Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD "Barcelona" said to a INTEL CORE2 Ripoff!?!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 1, 2007 9:51:49 PM

Famous INTELIOT Fred Pohl...over at the JUNGLE http://thejungle.zforums.net/forum/index.php?msg=6116.1

is stating ( while insulting me through-out) that Barcelona is nothing more than a CONROE ripoff and steals INTEL tech.

Is it?
March 1, 2007 9:55:17 PM

If you look at the features in Barcelona (Anandtech article) it sure looks like AMD "borrowed" lot of technologies from Core 2.
March 1, 2007 9:59:10 PM

You mean that this is not what both companies have been doing since the begining???
Related resources
March 1, 2007 10:03:13 PM

Quote:
If you look at the features in Barcelona (Anandtech article) it sure looks like AMD "borrowed" lot of technologies from Core 2.


u wonder how radically different a cpu can be

i mean both GM and Ford make cars.... how many features are the same for both?

Isnt INTEL implementing CSI (aka HTT) and a ODMC
March 1, 2007 10:05:16 PM

They all sure have 4 wheels and an engine :lol: 
March 1, 2007 10:08:54 PM

Quote:
Famous INTELIOT Fred Pohl...over at the JUNGLE http://thejungle.zforums.net/forum/index.php?msg=6116.1

is stating ( while insulting me through-out) that Barcelona is nothing more than a CONROE ripoff and steals INTEL tech.

Is it?

Is it so hard to cut trolls out of our life and continue no our way, being reasonable persons?! How can doubling SSE registers or enhancing branch predictions be a ripoff; it's just commonsense, it's the only way to strengthen an architecture. By this same troll logics, we could also say that ALL Intel's dual cores are ripoffs, because they got the idea from AMD dual cores; it's just BS.
March 1, 2007 10:09:54 PM

Both companies have always "stolen" ideas from one another. Intel stole AMD's EV6 bus. AMD "borrows" SSE, 2, 3, & 4. Intel stole EMT64 (or reverse engineered it, whichever). AMD stole the SLOT A format from SLOT 1.

I could go on forever...

The point is: who fcuking cares? So long as it's faster and doesn't infringe upon patents... what does it matter?
March 1, 2007 10:10:36 PM

Yes its a ripoff because it requires power to even work, goes onto a motherboard, has pins, heats up when in use, can be overclocked, uses L1 and L2 cache, has transistors, worthless against bullets, and not very edible :o 
March 1, 2007 10:11:01 PM

Yes, Intel will introduce CSI with ODMC but I would say it won't
benefit desktops much. You need all the CSI features and bandwidth
only when are talking about 2P, 4P or more. Besides I don't think
HTT / ODMC was AMD's original Idea. If I remember correct,
I think DEC/Alpha had it first I guess.
March 1, 2007 10:15:29 PM

is it CSI Miami or CSI:NY :D 
March 1, 2007 10:29:18 PM

Is it really necessary to whine here about what someone else said over another forum? :roll:
March 1, 2007 10:40:47 PM

Quote:
Is it really necessary to whine here about what someone else said over another forum? :roll:


wasnt whining... just seeing what people think about barcelona being a INTEL CORE2DUO in green clothing
March 1, 2007 10:43:44 PM

Quote:


Is it?


:lol: 
March 1, 2007 11:00:24 PM

Same here on the link.It takes the damn thing exsisting for their to even be an arguement.Sounds like the S&W guys from our gun club that bash Ruger when they know Ruger is a stronger gun lmao.Then ya take a 629 and load a hot 44. then KABOOM it's in pieces , then ya take a ruger and your smacking the powder can trying to make that last round 1/2 a grain heavier.I am running a C2D after using my last build for 7 years+ (AMD K6-2) and when I started up again it made me sick I could get a Pentium D 805 that can OC for half of what AMD could do me.I know the 3800 x2 was faster stock,cooler , and less power hungry but how many of you AMD guys can look me in the eye and say the K6 series ( mainly the K6-2/3) was what made AMD shine in your eyes.None of us could touch a P2 when they came out cause the SS7 ( most that OC back then tried to get it instead of the older s7 twards the end of 66mhzFSB) was still great and it didnt need to be changed.That for me was the first time I felt betrayed by intel.Then I loged on to my favorite forum and was amazed at the number of posts ranting on about the P2 multi's and having to raise the FSB which just made people mad.And it is still rolling down hill.AMD is the underdog in my eyes like ruger , they had a better, more original product and looked out for consumers but then I saw the Price of that 3800x2 ( i know i know then they dropped the price and I was/ am tempted to build a AMD desktop even if it is not as good a deal/performance than a core2duo), Just want to own one from These days to see how I like it cause they had my support as asus does even if they dont deserve it anymore.The crap is always the same cause there could be a person that replies to what I said and contradicts everything I say but we could both be right or wrong.One last example is that EVERY new car has atleast front disc brakes , heck most time 4-wheels , Jaguar designed the disc brake system with the help of William Fisher of GM & an unnamed person from Chrysler yet everyone has them these days , why you ask ......... Because it's not a option/feature anymore it is a necessity now.Intel switched to DDR2 and then AMD did , AMD has an integrated memory controller and Intel will in the furture.Why do you ask ............. Because it is necessary to advance.I bet they will make the raptor style 10k hd standard befor we start going flash drives mainstream because they have hit the limit like 5400rpm.It is cheating in a way and if it wasnt about advancement they would sue a lot more over things like this but if Intel starts sueing over things like this then AMD will start to and at some point one will hit a brick wall that the other will solve first.Then whoever was second will either be paying for a map from the other or getting sued over " Cheating" , yeah they might be able to find their own patch but it doesnt allways happen.
March 1, 2007 11:29:41 PM

Just noticed your Baron signature , i love it
March 2, 2007 12:32:25 AM

leave the poor amti guys alone - its bad enough they have second rate systems but com on - they ripped off Intel? that's too much to bare!

Quote:
If you look at the features in Barcelona (Anandtech article) it sure looks like AMD "borrowed" lot of technologies from Core 2.


com on we all know 4x4 is sure stroke of genius with its 250 watt interface - what about the 125w 6000+ - its well ....

and the r600 hey they are delaying it since they want to release all their graphic cards as a big happy family - amti does not mind losing business to nvidia each and everyday its delayed - right?

well at least we have that new integrated graphics so we can fire up oblivion on 800x600 res at 27 fps!


where is my r600 and new crossfire mobos - com on amti move it!
March 2, 2007 12:50:56 AM

Quote:
Famous INTELIOT Fred Pohl...over at the JUNGLE http://thejungle.zforums.net/forum/index.php?msg=6116.1

is stating ( while insulting me through-out) that Barcelona is nothing more than a CONROE ripoff and steals INTEL tech.

Is it?


:cry:  sry that someone on another forum was picking on you. :cry: 

Need a hug? :( 

Now get back into that other forum and tell him to leave you alone or the guys over at TG Forum will flame on him. :x
March 2, 2007 1:09:16 AM

I think it is more borrowing. :p 
March 2, 2007 1:14:32 AM

All I can say is :? :? :? :? :? :?

You are such an idiot.

I'm never quite sure how to respond to you. You call AMD second rate systems? Will you do that when K10 comes out and beats your first rate system? And your tone, even when speaking facts is just, i dunno, sounds like AMD kicked your dog or something.

You are now to me, who baron is to jack, except i'm too lazy to refute you at every turn like jack does. :wink:
March 2, 2007 1:18:44 AM

Inventing is kinda that way, you see a product that you can make better and make it. Don't think that is stealing.
March 2, 2007 1:34:27 AM

Even if one company has something patented that the other one wants to use, they could always license the technology from them. It wouldn't be stealing...........

Add beerandcandy to your list corvetteguy lol
March 2, 2007 1:56:11 AM

Well AMD licenses the x86 architecture from Intel, and under the licensing agreement the two companies are required to share technologies that are based around the x86 architecture.

i.e. x86-64 a.k.a amd64 a.k.a x64

So while it seems tech's are being ripped off from one another, there most likely not, then things like doubling SSE just natural progression.


I may have left out details or misstated something, so if anyone knows more details about what i mentioned feel free to correct me. I only have a vague understanding
March 2, 2007 2:05:16 AM

Quote:
Yes its a ripoff because it requires power to even work, goes onto a motherboard, has pins, heats up when in use, can be overclocked, uses L1 and L2 cache, has transistors, worthless against bullets, and not very edible :o 


hm thas weird, I remember the K6-II bein quite tasty and life saving
March 2, 2007 2:12:20 AM

here is Fred Pohl's exacnt comment

Quote:
From: fredpohl Mar-01 11:26pm
To: Dave-B (THEWRETCHED) unread (5 of 5)

6116.5 in reply to 6116.3
If p00pTard linked to the Anandtech article that I already posted, it is by far the best, most accurate and unbiased article about K9 that I've seen yet. It correctly notes that every improvement in K9 has already been incorporated by Intel over the past 5 years.

Still, although K9 offers nothing new, all those improvements together should make K9 much more competitive with C2 than K8 is. AMD seems to have addressed most of K8's shortcomings with K9.

p00pTard's translation of K9's incorporation of existing Netburst, Dothan, Yonah and C2D core features to be "beast-like" can only be explained by his fanatical AMD fanboism.

March 2, 2007 2:13:59 AM

Quote:
here is Fred Pohl's exacnt comment

From: fredpohl Mar-01 11:26pm
To: Dave-B (THEWRETCHED) unread (5 of 5)

6116.5 in reply to 6116.3
If p00pTard linked to the Anandtech article that I already posted, it is by far the best, most accurate and unbiased article about K9 that I've seen yet. It correctly notes that every improvement in K9 has already been incorporated by Intel over the past 5 years.

Still, although K9 offers nothing new, all those improvements together should make K9 much more competitive with C2 than K8 is. AMD seems to have addressed most of K8's shortcomings with K9.

p00pTard's translation of K9's incorporation of existing Netburst, Dothan, Yonah and C2D core features to be "beast-like" can only be explained by his fanatical AMD fanboism.



he called Barcelona K9 that should automatically discredit anything he says against AMD, until he is able to correct himself.
March 2, 2007 2:31:08 AM

Quote:
here is Fred Pohl's exacnt comment

From: fredpohl Mar-01 11:26pm
To: Dave-B (THEWRETCHED) unread (5 of 5)

6116.5 in reply to 6116.3
If p00pTard linked to the Anandtech article that I already posted, it is by far the best, most accurate and unbiased article about K9 that I've seen yet. It correctly notes that every improvement in K9 has already been incorporated by Intel over the past 5 years.

Still, although K9 offers nothing new, all those improvements together should make K9 much more competitive with C2 than K8 is. AMD seems to have addressed most of K8's shortcomings with K9.

p00pTard's translation of K9's incorporation of existing Netburst, Dothan, Yonah and C2D core features to be "beast-like" can only be explained by his fanatical AMD fanboism.



he called Barcelona K9 that should automatically discredit anything he says against AMD, until he is able to correct himself.

he says that anyone who calls barcelona anyting other than a K9 is a blithering AMD fanboi
March 2, 2007 2:33:11 AM

Fanboy because they call it something else?? lol What a douche mongrel.
March 2, 2007 2:59:05 AM

Quote:
All I can say is :? :? :? :? :? :?

You are such an idiot.

I'm never quite sure how to respond to you. You call AMD second rate systems? Will you do that when K10 comes out and beats your first rate system? And your tone, even when speaking facts is just, i dunno, sounds like AMD kicked your dog or something.

You are now to me, who baron is to jack, except i'm too lazy to refute you at every turn like jack does. :wink:

Careful DragonSprayer is passing out PM's threatening lawsuits now for belittling his irrational crap posts.

We should all be so scared :oops: 

:lol: 
March 2, 2007 3:04:54 AM

Quote:
All I can say is :? :? :? :? :? :?

You are such an idiot.

I'm never quite sure how to respond to you. You call AMD second rate systems? Will you do that when K10 comes out and beats your first rate system? And your tone, even when speaking facts is just, i dunno, sounds like AMD kicked your dog or something.

You are now to me, who baron is to jack, except i'm too lazy to refute you at every turn like jack does. :wink:

Careful DragonSprayer is passing out PM's threatening lawsuits now for belittling his irrational crap posts.

We should all be so scared :oops: 

:lol: 


I think he would be dissapointed, as i have no money, no Disgruntled Idiot Insurance, and the only thing of value i own is my second rate AMD system :p  :wink:
March 2, 2007 3:10:56 AM

Yeah he definitely wouldn't want one of those! lol
March 2, 2007 3:16:52 AM

Quote:
Is it really necessary to whine here about what someone else said over another forum? :roll:


wasnt whining... just seeing what people think about barcelona being a INTEL CORE2DUO in green clothing


Thats why Barcelona is late Intel fab having trouble ramping up to run green.



____________________
“Right or Wrong is always dependent on the context.”
March 2, 2007 3:55:23 AM

Intel and AMD have a cross-licensing agreement.

AMD gets tech like SSE from Intel and Intel gets tech like EMT64, which are instructions licensed from AMD64.
March 2, 2007 4:36:41 AM

Quote:
why havent they migrated to IMC yet?


It is not necessary yet.

Where is their wall?

Heat?
March 2, 2007 5:17:51 AM

I read last year somewhere, that a team of engineers that developed what later became known as Core (and Core2) left AMD for Intel.
I guess this kinda thing happens all the time.
March 2, 2007 5:18:29 AM

Quote:
Yes its a ripoff because it requires power to even work, goes onto a motherboard, has pins, heats up when in use, can be overclocked, uses L1 and L2 cache, has transistors, worthless against bullets, and not very edible :o 
I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this. I love a bag of chips. :D  :wink:


March 2, 2007 5:49:56 AM

I agree with Jack that on the desktop or mobile the FSB is not the limiting factor but on the server side it is. To illustrate this point. Why are the Xeon's the only ones that have a 1333 FSB? Answer: because they need it do to FSB saturation. Another point: Why did the announcement for a new Xeon later this year is going to have a 1600 FSB? Answer: because Intel needs to further unlock more performance in the Xeon to maintain or even keep up with the power of the Barcelona.
a c 125 à CPUs
a b å Intel
a b À AMD
March 2, 2007 5:50:57 AM

A rip off.....no....after all they both do the same thing....Intel went for more IPC just like amd did years ago(Intel just went farther....at least for now....who knows whats next)....i hope it keeps on going....more computer speed for me...

Intel and AMD...."share" things.....
March 2, 2007 5:54:20 AM

Quote:
A rip off.....no....after all they both do the same thing....Intel went for more IPC just like amd did years ago(Intel just went farther....at least for now....who knows whats next)....i hope it keeps on going....more computer speed for me...

Intel and AMD...."share" things.....
Hector and Paul probably play rounds of golf together. :wink:
March 2, 2007 5:56:16 AM

Tell him the only thing that Barcelona will actually steal from core2 is it's thunder.
March 2, 2007 6:15:32 AM

Quote:
If you look at the features in Barcelona (Anandtech article) it sure looks like AMD "borrowed" lot of technologies from Core 2.


u wonder how radically different a cpu can be

i mean both GM and Ford make cars.... how many features are the same for both?

Isnt INTEL implementing CSI (aka HTT) and a ODMCIt's different, i guess, but kind of interesting too... AMD is acting like they're protecting the "Colonels" secret recipe, but GM/Ford look forward to revealing upcoming stuff (concept-cars). As an example..yesterday i read that Chrysler is bringing back the "Challenger"(Schwingggggg....looks awesome), just like GM(new Camaro.. styled like old ones) and of course...Ford with the Mustang looking like a '70ish Mustang. Anyways, they welcome the chance to flaunt their stuff, whereas computer component mfgr's hide their future products... Such is the nature of the industry, i guess. :x
March 2, 2007 6:17:33 AM

Well vern, not sure. I heard that it is the big A that is pushing Intel to come out with the 1600 FSB. So if you are into Macs then there will be a nice upgrade to the Mac Pro later this year.

Of course this means that when Intel moves to the stepping of the Core 2 Duo processor that supports a 1600 FSB then Merom, Conroe and of course Woodcrest will benefit and they should all be better at overclocking in the FSB.

The limitation would be the MCH. But since the Bearlake chipset is set to support a 1333 FSB I would say that any board built using the Bearlake chipset should have no problem taking one of those next stepping processors to 1600 FSB or beyond.

I'm really interested in what the CSI bus will provide the Nehalem in terms of Bandwidth. Since the Nehalem is supposed to have even more cache than the Wolfdale's 6M cache feeding 4 cores I'm betting that Nehalem is going to become King of the Hill for X86 processors.
March 2, 2007 6:33:40 AM

Mmmmm, no I don't believe so. I think the limitations of the Clock Generator will limit that. The base clock would need to run at 500MHz to reach 2000. That would be an expensive chip would be my guess. Not that a Clock Generator company could not design it but it would be made in low volume so of course the cost would be high.

Each Clock Generator has a set of base frequencies that are set by Bios using GPIO's (General Purpose Input/Output) lines. The last Clock Generator I saw Intel use on one of their boards had a top frequency of 400MHz x 4 = 1600 FSB.

If you new the correct lines to either pull up or down you can force any motherboard clock generator to run at one of those base frequencies. I modified a board to force 1333 FSB once. Worked great. I just added 2 3 pin headers and solder wires to the correct pins on the Clock Generator. Then using a simple jumper I could force the board to any base clock frequency no matter what the Processor was telling the Clock Generator to set the base frequency too.

Of course you need a good processor that can run at the elevated FSB but you can do some nice overclocks that way. :D 
March 2, 2007 6:43:16 AM

Vern, I think you are getting confuse here. The IMC improves the latency between the Dimm's and the processor and the FSB or HT or CSI will run indepently of the memory bus speed.

I'm betting that Intel will make their IMC run at the top expected speed of DDR3 with enough margin to meet their design specs.

It will also be interesting to see what knobs us enthusiasts will have to play with once Nehalem comes out. Will increasing the base clock also push the memory clock up will that have its own PLL so even if you raise the base clock it happily runs at its design speed.

Just some thoughts. 8)
March 2, 2007 6:54:23 AM

Quote:
So you know how to trace the electrical aspects of the cpu that well?Nice I wouldnt mind knowing that myself 8) Closest i ever came was unlocking a barton with thermal grease. I like to do it to see how high it goes and then run at stock for longeevity.
Whoaaa there verndewd....One thing at a time...baby-steps...learn to walk before you run, chicken before the egg, cart before the horse, etc.etc.etc. You have to learn to put the processor into the damn socket properly....without bending the pins!!! :tongue: :D  :D  :D  hehehe
March 2, 2007 6:55:16 AM

I don't know the electricals of the processor at all. To me it is a grey box with the board Bios being a Black Box. I can code to a limited extent but coding is in no way fun for me. Close to pulling teeth.

Now I do know some about motherboard layout and what goes on there.

2 things to know about processors. What voltage do they take and how to connect them to the FSB to communicate with the rest of the motherboard.

Here is an interesting tidbit. The EPA is setting up 2007 as the new Energy Star year. I have been characterizing intel CPU's in preperations to figure out what CPU's can be used in what motherboards to meet the new Energy Star requirements.

I have characterize a E4300 to less than 7 watts idle which is extremely and I mean extremely good. If my memory serves me the original Core 2's came out with an idle wattage of around 22 watts. A very nice drop.

:D 
March 2, 2007 7:06:01 AM

Quote:
intel has higher clock speeds than 400Mhz on their boards.


Please tell me B and C where on a motherboard other than internally in the processor or overclocking is higher thank 400Mhz right now?

Quote:
also intel did IMC before so they are aware of how to make the timing work.


Yes, the Timna processor using an IMC for RDRAM. A friend of mine who works at Intel still has one and the board that was designed to work with it. He says it still works.

Quote:
I doubt they would make it work at the top expected speed of DDR3.
cause then they would have memory issues like amd has with picky memory speeds vs perf


Top speed per Jedec for DDR3 is 1600 or the IMC would need to run at 800MHz.
March 2, 2007 12:29:30 PM

Quote:
A rip off.....no....after all they both do the same thing....Intel went for more IPC just like amd did years ago(Intel just went farther....at least for now....who knows whats next)....i hope it keeps on going....more computer speed for me...

Intel and AMD...."share" things.....


Exactly why aren't we worried about the Core2Duo ripping off architecture from AMD what happened to the need for speed clock cycles in Netbust. They went for more IPC than clock speed because they got their a**es handed to them by AMD in performance for years and figured that if they stopped hitting their head on the gigahertz wall it might feel better seemed to have worked well too. If Barcelona looks a lot like Core2Duo in architecture it's more likely Intels doing because they changed their architecture to become more similar to AMD.
March 2, 2007 3:33:46 PM

This guy is so stupid that in the past 3 years he used Pentium crap.
March 2, 2007 3:42:04 PM

Quote:
Exactly why aren't we worried about the Core2Duo ripping off architecture from AMD what happened to the need for speed clock cycles in Netbust. They went for more IPC than clock speed because they got their a**es handed to them by AMD in performance for years and figured that if they stopped hitting their head on the gigahertz wall it might feel better seemed to have worked well too. If Barcelona looks a lot like Core2Duo in architecture it's more likely Intels doing because they changed their architecture to become more similar to AMD.


That's a rather silly view of it IMO. Core 2 is an evolution of the Pentium M, not a knock-off Athlon. So before you accuse Intel of copying AMD:
Quote:
AMD started as a producer of logic chips in 1969, then entered the RAM chip business in 1975. That same year, it introduced a reverse-engineered clone of the Intel 8080 microprocessor.


With that said, regarding 'copying' each other, I personally wouldn't care if AMD took Intel chips and rubbed out the markings on the IHS with a magic marker then sold them as Athlons. Everyone copies each other and it makes products better. Like someone said earlier, as long as no patents are infringed, it's fair game.
March 2, 2007 4:15:50 PM

saying sorry for any spelling now,i was in a car wreck last night,and broke my right arm,so typeing left handed. Mk,that said, AMD and Intel have been reverse engineering each others products for years and years...and ya know what?its what makes the market jump so much...it lets another set of eyes look at something, and a diffrent mind to wander what they can do with it...I hope AMD stole so much from core2 that cpuid mistakes em for each other...cause i want the best performance i can get,and i dont care who designs it,and steals another design from somewhere else, as long as i can have it
!