasonable to a certain extent, but past history indicates neither has ever been down for the count, and as most new offerings go the high pricetags come with them.

Its time for some serious leaps in technology both companies have just been inchworming along and milking it all the way, so seriously its time for both to get off the pot and give us some serious offerings to the market!

If that went over your head Sorry! But there really is nothing to argue about here but someones opinion!
March 12, 2006 2:38:20 PM

Quote:
Both of the companies historical track records would indicate that statement is hype and hogwash, both companies have had the lead at times in this so called CPU superiority race.

Market competition is great for us all, it keeps prices reasonable to a certain extent, but past history indicates neither has ever been down for the count, and as most new offerings go the high pricetags come with them.

Its time for some serious leaps in technology both companies have just been inchworming along and milking it all the way, so seriously its time for both to get off the pot and give us some serious offerings to the market!

If that went over your head Sorry! But there really is nothing to argue about here but someones opinion!
I would have to say these are the best offerings in quite a while from Intel, all I'm hearing about AM2 is that it is some sort of suped-up Athlon, though I would have to disagree.
March 12, 2006 2:54:32 PM

And the Conroe is some supped-up Core Duo! :wink:
March 12, 2006 2:59:32 PM

well everyone seems to be forgetting the most important benchmark that noone has seen yet and that is the price/performance ratio of the new chips.

So what if a conroe chip in the midrange beats the fastest amd if the midrange costs a lot more than the fastest amd chip.
March 12, 2006 3:01:58 PM

I don't believe that for a second. AMD didn't just come around in the last three years. People were buying their processors even when they couldn't beat Intel. They just gained more market share once they were better. Will they lose some market share if they can't counter punch? Yes. That's just the way of the beast. Will it be the end, no way. They have far more resources now then they had when they took the lead. You can bet that this won't be the last you hear from AMD.
March 12, 2006 3:02:29 PM

Quote:
well everyone seems to be forgetting the most important benchmark that noone has seen yet and that is the price/performance ratio of the new chips.

So what if a conroe chip in the midrange beats the fastest amd if the midrange costs a lot more than the fastest amd chip.


Nice ideas, but my AMD union contract won't let me buy Intel no matter what they come out with for 2 more years... :( 
March 12, 2006 3:04:25 PM

AMD's biggest problem isn't Conroe. Most average users know nothing of
AMD let alone Conroe. AMD's biggest hurdle is the 'Intel inside', Dell, and
now Apple brainwashing.
March 12, 2006 3:05:19 PM

If AMD faills to stay competitive we might as well see 200$ FX chips like we did 5 years ago(though by that time they weren't FX).
The problem for AMD would be the cost of this.
The cost production of Intel CPUs is much lower than AMD's( hence Intel can make very tempting deals with OEMs). And the production capability of Intel is much higher. AMD can't mass produce something like Intel can.
If they'll have to lower prices a lot then they'll surely end up with financial problems.
Untill they release chips on 65nm(that should make its chips not only competitive but cheaper to make) AMD's growth rate can stall to a halt or it can move backwords as well(i'm not saying it will,i'm saying it can). That's provided that Conroe beats AM2 by a significant margin to make even the most pesimistic user buy Intel.
Selling at low prices makes the user happy but without doubt,it does not make AMD happy. Whenever they have a chance they raise it.
March 12, 2006 3:34:37 PM

Quote:
AMD's biggest problem isn't Conroe. Most average users know nothing of
AMD let alone Conroe. AMD's biggest hurdle is the 'Intel inside', Dell, and
now Apple brainwashing.


That's true I'd say probably 65%-75% of the market is mostly driven by price. The cheaper it is, the faster it sells. Alot of peeps don't even know or care what a PSU is let alone a HDD.

As few as a couple years back you could compare a computer based on speeds you can't even do that anymore. Some vendors don't even list the speeds anymore, if you don't know the particular model of the cpu you're SOL, unless you happen to get a knowledgeable sales person.

So I would say the vast majority of the shoppers out there are either going by recommendation or by price/ what they can afford.

The apple crowd is a more finnicky bunch, not sure how happy or sad they are now that they're beloved "expensive record player" has an idiot inside it. Most of these peep's were in bed with IBM for so long and so brainwashed that I don't see how the intel switch will help this group much.

I mean how does Steve Jobs one minute claim he has the fastest computer in the world and then a short time later switch to Intel chips? He does this all with a straight face. How gullible this apple crowd is?

It may be apples undoing except for the sale of the OS. There are already more and more sites showing how to make an apple pc out of ordinary PC hardware. I'd expect that to continue, why pay a premium for ordinary PC hardware?
March 12, 2006 4:11:24 PM

I think, more than ever, intel is gunning for amd now
there have been some signs to suggest that they have been attempting to make their product more similar to amds in order to eliminate any kind of niche market amd sells to.

An example is the mention of future units using less electricity, not something extremely important but a factor amd has always dominated with

another example is a focus on performance as opposed to sales, appealing to the not-so-huge enthusiasts croud
i found this in some article linked on toms coverpage
"The Intel developer forum (IDF) typically is the best way to get a deep insight in Intel's product plans for the coming 12 months to 18 months. It's not unusual that visitors see a flurry of announcements, products and trends. But beyond all those press releases, presentations and briefings, IDF always transports a certain message to the audience: This week, we saw an Intel that deemphasized business charts and highlighted a passion for technology instead."

as far as performance is concerned, i believe amd has to consistantly make superior products in order to get any kind of recognition and sales, something that may not be possible with conroe launch
but i remember reading somewhere that the finest conroe cpu would be 40% quicker than the 950 2x cedarmill thingy (not sure what its called)
i might be mistaken, but a 955 overclocked to the 4.2 region is about half of that gap (20% quicker) and it is still slower in most tests than the fx-60 toledo
if these numbers are to be believed, it is likely amd will still control the finest unit available, translating into at least some percentage of the market in sales of slower, cheaper, units, due to image of the flagship superiority

in order to become a very serious competitor to intel, i believe amd must not only focus on making a faster processor in the short term, but also focus on marketing and consumer awareness
truly amd is not in the best of positions
im eagerly awaiting seeing what will happen
March 12, 2006 5:27:07 PM

FX < EE < Conroe
The "flagships" actually are lagging behind.

Furthermore Intel was kind enough to directly compare Conroe and FX, without calculating performance difference based on EE (Presler) results.
March 12, 2006 5:28:33 PM

Quote:
Okay, now that I've pi$$ed off the idiot inside croud, I will let you know that Amd isn't exactly small potatoes. True, they are not the big ugly gorrila that Intel is, but with a net worth of $18 billion, they aint exactly chopped liver.
Besides, if conroe does crush them, that would be monopoly competition, and the courts would award Amd enough cash to stay afloat, and cover R&D for a new chip.


Oh, Great!!! Welfare AMDroid Babies!!!
Just more handouts counted on as a corporate performa... Take that to the bank... ;) 

Actually, the US government DOES make a habit of giving handouts to larger companies that are in danger of going bankrupt if there are potentially enough jobs at stake, or if there is the right political pull. Just look up USAIR, the Government gave them about $90 million in free money to promptly go spend overseas on new planes and cheaper labor. Thats just one example.
March 12, 2006 5:57:53 PM

I disagree with that. I think it would have been far more helpful for them to compare it to presler than to AMD, since AMD's comparison chip isn't out yet.
March 12, 2006 6:19:18 PM

Quote:
FX < EE < Conroe
The "flagships" actually are lagging behind.

Furthermore Intel was kind enough to directly compare Conroe and FX, without calculating performance difference based on EE (Presler) results.



Negative.

FX < EE < Conroe does not compute

FX > EE

Conroe does not exist yet.

Let's compare Conroe to AMDs response not to their current offerings. Let's wait and see what happens! We need to reserve judgment until all the facts are in.

It took Intel 3 years or so to wake up and realize their PIII / P6 architecture was actually better than the P4 netburst architecture and to work out most of the problems.

It also took them 3 or more years to admin that GHz !=performance.

It is funny that all the Intel fans admit that GHz !=performance now that their lower clocked CPU beats their own flagship P4s just like AMD has done for years.

Ohhhh the IRONY!!!
March 12, 2006 6:22:16 PM

Quote:
AMD's biggest problem isn't Conroe. Most average users know nothing of
AMD let alone Conroe. AMD's biggest hurdle is the 'Intel inside', Dell, and
now Apple brainwashing.


Exactly, and that's what the average consumer is used to.

I support internet services for the local phone company and, it's no surprise to walk into a customers home and there sits a brand new Dell machine with the Intel logo. Over 90% of my calls are for setting up Dell machines. Surprised? I think not ...
March 12, 2006 9:24:48 PM

Intel cannot compete so they are trying to price AMD to death.

Great plan, that just reinforces the AMD lawsuit.
March 12, 2006 11:38:51 PM

I'm not sure but, i was talking with my local Computer tech. And he said to me he was going through some Tech chat rooms and he's hearing rumers that AMD might release Athlon64 x2 5200+ as a retaliation to Conroe. you know their 2.6Ghz beating our AMD. You guys get it. 2.6Ghz X 2= 5200MHZ. Not sure but i think it might be a possiblitly. Because AMD does Realise that the mid-range Conroe just beat a FX-62(overclocked FX-60). So the 5200+ ight just come out with the FX-62 and the 5000+. I have no hard proof on what my Computer tech guys said to me. but its a pretty "doable" thing for AMD.
March 12, 2006 11:40:09 PM

Quote:
It is not illegal or monopolistic to offer a better product for less money. In fact AMD exists today because it offered a decent product for less money for years, and in the last 2-3 has offered a better product for more money -- and people are willing to pay a premium for top notch.

What is illegal is to offer a product and price it to take a loss with the intention of driving the competition out of business only to increase it when competition is gone. Wal-mart does this routinely.

AMDs suit hinges it's complaint on Intel using it's market share (and manufacturing advantage) to coerce OEMs into exclusive deals. They claim that as (paraphrased) "AMD has the better product, what other explanation for languishing market share other than monopolistic practice". Reasonable argument, problem is that they make this claim during the steapest part of the slope on their market share grab.

Intel countered that AMD is capacity constrained, that when AMD offers a competitive (read better) product, the market responds (and it has). Intel's answer is stronger than AMD's complaint in my opinion, rather I believe AMD had different rationale for bringing the suit online when they did.

On the flip-side, Intel has an industry reputation for being ruthless, is it illegal? The JTC certainly thinks so. In terms of the U.S., Intel has been investigated before by the FTC, no wrong doing was found and the investigation was dropped. What will happen? We will not find out for another few years.


So where does making a deal with Skype to limit AMD processors to 5-user conferance calls while allowing Intel users 10 fall into all this?
March 12, 2006 11:48:38 PM

I thought 5200 was imaginary because that little turd 9-inch posted something about a 5200 beating a Conroe and I was like WTF?
March 13, 2006 12:32:29 AM

hi. Reading here and there, and analysing a bit of the data makes me think that Conroe IS a better architecture than P4X (netburst and subsequent mod's) and that the K8. Remember K8 IS long on the tooth (already at F rev) and has quite some years on it. But I doubt that AMD has been sitting on their laurels (a$$e$). :oops:  Their move to socket AM2 is looking to decrease system power draw by using a newer memory technology (DDR2) that both uses less power and is just beginning to get competitive speeds (remember the SDR to DDR transition, I remember 440BX oc'd to 166MHz TROUNCING their fastest DDR couterparts because of latency and speed, it wasn't until DDR got better latency and base clock speeds that it really was a better choice). Also, DDR is going to get expensive soon, because of the ramping up of DDR2 and the phase-out of DDR. So AMD needs to change their plataform so their overall system price doesn't go to the sky. Eventually they can replace the CPU for a new offering that can (maybe) fit the same socket, giving that the memory interface is on-die. Intel has a very good new architecture, AMD isn't saying peep until after the release of socket AM2. My take?¿ Quite probably a 530$+ conroe sitting on a 250$+ QXXX (sorry, I don't remember the number) mobo can utterly destroy a 1000$+ AM2 FX62 sitting on a 150$ mobo. But I'd like to see a 350$ conroe on a 150$ mobo vs. a 350$ AM2 on the same 150$ mobo. There will be the difference, 'cause integrating the 1333MHz FSB with the premium Memory Controller Hub on the cheap mobos is what i see less likely, at least until december or something like that.

If they can make it, my kudos. but IMHE, Intel charges premium for its premium mobos, and on the lesser ones, they cripple them (i815 bad experience, can't get past 512MB :x ) AMD's On board memory controller kinda normalizes mobo dependency, some are better some are worse but variation plataform to plataform tends to be lower than intel's.

that's my 2 cents, sorry if long, tell me your thoughts
March 13, 2006 12:34:21 AM

Quote:
I really don't think that there is anywhere near that much at stake. AMD has a loyal enough fanbase now that they will stay afloat until they can do a redesign in the worst case scenario.


Can't agree more with this statement. Even though im convinced that the PIII, woops... sorry i mean, Conroe is a much better processor :lol:  . I wouldn't buy it nor would i recommend it. I think there's enough of us AMD enthusiasts out there on this planet, enought to support AMD.

However, I'm not quite convince that AMD is dead in the water yet. Im sure that they have plans on their own. :D 
March 13, 2006 12:50:10 AM

Yea, I'm a betting man and It's a 100% certainty that AMD does not have the technology, resources or marketing to possibly ever stand up to intel again. They had a brief moment in the sun and now itel said enough.

With the amount of lead intel is now taking over AMD only a fool would ever by AMD again. Maybe only shamelsss fanboys would stick with their looser. The question is how many more years can AMD stay in business. 1, 2 maybe 3 if they are lucky.

IMO
March 13, 2006 12:59:54 AM

Quote:
Yea, I'm a betting man and It's a 100% certainty that AMD does not have the technology, resources or marketing to possibly ever stand up to intel again. They had a brief moment in the sun and now itel said enough.

With the amount of lead intel is now taking over AMD only a fool would ever by AMD again. Maybe only shamelsss fanboys would stick with their looser. The question is how many more years can AMD stay in business. 1, 2 maybe 3 if they are lucky.

IMO


Wow, you are completely clueless as to how this industry works aren't you?
March 13, 2006 1:02:59 AM

What the hell are you ding, are you trying to Provoke. The AMD Boys? Did you even try to back up your Information? AMD had a Partnership with companies to Make a 32Nm Chip and they already Got it to work down to 30nm but its at 32nm now and Intel had only got down to 45nm.
I proclaim the future to AMD.!!!
Vive la AMD!
March 13, 2006 1:07:25 AM

Quote:
What the hell are you ding, are you trying to Provoke. The AMD Boys? Did you even try to back up your Information? AMD had a Partnership with companies to Make a 32Nm Chip and they already Got it to work down to 30nm but its at 32nm now and Intel had only got down to 45nm. And just remember AMD is an Asian Company and Intel is an American. History has it that Most American Companies are getting beaten by Asian Companies. And Canadian Companies (ATI) lolls. Yea Most American companies are going down.
I proclaim the future to AMD.!!!
Vive la AMD!


Sorry Kid, but AMD is based in the Good ole' USA just like Intel. as for your other info, got any links to back that up?
March 13, 2006 1:10:44 AM

Quote:
What the hell are you ding, are you trying to Provoke. The AMD Boys? Did you even try to back up your Information? AMD had a Partnership with companies to Make a 32Nm Chip and they already Got it to work down to 30nm but its at 32nm now and Intel had only got down to 45nm. And just remember AMD is an Asian Company and Intel is an American. History has it that Most American Companies are getting beaten by Asian Companies. And Canadian Companies (ATI) lolls. Yea Most American companies are going down.
I proclaim the future to AMD.!!!
Vive la AMD!


Who the hell is saying AMD is an Asian Company? AMD was started by defectors from Fairchild Semiconductor just as Intel was back in the late 60's, early 70's. Both companies are AMERICAN, just because AMD has factories in foreign countries doesn't make it an ASIAN company. In fact, the CEO Hector Ruiz is Mexican!

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 13, 2006 1:13:11 AM

Lol, My bad. I musta been searching about another company and read it as AMD. totally srry. gotta edit that post up now.
March 13, 2006 1:14:23 AM

Quote:
What the hell are you ding, are you trying to Provoke. The AMD Boys? Did you even try to back up your Information? AMD had a Partnership with companies to Make a 32Nm Chip and they already Got it to work down to 30nm but its at 32nm now and Intel had only got down to 45nm. And just remember AMD is an Asian Company and Intel is an American. History has it that Most American Companies are getting beaten by Asian Companies. And Canadian Companies (ATI) lolls. Yea Most American companies are going down.
I proclaim the future to AMD.!!!
Vive la AMD!


Ok....interesting....

32 nm litho has not been developed yet, it is on the drawing boards, perhaps proof of concept has been done, but 32 nm will not see the light of day for at least 4 years.

AMD is an American company, AMD Ticker headquartered in Sunnyvale CA.

So what facts are you using to sustain your proclomation? How do reason AMD will be successful in the future? What logical analysis can be done with known data to support your hypothesis?

(Civil discussion please, I am really simply interested in your opinion)

AMD has signed a contract with IBM through 2011 to create 32nm and 22nm Technologies, but as of now, there has yet to be any production of them, it's happening at IBM's Watson Research Center in New York.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 13, 2006 1:18:57 AM

So what AMD and IBM mean by this deal is, that 22nm and 32nm have been done. Otherwise They would'nt have done the deal without having somekind of working model to base a deal on. Lol today i'm so outta it. Lol i had some RUM filled chocolate. lol i got a buzz going. i'll try to back my comments up and keep my sentense structure and sense making more stable next time.
    • 1 / 15
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • More pages
    • Next
    • Newest
!