Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Why Amd can't deliver to the big boys.

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • AMD
Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 20, 2006 8:03:16 AM

More about : amd deliver big boys

March 20, 2006 8:34:25 AM

Google got googled....come on amd just doen't have the what the big boys need...People just need to know their limitations.....
March 20, 2006 9:21:46 AM

So, lets get this straight. AMD, a manufacturer of Hardware, specifically in this case CPU's is in over its head because the SOFTWARE that google is using is not ready?

Am I missing something? I have read a far more in depth release regarding this and at no point does it say that AMD is developing the software, the developers of the software were referred to several times as a separate entity.

Does anyone have more facts on the actual setup of this deal regarding who is responsible for supplying what?
Related resources
March 20, 2006 9:21:54 AM

this is just a small problem probably already solved.But nevertheleast very bad for AMD reputation
March 20, 2006 11:09:02 AM

Total nonsense and a waste of type, more ANTI AMD stuff.
Where's the ANTI Intel post now ? Gotta have parity.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 20, 2006 11:39:14 AM

Quit spawning useles threads...
March 20, 2006 11:42:58 AM

AMD is and has always been hindered by the fact that they do not have their own chipset.
March 20, 2006 12:05:13 PM

Quote:
AMD is a hardware vendor not software.


Ding ding ding, we have a winner. AMD does not have hardware bugs (nor does Intel). Both chip makers produce chips that run software. I do not understand exactly why Google is using new software rather than whatever they currently use, but you gotta face it:

We rarely ever deal with CPU hardware bugs, we just deal with benchmarks, temperatures, and overclocking to the max.
March 20, 2006 1:07:21 PM

Referring Inquirer in anything is an act of monority and you have done just that. Congrats.
Being unable to make the difference between software and hardware is also a big achievement. Congrats again.

Now stop and try to "think", who is over his head in here?
March 20, 2006 1:30:04 PM

Quote:
Google got googled....come on amd just doen't have the what the big boys need...People just need to know their limitations.....


Said by a Fanboy... Damn I Hate you guys ! AMD has the "big boys" needed... The Opteron is the best CISC server chip available...

Like all have said, this is a software issue, created by the differences in how the AMD setup is used, compared to the older intel, and this is causing problems... Thus, SOFTWARE(google), not Hardware(AMD) problem...

Thank god for another pointless thread...
March 20, 2006 1:58:55 PM

Another @sshole posting his FUD. 8)
March 20, 2006 2:03:11 PM

Quote:
Another @sshole posting his FUD. 8)


lol excuse the n00b question... buh wah is FUD ? ! :oops: 
March 20, 2006 2:25:23 PM

FUD; fear, uncertainty, doubt.
That's wah FUD means.
Known also as bullsh|t.
But be careful how you use it, it's Intel's patented trademark.
March 20, 2006 2:27:07 PM

lol Cheers dude :!:
March 20, 2006 10:20:11 PM

They did, but I don't think it was very good, so they struck up a deal with Nvidia. That was back in the day, maybe the 761 chipset when they hit 1 GHz ?
March 20, 2006 10:27:12 PM

Quote:
Another @sshole posting his FUD.


Funny coming from you.
March 21, 2006 3:14:09 AM

Quote:
AMD is and has always been hindered by the fact that they do not have their own chipset.


Hmm...sorry to say, but you're wrong. AMD does infact make chipsets, although they are only in 4 to 8-Way Opteron 64 server boards, but they do make them nonetheless. They are the 8xxx Series.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 21, 2006 3:32:14 AM

Just so.

And for the inquirers next trick, An article in which Bill Gates will blame both AMD and Intel for slow boots times, security violations and Office 2007 compatabilities issues because the chips are all flawed, and, as we all know, Microsoft products are secure and flawless. :D 
March 21, 2006 3:36:32 AM

Quote:
Quote:
The Opteron is the best CISC server chip available...


The Athlon 64 & Opteron 64 are actually more like RISC than CISC in their design IIRC, but I get what you mean :) .

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 21, 2006 3:43:09 AM

Quote:
Just so.

And for the inquirers next trick, An article in which Bill Gates will blame both AMD and Intel for slow boots times, security violations and Office 2007 compatabilities issues because the chips are all flawed, and, as we all know, Microsoft products are secure and flawless. :D 


Amen, the inquirer.net is to technology as the inquirer magazine is to hollywood (inquirer magazine being the tabloid, not the website :)  ).

I expect anytime now for them to report green aliens beamed up an AMD implanter and slowed down the Fab 36 ramp. Of course, they will likely quote a "reliable source", or "someone overhear Hector say....", or something like that.

The magazine is spelled with an E as Enquirer :p .

This just in: Midgets raid Intel's Fab's with Dustbunnies and destroy all their yields ;) .

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 21, 2006 3:59:23 AM

lol, let me start:

PAUL OTELLINO MARRIES HECTOR RUIZ! AMD AND INTEL MERGER DETAILS INSIDE!

hehehe...uh oh, I hope I don't get in trouble for posting Inquirer's main headline tomorrow :lol: .

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 21, 2006 5:37:33 AM

You are an AMD idiot!
March 21, 2006 5:47:50 AM

As much as I love AMD, this does point out the fact that AMD has a sadly low production capacity. Even if they had the marketing, products and prices to take hold of all aspects of the markets from Intel, they would simply not be able to mass produce the chips necessary. However, this article is retarded. Anybody who thinks that AMD chips have "bugs" in software is a moron. Which chip do you think Microsoft uses to compile its software? :o 
March 21, 2006 5:49:28 AM

Not for long.
March 21, 2006 5:52:15 AM

Quote:
Not for long.

What do you mean "not for long"? AMD doesn't even have the necessary factories in construction that it really needs....
and, this is still under the circumstances AMD has good marketing. The fact is, AMD has crap for marketing. Half of the people on your city street have never heard of AMD all they know is "intel inside" on the Dell commercials..
March 21, 2006 5:58:09 AM

How do you know that Microsoft uses AMD instead of Intel. You guessing or you know something. All I hear is that AMD is good for gaming and Intel is good at office programs. :roll: I have many friends working at Microsoft and they are using the Intel Dual core and the Pentium D processor. Most of their staff are using the Centrino laptop. You know, battery life.
March 21, 2006 6:21:29 AM

Quote:
How do you know that Microsoft uses AMD instead of Intel. You guessing or you know something. All I hear is that AMD is good for gaming and Intel is good at office programs. :roll: I have many friends working at Microsoft and they are using the Intel Dual core and the Pentium D processor. Most of their staff are using the Centrino laptop. You know, battery life.

AMD is good at gaming and Intel is good for office programs, but that doesn't mean that can't compete in each other's turf. I know Micorosft uses primarily Intel products, but I think you'd be suprised at how open Microsoft is about changing partners. They have worked with AMD to provide a lot of different fixes and solutions, really suprising when you consider the Wintel alliance. I can't find any links to the compiler thing, I'll admit I can't back up with hard evidence so you can say Intel compiles although we'll never know for sure lol. What I can confirm is that Microsoft isn't going to snuff out AMD like Intel will when it comes to software.
March 21, 2006 8:16:56 AM

Quote:
AMD has a sadly low production capacity.

Did you know that Amd increased thier chips sales by 50% last year, and that was before thier new plant was even on line?
Where did you get the notion that Intel was better at office? Aside from the obvious that office is not all that taxing, most office apps are highly IPC related, so Amd is the clear winner (unless you use only bapco benchmarks in your office)
To confirm who is better at compiling, just read Spitfire's sticky. It is very informative, and very unbiased.
March 21, 2006 5:44:23 PM

Quote:
You are an AMD idiot!


And you're a Nothing idiot! Because even Intel isn't as stupid as you! :o !

And in case you're wondering idiot, due to the larger pipeline, Intel sucks @ office apps vs. an Athlon 64. Because the pipeline gets flushed alot and having to flush a 31-stage pipeline is horrendous.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 21, 2006 5:45:14 PM

Quote:
AMD has a sadly low production capacity.

Did you know that Amd increased thier chips sales by 50% last year, and that was before thier new plant was even on line?
Where did you get the notion that Intel was better at office? Aside from the obvious that office is not all that taxing, most office apps are highly IPC related, so Amd is the clear winner (unless you use only bapco benchmarks in your office)
To confirm who is better at compiling, just read Spitfire's sticky. It is very informative, and very unbiased.

My thread has more information than Spitfire's, his is too bland.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 21, 2006 5:55:07 PM

Quote:
AMD has a sadly low production capacity.

Did you know that Amd increased thier chips sales by 50% last year, and that was before thier new plant was even on line?
Where did you get the notion that Intel was better at office? Aside from the obvious that office is not all that taxing, most office apps are highly IPC related, so Amd is the clear winner (unless you use only bapco benchmarks in your office)
To confirm who is better at compiling, just read Spitfire's sticky. It is very informative, and very unbiased.
Again, sales do not equal production!
March 21, 2006 5:57:21 PM

Quote:
AMD has a sadly low production capacity.

Did you know that Amd increased thier chips sales by 50% last year, and that was before thier new plant was even on line?
Where did you get the notion that Intel was better at office? Aside from the obvious that office is not all that taxing, most office apps are highly IPC related, so Amd is the clear winner (unless you use only bapco benchmarks in your office)
To confirm who is better at compiling, just read Spitfire's sticky. It is very informative, and very unbiased.
Again, sales do not equal production!

or performance!

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 21, 2006 11:26:45 PM

This article is crap. It's very poorly written.

Quote:
The problem is that the software is not all there yet, described by one insider as 'not ready for production' and 'chock full of bugs'.


What software? What the hell is he talking about? Last I checked Google is the one who writes software, not AMD. So how exactly is that AMD's problem or fault?

I hate the Inquirer. It's nothing more than a blog for a bunch of supposed "insiders." Are more often than not their sources are incorrect.
March 22, 2006 3:14:37 AM

Quote:
This article is crap. It's very poorly written.

The problem is that the software is not all there yet, described by one insider as 'not ready for production' and 'chock full of bugs'.


What software? What the hell is he talking about? Last I checked Google is the one who writes software, not AMD. So how exactly is that AMD's problem or fault?

I hate the Inquirer. It's nothing more than a blog for a bunch of supposed "insiders." Are more often than not their sources are incorrect.
Yeah, screw them. They never know what the hell they are talking about, but love to have everybody link up to their BS
March 22, 2006 4:00:47 AM

The problem itself has nothing to do with AMD. It's Google's new software that's buggy.
!