Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD talks back on Intel's Conroe

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 17, 2006 5:44:20 AM

Hi, as you can obviously tell by my post count I am newly registered to the forums, but not to the TH site or the hardware enthusiast scene. I recently came upon this article the other day.

Quote:
»AMD disputes Intel Conroe performance claims

"It's driven by the fact that they can't talk about their current products, because everybody knows their current products aren't very good," said Henri Richard, AMD's chief sales and marketing officer, in an interview with CNET News.com late Friday.
Richard was responding to a prediction from an Intel executive that the company's chips scheduled for the second half of the year will deliver a 20 percent improvement in performance over comparable AMD products scheduled for release in the same time frame.


Old news to some? Can you say bring it on Intel? :p 

Source: http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchi...
March 17, 2006 6:05:43 AM

I hope Intel won't blow it.
Related resources
March 17, 2006 6:07:15 AM

2 weeks is old? /shock

j/k..
March 17, 2006 9:47:29 AM

Quote:
2 weeks is old? /shock

j/k..
This is the internet. 2 hours is old.
March 17, 2006 10:21:59 AM

AMD said that they arent quite going to be able to match.

Of course they didnt exactly say that but thats the essence.
a b à CPUs
March 17, 2006 11:16:32 AM

So AMD's position almost seems, "yes, Conroes are faster, but we have products out now"?
a b à CPUs
March 17, 2006 11:57:30 AM

Quote:
Hi, as you can obviously tell by my post count I am newly registered to the forums, but not to the TH site or the hardware enthusiast scene. I recently came upon this article the other day.

»AMD disputes Intel Conroe performance claims

"It's driven by the fact that they can't talk about their current products, because everybody knows their current products aren't very good," said Henri Richard, AMD's chief sales and marketing officer, in an interview with CNET News.com late Friday.
Richard was responding to a prediction from an Intel executive that the company's chips scheduled for the second half of the year will deliver a 20 percent improvement in performance over comparable AMD products scheduled for release in the same time frame.


Old news to some? Can you say bring it on Intel? :p 

Source: http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchi...

here are some 99% accurate facts:

conroe is here in ~4months
amd is faster for the time
intel will take over the lead in every area
AMD will lower prices to match
AMD might take 2+ years to catch (dont know the full details on the future for them but they always come back)

does that answer things for you?
March 17, 2006 12:07:06 PM

It doesn't seems to be a real "fact" but a fanboyish fact.
March 17, 2006 12:26:10 PM

Nope
March 17, 2006 1:25:28 PM

At one time, Intel had the lead on AMD: Pentium-II then Pentium-III compared to K-6, especially on FPU operations.
Frankly, you could hardly find more bang for the buck than a Celeron 300A with an Abit BH6 (or BX6) and a fast stick of SDRAM: you plugged the processor in, you instantly got a 450-MHz rock stable system.
Remember that the P-III architecture was a long evolution from the Pentium Pro design... and then led to Pentium-M, then Conroe.

P-4 was probably the biggest long-lasting POS to have ever come out of Intel's labs - right there with the MTH for i8xx chipsets.

Then, AMD took the lead with the Athlon: the design aged quite nicely and had no competition from Intel (I used P-4's at work, they felt sluggish compared to my half-clocked Duron :p  )

Now, Intel decided that there might have been something more to squeeze out of the P-3/P-M design (took them long enough).

What I wonder about, is: how comes AMD couldn't innovate much over these almost ten years on a design level, while a small Israeli Intel lab could?

My guess is that Intel will enjoy some time at the lead with Conroe, Amd will test-drive new platforms and new manufacturing processes with a proven architecture, then get out a new architecture. After all, it's strange that Amd's roadmaps suddenly got so vague...

Intel's roadmaps are usually vague and announce paper product launches, but they're being incredibly open about Conroe: after all, you could already build Pentium-M based desktop systems yourself, so it is little surprise that a tweaked processor running on the same platform would get out eventually.

Right now, we have Intel being open about a refit product (a well refit one, mind you) and Amd being rather quiet about the matter: because they didn't see it coming, because they couldn't innovate enough, or because they're preparing something?

K6 design came out in 1995; K7 was out by 1998, K8 is a K7 with a 64-bit unit... Would it be unreasonable to think that Amd must have spent some resources exploring something else?

end rant.
March 17, 2006 2:37:31 PM

Those comments are old because of the context. AMD made those comments to respond to Intel boasting they would have a 20% performance advantage over AMD's future chip. That article was made on February 28, and at that point Intel's claims were completely unproven and unfounded. Since then, Intel has demonstrated benchmarks that substantiate their claims. You could question the validity of the benchmarks but at least they now have numbers to back up their claims.
March 17, 2006 5:43:08 PM

Quote:

here are some 99% accurate facts:

conroe is here in ~4months
amd is faster for the time
intel will take over the lead in every area
AMD will lower prices to match
AMD might take 2+ years to catch (dont know the full details on the future for them but they always come back)

does that answer things for you?


2+ years to catch? I thought AMD was just waiting to work out the bug with DDR2 ram for the AM2 before 'letting it out of the gates'. Indeed seems like you have many fans over at Intel. :p 
March 17, 2006 7:21:34 PM

Quote:
...K8 is a K7 with a 64-bit unit... Would it be unreasonable to think that Amd must have spent some resources exploring something else?


In that sense, the vast majority of all CPUs are just improved 8088s.

Damn these companies for not exploring alternatives! :roll:
March 17, 2006 7:39:17 PM

Quote:

here are some 99% accurate facts:

conroe is here in ~4months
amd is faster for the time
intel will take over the lead in every area
AMD will lower prices to match
AMD might take 2+ years to catch (dont know the full details on the future for them but they always come back)

does that answer things for you?


2+ years to catch? I thought AMD was just waiting to work out the bug with DDR2 ram for the AM2 before 'letting it out of the gates'. Indeed seems like you have many fans over at Intel. :p 

DDR2 will only give AM2 a boost of around 5% over 939, Conroe will have 20% over 939, so Conroe still wins. And no they dont have a bug, they tested DDR2 800 with AM2 and it seemed about right to what amd stated. So there is no bug and stop with that nonsence, if it had a bug, we would see some serious issues. Not to mention AMD is not bandwith hungry on memory, it likes low latencys, and that is what DDR2 doesnt have over DDR.
March 18, 2006 7:07:01 PM

Here are some nice old comments by the head of the beast,
"We'll work our buns off to beat [Intel]", said Hector Ruiz
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=418

Now why did he not say "to stay ahead of Intel?" He knew. It's no suprise he did, alot of people did.

So when Conroe is out Intel has a good lead and will keep it atleast untill AMD goes 65nm and maybe even then. After than Intel goes 45 nm and gains even more. In 2008 Intel will change more and leaves too many questions to even guess.
March 22, 2006 6:43:51 AM

I haven't said that; what I said was the K-7 design was tweaked and saw a 64-bit unit added to it. However, the general design, the integer, SSE, 3Dnow and FPU units are still mostly the same, the crossbar system too...

The 8088 was using 20-bit addressing, there was deep architectural changes made to it to address 24-bit (286) then 32-bit (386) memory spaces; then, if went from a completely CISC architecture to an 'almost' RISC architecture (486 - also saw desynchronized CPU/system bus + integrated FPU in DX), then the memory bus was widened from 16-bit to 32-bit (386DX) to 64-bit (Pentium). Pentium pro saw the integrated 2nd level cache and a specifically 32-bit architecture (until then, processors were still heavily 16-bit processing oriented)

Would you consider the addition of an SSE unit (128-bit floating point instructions!) to the Pentium II a big architectural change? So then, what's so exciting about a 64-bit unit? Keep in mind I do use 64-bit operating systems (Linux power!) and it's certainly interesting, however for mundane stuff I don't see much difference between 32-bit and 64-bit performance - as it was supposed to be.

AMD's big strenght lies in its initial decisions: it IS quite impressive for the K7 design to scale so well: it has seen SSE, multicore, memory controller, 64-bit capabilities added to it, while going from 600 MHz to 3.00 GHz.

The K6 was a very good improvement over the K5, and the K7 left the K6 in the dust. The K8 doesn't whip a K7s ass that much.
March 22, 2006 8:28:52 AM

intel will take over the lead in every area ...ironically he said....
get real my friend ...what`s the matter with you....are you affraid to see the reality.......some areas he said ...haa.....if you carefully watch the tests done ... some 2,66 conroe against the fx60...all the tests ...and i mean all the tests ..favour Intel....
and what is the conclusion we can drawn from that test....a 2.66 conroe against the fastest amd on the market.......it is as simple as it can get .... that particular cpu and i mean conroe blows to pieces the fastest amd on the market....
you boys want to escape from reality ....... lock yourself in your little room and isolate from the rest of the world ..... it`s ok you can cry ... it helps sometimes
a b à CPUs
March 22, 2006 10:47:04 AM

"DDR2 will only give AM2 a boost of around 5% over 939, "

The latest benchmarks I saw using an M2/DDR2-800 equipped x2- 4800+, gaming framerates were still 1-2 frames/sec slower.....

Perhaps with DDR2/1066 and a few more BIOS tweaks they will reach parity with less expensive standard 939/PC3200 rigs?
March 22, 2006 10:50:58 AM

I would not be suprise that Intel was able to catch up.
Intel is a much larger company and have a lot more resource than AMD.
March 22, 2006 11:20:11 AM

I guess they will try to optimize the memory controller in the way of Intels Core architecture Smart Memory Access. They will add more L2 cache if Z-RAM technology for real is implemented in the 65nm SOI. Maybe HTT will be improved to 1600MHz full-duplex and more links will be added. I would like to see 4 cores on single chip linked in the way like 4 single-core Opteron 8xx are linked between with direct connect architecture. Maybe some more multimedia power will be added, the SSE4 and some extra clock, + 400MHz for quadcored and +800MHz more for dualcored chips.
But that will be after Conroes lounch as we can expect now. And maybe we can see some two processor systems with quadcore Clovertown processors(8 cores total in system) in the same time.
We can only guess and talk now. We don't have any kind of simillar chip in our hands, and we can only hope that the articles with informations, benchmarks, overviwes and etc. about them are not lies.
Let's see, what we have available now and what we got from both Intel and AMD. Lets see what are we using that for, before we judge who is better or worse.
March 22, 2006 12:04:47 PM

Correct me if im wrong, but the a64 and opteron are 90nm cpus while the conroe are 65nm(like the presler)? Why not wait till amd drops there new 65nm chips with new core setup b4 we say either one is better than the other.
March 22, 2006 12:25:20 PM

If you want to wait untill next year, go ahead. AMD may win some benchmarks with K8l, but conroe will still be ahead in many more. There is not much info on K8l, just that it has a very good FPU.
March 22, 2006 12:30:59 PM

Funny how I really don’t want Intel to dominate AMD. I prefer a situation like the GPU market. Better competition leads to better prices for us. When/if Intel totally dominates AMD then I feel we wont be seeing sweet deals like the 805 anymore :( 

p.s. I think the Conroe will be a great processor but am waiting for the release (and the release of the AM2) before making a final decision. Specially good for me since I hope to retire my old rig sometime November or December this year.
a b à CPUs
March 22, 2006 1:04:00 PM

"while going from 600 MHz to 3.00 GHz. "

from 500 Mhz to 2.8G, officially....

They just can't seem to crack that 3G nut! :-)
March 22, 2006 1:06:25 PM

FX64 is comming(3ghz X2.) If it's not 65nm, it' will be a hot power hog. AMD fans will love that. :lol: 
March 22, 2006 1:14:31 PM

Look at it from this point of view.

Intel is clearly superior in manufacturing techniques, hence the 65nm now, and soon to be 45nm.

AMD is clearly ahead in the architecure department, as mentioned the K7 and K8, and the fact they had working quad-cores last year.

Its just like the GPU market nVidia using a 110nm process made cards that were able to keep up with ATI's latest and greatest 90nm, and now nVidia shrunk to 90nm, and use less transistors and other components and are still keeping up with the much larger 90nm from ATI.

Its rather sad that Intel can only boast a 20% boost over the current top the line AMD with there superior manufacturing processes. With AMDs clearly superior architecture and there new joint venture with IBM manufacturing processes, I say next gen. CPU war is only warming up. Right now its just a fun game of he said she said.

Morale of the story: a good architecural design, is greater than any manufacturing process
March 22, 2006 1:19:44 PM

You're obviously biased seeing your avatar/name/posts...

AMD will have a response, that's what drives the market, it's just they don't speak out what they are doing that's all.

Both companies make good products. Just use your best judgement and get the best one! Conroe looks really sweet I admit...So if AMD's answer to Conroe sucks, then I'll go Intel. I've went both ways: PIII 800Mhz and Athlon 1800+. Both great products at that time :) 
March 22, 2006 1:20:29 PM

AMD did wonders with 90nm. It is at it's end now. It's a new game, core design is better over at intel. AMD's had better been working on a new core a year ago, or the next two years are going to be very hard for them to cut a profit.
March 22, 2006 1:22:58 PM

How many !!!! here with AMD avitars? I own AMD too. I know them as well as I know Intel.
March 22, 2006 1:27:02 PM

Quote:
Look at it from this point of view.

AMD is clearly ahead in the architecure department, as mentioned the K7 and K8, and the fact they had working quad-cores last year.



I thought the the conroe was not only an upgrade in manufacturing process but also in architecture ? :?
March 22, 2006 1:27:13 PM

Ok...but did you create your account just to anticipate conroe? I don't think you should do that...well, unless you are purposefully opposing the AMD fanbois which I understand because all those fanboys are REALLY irritating.

Sorry, I just don't like people who are too biased towards something...I apologize...
March 22, 2006 1:30:12 PM

I used that name for over a year now in many forums. I always thought conroe was going to be a great cpu.
March 22, 2006 1:33:07 PM

Same here been switching from AMD to Intel with every rig. I think I've had more Intels though.
March 22, 2006 1:35:04 PM

well here's to hoping that u are right. I hope that it is not only a great processor but also cheap :wink:
March 22, 2006 1:36:26 PM

I bet it will ;) 

Well, I've had more Intels, but I only had three computers though...

200mhz Pentium I :o 
800mhz Pentium III
1533 Mhz Athlon XP 1800+
???

Hopefully a great new PC next!
March 22, 2006 1:49:33 PM

Quote:


I thought the the conroe was not only an upgrade in manufacturing process but also in architecture ?



No, the new conroe is just a revised version of the P-III, its just been updated. Just as the K8 was a revised and updated version of K7.

I am no means a fanboy I will concede when a product is superior, and I love the P-III at work, and I love my X2 at home. But when Intel just slaps two single cores together connects them with a crossbar and calls it Dual-Core that is not a sign of better architecure. Building a Dual-Core from design to product is what we call better architecture.
March 22, 2006 1:54:23 PM

Quote:

No, the new conroe is just a revised version of the P-III, its just been updated. Just as the K8 was a revised and updated version of K7.

I am no means a fanboy I will concede when a product is superior, and I love the P-III at work, and I love my X2 at home. But when Intel just slaps two single cores together connects them with a crossbar and calls it Dual-Core that is not a sign of better architecure. Building a Dual-Core from design to product is what we call better architecture.


X2 uses a crossbar switch. Conroe(and yonah) have shared smart cache. Pentium D just used the front side bus.
March 22, 2006 1:59:47 PM

Quote:


X2 uses a crossbar switch. Conroe(and yonah) have shared smart cache.



Smart cache is nothing to brag about, in a CPU intensive enviroment, the cores starting fighting over it, and that can get pretty ugly with a

"I dont think so girlfriend"
"Oh no you didn't slut"

But i still standby that the fact the war for Next Gen. CPUs is just warming up
March 22, 2006 2:02:46 PM

Smart cache has many advantages. One core can use more cache, and cache can be switched off when not in use. The crossbare is better than useing the FSB, but smart cache is a better design.
March 22, 2006 2:49:07 PM

What would be even better would be a combined smart cache+cross bar.
For two truely independent treads they would use the local cache, for dependent threads the cross bar would be used for communication, if only one thread is active the two caches would be added together (via cross bar) to be one large cache.

I may of course be talkin out of my arse (quite likley)
March 22, 2006 3:06:19 PM

Quote:
Morale of the story: a good architecural design, is greater than any manufacturing process


That may be a cute-sounding cliche', but having worked in the CPU process arena, I can tell you that both great architecture AND a great manufacturing process is the real goal. Why? Oh, little things like Q/C rejects, durability, profitability and so on come from the process side and speed, efficiency and potential growth come from the design side.
March 22, 2006 5:23:33 PM

Fanboys.......both Intel and AMD are morons, like some Nascar fans that only cheer for one driver they miss all of the other good stuff going on all around them.
FANBOYS......BOLDLY GOING WHERE NO ONE SANE WILL GO.
a b à CPUs
March 22, 2006 6:45:22 PM

Quote:
Correct me if im wrong, but the a64 and opteron are 90nm cpus while the conroe are 65nm(like the presler)? Why not wait till amd drops there new 65nm chips with new core setup b4 we say either one is better than the other.


Intel's always one nm process ahead

AMD needs a faster core to beat conroe not more fsb/htt, cache, mem bandwidth etc - they do nothin when the core is slow.
March 22, 2006 7:29:23 PM

Does the conroe fix the fsb problem that intell has now(with 2 cpu's on the same fsb vs amd with its built in memory controller)? If not and they getting a 20% increase thats crazy.
March 22, 2006 11:40:06 PM

Quote:
Does the conroe fix the fsb problem that intell has now(with 2 cpu's on the same fsb vs amd with its built in memory controller)? If not and they getting a 20% increase thats crazy.

Conroe does not have integrated memory controler, it have a technology called smart memory access that optimizes the order of memory operations and they way of memory acessing. They have better bandwidth than the K8 with dual channel DDR and unlike the K8 the cas latency almost have no affects on Conroes performance.
March 23, 2006 1:46:26 AM

It seems the pipeline stalls eat more performance than the memory latency. 20% is a bigger lead than AMD ever had in any benchmark, and Intel did it without a ICM. The chipset based memory controler dose give lower latency to the PCI bus over a ICM.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30466
This new memory would be nice, bet AMD2 will love it. But it costs way too much.
March 23, 2006 2:05:34 AM

Quote:
Correct me if im wrong, but the a64 and opteron are 90nm cpus while the conroe are 65nm(like the presler)? Why not wait till amd drops there new 65nm chips with new core setup b4 we say either one is better than the other.


This is what Im wondering, your talking current gen AMD (with a few bells and whistles) to brand new Intel tech, why not wait for the results of the AMD 65nm to compare on 65nm chips? I know AMD is making the claim that the AM2 is sorta a shot at conroe but is it really? Anyone know when the AMD 65nm chips will be out???
March 23, 2006 2:29:29 AM

AMD2? Q1,Q2, late Q2...
March 23, 2006 2:30:40 AM

Conroe? Q4, Q3? Conroe is months ahead of it's first date.
!