such as the expectation that the chip would outperform its predecessors by about 30 to 40% and that AMD considers the introduction of the chip as a significant launch, probably more significant than the launch of the original Opteron CPU.
I don't know if this is a miss print, but according to Hector Ruiz, Barcelona will be 30-40% faster than predecessors. Now, tell me if I'm wrong, but I thought refering to predecessors meant previous Opterons. That performance gain puts it in line with the Core lineup, which makes more sense than a 40% gain in "some applications" than Intel chips.
By all means, I'm a fan boy of consumerism. What I dislike is hype without proof. Intel hyped then showed proof. Where's the proof from AMD?
30-40% faster than Opteron should make it a hair faster than Core 2, generally said to be 20-25% faster than K8 at the same clocks. Core 2 also has substantially more frequency headroom at the moment, as overclockers would know.
AMD isn't providing any proof yet. The funny suspicion I get is that AMD may tweak the performance claims and keep working on K10 till both match, delaying the product release as necessary.
such as the expectation that the chip would outperform its predecessors by about 30 to 40% and that AMD considers the introduction of the chip as a significant launch, probably more significant than the launch of the original Opteron CPU.
I don't know if this is a miss print, but according to Hector Ruiz, Barcelona will be 30-40% faster than predecessors. Now, tell me if I'm wrong, but I thought refering to predecessors meant previous Opterons. That performance gain puts it in line with the Core lineup, which makes more sense than a 40% gain in "some applications" than Intel chips.
By all means, I'm a fan boy of consumerism. What I dislike is hype without proof. Intel hyped then showed proof. Where's the proof from AMD?
According to a video interview with the EMEA guy and chipset guy, those estimates are extremely conservative. But in this case I believe it is talking about Kuma vs. Brisbane as there is no direct quad core correlation.
I expected 60-80% which in FP is what dual core gets with Barcelona according to AMD.
He probably meant overall averages. We can all say "show me the money" but the thing is not due to sample until May so we have a few more weeks until server benches start to pop up.
If they misrepresented it then I will have a 4400+ for a LOOOOONNNNNGGGGG time.
Here's the thing, from a little research, I found that the earliest testings(actual benchmarks) were in March of last year for the Conroe chips. Granted, it was presented by Intel, but they weren't lying or proclaiming anything without the proof in hand. Core 2 shipped in August, right? If AMD is following suit, we should have seen some benches already. What are they afraid of? I thought AMD was bold and ambitious. They have challenged Intel before, but that was with already proven facts. I want to see the gloves come off before I lose all respect for AMD. It's time to put up or shut up.
Baron, I hope for your sake, that AMD and you are correct. But either way, I think I'll stick with my QX6700 until penryn or nehalem hits the streets, no matter what AMD puts out. I have an X2 3800+ system which I choose to let my wife use, she doesn't know the difference.
Here's the thing, from a little research, I found that the earliest testings(actual benchmarks) were in March of last year for the Conroe chips. Granted, it was presented by Intel, but they weren't lying or proclaiming anything without the proof in hand. Core 2 shipped in August, right? If AMD is following suit, we should have seen some benches already. What are they afraid of? I thought AMD was bold and ambitious. They have challenged Intel before, but that was with already proven facts. I want to see the gloves come off before I lose all respect for AMD. It's time to put up or shut up.
Baron, I hope for your sake, that AMD and you are correct. But either way, I think I'll stick with my QX6700 until penryn or nehalem hits the streets, no matter what AMD puts out. I have an X2 3800+ system which I choose to let my wife use, she doesn't know the difference.
Please, this is not a game. It's about engineers. AMD has Itanium AND Alpha engineers. Intel has 10X the resources and can have a lot more test chips being produced before they sample, AMD can't.
Again, why would they lie unless they want to go out of business? Intel FUD'd everyone away from the Opteron launch the same way.
Here's the thing, from a little research, I found that the earliest testings(actual benchmarks) were in March of last year for the Conroe chips. Granted, it was presented by Intel, but they weren't lying or proclaiming anything without the proof in hand. Core 2 shipped in August, right? If AMD is following suit, we should have seen some benches already. What are they afraid of? I thought AMD was bold and ambitious. They have challenged Intel before, but that was with already proven facts. I want to see the gloves come off before I lose all respect for AMD. It's time to put up or shut up.
Baron, I hope for your sake, that AMD and you are correct. But either way, I think I'll stick with my QX6700 until penryn or nehalem hits the streets, no matter what AMD puts out. I have an X2 3800+ system which I choose to let my wife use, she doesn't know the difference.
You seem to have mistaken AMD and Intel as being the same company. Every company doesn't run by the same business strategies. AMD is talking about it's chip, so what? Intel talked about Conroe a long time before it launched, and I didn't see anyone complaining. Why is it that everyone finds Intel to be more credible than AMD?
Here's the thing, from a little research, I found that the earliest testings(actual benchmarks) were in March of last year for the Conroe chips. Granted, it was presented by Intel, but they weren't lying or proclaiming anything without the proof in hand. Core 2 shipped in August, right? If AMD is following suit, we should have seen some benches already. What are they afraid of? I thought AMD was bold and ambitious. They have challenged Intel before, but that was with already proven facts. I want to see the gloves come off before I lose all respect for AMD. It's time to put up or shut up.
Baron, I hope for your sake, that AMD and you are correct. But either way, I think I'll stick with my QX6700 until penryn or nehalem hits the streets, no matter what AMD puts out. I have an X2 3800+ system which I choose to let my wife use, she doesn't know the difference.
Please, this is not a game. It's about engineers. AMD has Itanium AND Alpha engineers. Intel has 10X the resources and can have a lot more test chips being produced before they sample, AMD can't.
Again, why would they lie unless they want to go out of business? Intel FUD'd everyone away from the Opteron launch the same way.
Bugger off, excuse my French.
Not to start a flamewar or anything, but it might be in their interest to lie because;
1) they need a good news coming through - theirs stocks have hit a new 52-weeks low. Some are predicting doom and gloom for 07 for AMD
2) stop from all the server sales going to Intel. By saying that their chip is X% faster, some ppl/companies might delay their buying decision to see what AMD could offer (not always the case)
Both of those are valid reasons why they would 'want' to lie. IM NOT SAYING THAT THEY ARE LYING (excuse my caps).
Here's the thing, from a little research, I found that the earliest testings(actual benchmarks) were in March of last year for the Conroe chips. Granted, it was presented by Intel, but they weren't lying or proclaiming anything without the proof in hand. Core 2 shipped in August, right? If AMD is following suit, we should have seen some benches already. What are they afraid of? I thought AMD was bold and ambitious. They have challenged Intel before, but that was with already proven facts. I want to see the gloves come off before I lose all respect for AMD. It's time to put up or shut up.
Baron, I hope for your sake, that AMD and you are correct. But either way, I think I'll stick with my QX6700 until penryn or nehalem hits the streets, no matter what AMD puts out. I have an X2 3800+ system which I choose to let my wife use, she doesn't know the difference.
Please, this is not a game. It's about engineers. AMD has Itanium AND Alpha engineers. Intel has 10X the resources and can have a lot more test chips being produced before they sample, AMD can't.
Again, why would they lie unless they want to go out of business? Intel FUD'd everyone away from the Opteron launch the same way.
Bugger off, excuse my French.
Not to start a flamewar or anything, but it might be in their interest to lie because;
1) they need a good news coming through - theirs stocks have hit a new 52-weeks low. Some are predicting doom and gloom for 07 for AMD
2) stop from all the server sales going to Intel. By saying that their chip is X% faster, some ppl/companies might delay their buying decision to see what AMD could offer (not always the case)
Both of those are valid reasons why they would 'want' to lie. IM NOT SAYING THAT THEY ARE LYING (excuse my caps).
In a fantasy world where misrepresentation doesn't have repercussions perhaps that would be a proper course but in the real world, Opteron is not a lie and neither will Barcelona be a lie.
Here's the thing, from a little research, I found that the earliest testings(actual benchmarks) were in March of last year for the Conroe chips. Granted, it was presented by Intel, but they weren't lying or proclaiming anything without the proof in hand. Core 2 shipped in August, right? If AMD is following suit, we should have seen some benches already. What are they afraid of? I thought AMD was bold and ambitious. They have challenged Intel before, but that was with already proven facts. I want to see the gloves come off before I lose all respect for AMD. It's time to put up or shut up.
Baron, I hope for your sake, that AMD and you are correct. But either way, I think I'll stick with my QX6700 until penryn or nehalem hits the streets, no matter what AMD puts out. I have an X2 3800+ system which I choose to let my wife use, she doesn't know the difference.
You seem to have mistaken AMD and Intel as being the same company. Every company doesn't run by the same business strategies. AMD is talking about it's chip, so what? Intel talked about Conroe a long time before it launched, and I didn't see anyone complaining. Why is it that everyone finds Intel to be more credible than AMD?
i been sayin this for a while.... AMD is doing no different than INTEL did last year.... but for some reason AMD is villified for it
Here's the thing, from a little research, I found that the earliest testings(actual benchmarks) were in March of last year for the Conroe chips. Granted, it was presented by Intel, but they weren't lying or proclaiming anything without the proof in hand. Core 2 shipped in August, right? If AMD is following suit, we should have seen some benches already. What are they afraid of? I thought AMD was bold and ambitious. They have challenged Intel before, but that was with already proven facts. I want to see the gloves come off before I lose all respect for AMD. It's time to put up or shut up.
Baron, I hope for your sake, that AMD and you are correct. But either way, I think I'll stick with my QX6700 until penryn or nehalem hits the streets, no matter what AMD puts out. I have an X2 3800+ system which I choose to let my wife use, she doesn't know the difference.
You seem to have mistaken AMD and Intel as being the same company. Every company doesn't run by the same business strategies. AMD is talking about it's chip, so what? Intel talked about Conroe a long time before it launched, and I didn't see anyone complaining. Why is it that everyone finds Intel to be more credible than AMD?
i been sayin this for a while.... AMD is doing no different than INTEL did last year.... but for some reason AMD is villified for it
That's not what I was saying.
I don't see where Intel did the same as AMD is doing now. If I'm wrong put in some links to show me. Intel showed demonstrations to support their claims, that's all I'm saying. Where's the demo's(from AMD)? And they may be two different companies, but Intel has been on top because of the way they do business. It would suit AMD to at least do some of the things that Intel has. And to talk about resources is rediculous when comparing multibillion dollar businesses. You may hate what I say, but again, it's my opinion, and I'd rather stick with Intel until AMD can prove otherwise.
You can say my opinion is based on future roadmaps and the directions the two companies are heading. Now, I really don't like Apple because of their arrogant prick of a leader, Steve Jobs, but they saw enough in the future of Intel to use their CPU's. That's got to say something about the future of Intel. Now, if AMD comes up with something remarkable, I'll be the first one to use it, as long as they show me its remarkable.
I don't see where Intel did the same as AMD is doing now. If I'm wrong put in some links to show me. Intel showed demonstrations to support their claims, that's all I'm saying. Where's the demo's(from AMD)? And they may be two different companies, but Intel has been on top because of the way they do business. It would suit AMD to at least do some of the things that Intel has. And to talk about resources is rediculous when comparing multibillion dollar businesses. You may hate what I say, but again, it's my opinion, and I'd rather stick with Intel until AMD can prove otherwise.
You can say my opinion is based on future roadmaps and the directions the two companies are heading. Now, I really don't like Apple because of their arrogant prick of a leader, Steve Jobs, but they saw enough in the future of Intel to use their CPU's. That's got to say something about the future of Intel. Now, if AMD comes up with something remarkable, I'll be the first one to use it, as long as they show me its remarkable.
I don't even know where to start.
Quote :
It would suit AMD to at least do some of the things that Intel has.
Like I said, you seem to think they are the same companies. If AMD was Intel, then there might have been a working Barcelona demo with more than task manager open. But it's not.
I don't consider Steve Jobs a prick, he does, in my opinion, bend the facts sometimes, but he isn't a prick.
I'm not here begging you not to stick with Intel. I'm not trying to stick up for AMD, I'm just saying that there will be a demo, and AMD will not do it because you ask them for it. If I went to Intel and asked them for a free Core 2 Duo, Intel would not give it to me.
Here's the thing, from a little research, I found that the earliest testings(actual benchmarks) were in March of last year for the Conroe chips. Granted, it was presented by Intel, but they weren't lying or proclaiming anything without the proof in hand. Core 2 shipped in August, right? If AMD is following suit, we should have seen some benches already. What are they afraid of? I thought AMD was bold and ambitious. They have challenged Intel before, but that was with already proven facts. I want to see the gloves come off before I lose all respect for AMD. It's time to put up or shut up.
Baron, I hope for your sake, that AMD and you are correct. But either way, I think I'll stick with my QX6700 until penryn or nehalem hits the streets, no matter what AMD puts out. I have an X2 3800+ system which I choose to let my wife use, she doesn't know the difference.
You seem to have mistaken AMD and Intel as being the same company. Every company doesn't run by the same business strategies. AMD is talking about it's chip, so what? Intel talked about Conroe a long time before it launched, and I didn't see anyone complaining. Why is it that everyone finds Intel to be more credible than AMD?
i been sayin this for a while.... AMD is doing no different than INTEL did last year.... but for some reason AMD is villified for it
Not quite.... Intel did actually setup a running system, allowed journalist to scrutinize the setup, drivers, device manager, and even allowed Anand to update the AMD BIOS used for the comparision system.
What AMD is doing similar to Intel is what Intel stated in 2005 that everyone brushed off when they said they would lead in performance and power by 20% in both cases with a new architecture 2006.... it is exactly what they did.
AMD is making similar claims in performance within the same power envelop (actually quite bolder claims), there is no reason to doubt it but there is no reason to accept it either.... the same skepticism is valid now for AMD as it was in 2005 when Intel made the same claims without data.
Jack
I agree, Jack, but what is different now is timing. We are supposedly six months from a hard launch of Barcelona and where's the demo's? If AMD was so confident, why did it take so long to proclaim superior performance? These two companies may do business different, but if I've got a superior product that's launching in a pretty short time window, I think I would be putting all the speculation to rest and show some hard numbers, some real fact.
AMD has been working on K10 for a long time, it's time to give the people what they want. Maybe I'll eat my own words and Barcelona will be brilliant, but the way AMD is playing this "edge of your seat thriller" sucks. Give me something solid before I lose interest.
I don't see where Intel did the same as AMD is doing now. If I'm wrong put in some links to show me. Intel showed demonstrations to support their claims, that's all I'm saying. Where's the demo's(from AMD)? And they may be two different companies, but Intel has been on top because of the way they do business. It would suit AMD to at least do some of the things that Intel has. And to talk about resources is rediculous when comparing multibillion dollar businesses. You may hate what I say, but again, it's my opinion, and I'd rather stick with Intel until AMD can prove otherwise.
You can say my opinion is based on future roadmaps and the directions the two companies are heading. Now, I really don't like Apple because of their arrogant prick of a leader, Steve Jobs, but they saw enough in the future of Intel to use their CPU's. That's got to say something about the future of Intel. Now, if AMD comes up with something remarkable, I'll be the first one to use it, as long as they show me its remarkable.
I don't even know where to start.
Quote :
It would suit AMD to at least do some of the things that Intel has.
Like I said, you seem to think they are the same companies. If AMD was Intel, then there might have been a working Barcelona demo with more than task manager open. But it's not.
I don't consider Steve Jobs a prick, he does, in my opinion, bend the facts sometimes, but he isn't a prick.
I'm not here begging you not to stick with Intel. I'm not trying to stick up for AMD, I'm just saying that there will be a demo, and AMD will not do it because you ask them for it. If I went to Intel and asked them for a free Core 2 Duo, Intel would not give it to me.
Come on man, that's such a cop out. I know they are two different companies. One is called Intel and the other is called AMD. I'm disappointed in the way AMD is doing business right now.
And Steve Jobs is a prick. Haven't you seen the Mac commercials? I have not seen Microsoft do anything as disrespectful as those commercials. And when was the last time Steve Jobs donated a billion dollars to charity? I respect Bill Gates for the man he is and they way he does business. But that's for another thread, not this one.
I can't go on, the more I tell you that for now you should take it as fact until the benchmarks prove/disprove it, the more you will ignore me. They don't have to give you benchmarks, but you'll sit here and complain about them not giving them.
does amd pay you to write this? if not say yeye to the better chip and boo to the loser chip! in 6 moths amd will be back on top and you can fanboy it.
Quote :
I don't see where Intel did the same as AMD is doing now. If I'm wrong put in some links to show me. Intel showed demonstrations to support their claims, that's all I'm saying. Where's the demo's(from AMD)? And they may be two different companies, but Intel has been on top because of the way they do business. It would suit AMD to at least do some of the things that Intel has. And to talk about resources is rediculous when comparing multibillion dollar businesses. You may hate what I say, but again, it's my opinion, and I'd rather stick with Intel until AMD can prove otherwise.
You can say my opinion is based on future roadmaps and the directions the two companies are heading. Now, I really don't like Apple because of their arrogant prick of a leader, Steve Jobs, but they saw enough in the future of Intel to use their CPU's. That's got to say something about the future of Intel. Now, if AMD comes up with something remarkable, I'll be the first one to use it, as long as they show me its remarkable.
I don't even know where to start.
Quote :
It would suit AMD to at least do some of the things that Intel has.
Like I said, you seem to think they are the same companies. If AMD was Intel, then there might have been a working Barcelona demo with more than task manager open. But it's not.
I don't consider Steve Jobs a prick, he does, in my opinion, bend the facts sometimes, but he isn't a prick.
I'm not here begging you not to stick with Intel. I'm not trying to stick up for AMD, I'm just saying that there will be a demo, and AMD will not do it because you ask them for it. If I went to Intel and asked them for a free Core 2 Duo, Intel would not give it to me.
dude you do this all the time: I'm not here begging you not to stick with Intel. I'm not trying to stick up for AMD,
Not quite.... Intel did actually setup a running system, allowed journalist to scrutinize the setup, drivers, device manager, and even allowed Anand to update the AMD BIOS used for the comparision system.
What AMD is doing similar to Intel is what Intel stated in 2005 that everyone brushed off when they said they would lead in performance and power by 20% in both cases with a new architecture 2006.... it is exactly what they did.
AMD is making similar claims in performance within the same power envelop (actually quite bolder claims), there is no reason to doubt it but there is no reason to accept it either.... the same skepticism is valid now for AMD as it was in 2005 when Intel made the same claims without data.
