Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Penryn and Nehalem; Can AMD catch up?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 30, 2007 5:56:10 PM

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31408/135/

http://www.chipzilla.com/default.aspx?article=38566

Intel is continuing to push the Penryn line with smaller die (65nm>45nm), bigger cache (4MB > 6MB Dual Core, 8MB > 12MB Quad Core), SSE4 and new S3 ops to intergrate with increased cache associativity (16 way >24 way). Clock speeds, for now, appear to be only slightly increased, ie. topping at 3.2-3.3 Ghz. However, TDP appears to have dropped even more, though Intel is modestly claiming that they will "hold" it to the same TDP as the 65nm process. Additionally, FSB will further increase from 1333 Mhz > 1600 Mhz.

With Nehalem (expected late Q1-early Q2 2008), Intel is introducing their own version of an intergrated memory controller (IMC) , known as the "Nehalem System Controller", which aims to introduce "burst"-style point-to-point cpu requests and receipts. Additionally, Nehalem will offer up to 8 cores, and will see the return of "hyper-threading" (virtual cores), along with an updated SMTP (simultaneous multi-threaded processing) instruction and control scheme. Initially released at 45nm fab, Nehalem will be further shrunk down to 32nm, in late 2008.

Does anyone want to guess whether AMD will be able to stay competive with the break-neck pace that Intel is going? 'Cause it certainly appears like intel is trying to crush AMD into the dust..
March 30, 2007 5:59:35 PM

IMHO this is exactly Intel's strategy. To kick AMD while it's down and unable to get up. It's more of a mugging than competition. But all's fair in war and business!
March 30, 2007 11:08:17 PM

Quote:

Does anyone want to guess whether AMD will be able to stay competive with the break-neck pace that Intel is going? 'Cause it certainly appears like intel is trying to crush AMD into the dust..


K10/HT3.0 should suffice for awhile.... HTX graphics cards might excite gamers....

IF AMD fusion/APUs make it to market in a timely manner, than yes they can catch up(big IF).... They need to get to 45nm in a timely manner also....

I would like to see them get some of that cool stuff they are working on with IBM to market soon.... 6.0ghz speeds / that cooling system that makes cpus run at 1/3 the temp of current technology / and that new cache technology that lets you put alot of cache on die for cheap(forget the name)....
Related resources
March 30, 2007 11:54:18 PM

Quote:
IMHO this is exactly Intel's strategy. To kick AMD while it's down and unable to get up. It's more of a mugging than competition. But all's fair in war and business!


Where I come from, this might seem like more of a r@pe case.
It's like seeing one skinny guy being surrounded by "big men" in the prison yard.. you know who the "pivot man" is going to be. :twisted:

Still, while AMD is talking some interesting ideas, I don't see a whole lot of doing. They diffently need to saddle up, and rethink some strategies (if they have any), but all they're doing now is simply embarrassing themselves. They've been riding high in the saddle since the Thunderbird/Palamino(sp?) K-7 releases, but they rode it into the ground, and now it's time to find a new ride.

I am starting to think that the K10 (both Barcelona and Agena) might be too little, too late. None of it's features are really revelutionary, merely evolutionary. Plus, I have grave concerns that they can do so while Intel is selling its' (so far) superior chips at seemingly "fire-sale" prices (to which I have no personal objections :D  ). Plus, their first run 65nm Brisbane's have failed to live up to alot of the claims that AMD touted. It may be good for AMD, but the consumer takes it in the seat, just like the Netburst chipsets.

gman01,
the thing is, Intel could buy/lease alot of those technologies, too. Even more so, when you consider all the cash that Intel in it's reserves. And don't forget, Intel and IBM go back a loooong way..
March 31, 2007 1:09:36 AM

Quote:

gman01,
the thing is, Intel could buy/lease alot of those technologies, too. Even more so, when you consider all the cash that Intel in it's reserves. And don't forget, Intel and IBM go back a loooong way..


Intel has a lot of their own versions of the technologies that IBM and AMD are talking about. The difference is that Intel waits to talk about technology when it is going to be available in the near future. I find it quite amusing that IBM announced the High-K dielectric/metal gate technology ahead of Intel despite the fact that they are about a year behind. Heck, the cell processor is only just making its way to 65nm. Right now, the second largest investor in technology development, the IBM/AMD/Freescale/Samsung alliance has a much smaller investment than Intel has for chip development and is a year or more behind. No one is going to create a better high end digital design process than Intel. Expecting IBM/AMD to beat them in more than one specific process area is extremely unrealistic.
March 31, 2007 4:58:15 AM

Quote:

Still, while AMD is talking some interesting ideas, I don't see a whole lot of doing. They diffently need to saddle up, and rethink some strategies (if they have any), but all they're doing now is simply embarrassing themselves. They've been riding high in the saddle since the Thunderbird/Palamino(sp?) K-7 releases, but they rode it into the ground, and now it's time to find a new ride.

I am starting to think that the K10 (both Barcelona and Agena) might be too little, too late. None of it's features are really revelutionary, merely evolutionary. Plus, I have grave concerns that they can do so while Intel is selling its' (so far) superior chips at seemingly "fire-sale" prices (to which I have no personal objections :D  ). Plus, their first run 65nm Brisbane's have failed to live up to alot of the claims that AMD touted. It may be good for AMD, but the consumer takes it in the seat, just like the Netburst chipsets.


Couldn't agree more. Let's face it, AMD's last interesting launch was the first batch of X2s. The 65nms have been a snoozefest. Everything else has been nothing more than posturing and pushing back the roadmap launch dates. C'mon... it's almost six months after the intro of Business Vista and ATI still doesn't have a DX10 card out? That is completely unbelievable.
March 31, 2007 5:56:05 AM

Poor, poor AMD. Some of these guys will miss you. :twisted:
March 31, 2007 6:15:53 AM

Not only is AMD meeting Intel head-to-head; C2D E6600 = X2 6000+ they are doing this with a 4 year old architecture. Fact is Intel has sold crap for the last 4 years and thats what they will be selling for 4 years more once AMD releases in 3 months. You forget Intel is a master at marketing more than electronics, like IBM.
March 31, 2007 7:54:45 AM

Quote:
Not only is AMD meeting Intel head-to-head; C2D E6600 = X2 6000+ they are doing this with a 4 year old architecture. Fact is Intel has sold crap for the last 4 years and thats what they will be selling for 4 years more once AMD releases in 3 months. You forget Intel is a master at marketing more than electronics, like IBM.


OK, it's time to lay off the crack.. :roll:

Seriously, any OBJECTIVE (meaning UNBIASED) person knows that the C2D chipset is the better ,price and performance-wise, for the mid to high end CPU market (AMD does have better low and entry-level chips). The C2D is better in FP, Integer, Power-usage, TDP, and instruction latency than equally clocked X2's (including the new Brisbanes). And don't forget, there's also the E6700,Q6600,X6800, and the QX6700. Also, a plain vanilla E6600 can easily (greater than 95% chance) be overclocked to 3.2 Ghz on air. How far can the 6000+ be OC'ed?

Facts are facts.. AMD got their @sses handed to them this round. I am merely wondering if they have the cajones to pull their collective heads out and get back in the game. Deep down, I don't want AMD to get their teeth kicked in, but they need to actually do something. This habit they're getting into of sticking their fingers in their ears and humming real loud, and occassionaly shouting "INTEL SUX!" , isn't doing anything..
March 31, 2007 8:08:37 AM

Quote:
Not only is AMD meeting Intel head-to-head; C2D E6600 = X2 6000+ they are doing this with a 4 year old architecture. Fact is Intel has sold crap for the last 4 years and thats what they will be selling for 4 years more once AMD releases in 3 months. You forget Intel is a master at marketing more than electronics, like IBM.


OK, it's time to lay off the crack.. :roll:

Seriously, any OBJECTIVE (meaning UNBIASED) person knows that the C2D chipset is the better ,price and performance-wise, for the mid to high end CPU market (AMD does have better low and entry-level chips). The C2D is better in FP, Integer, Power-usage, TDP, and instruction latency than equally clocked X2's (including the new Brisbanes). And don't forget, there's also the E6700,Q6600,X6800, and the QX6700. Also, a plain vanilla E6600 can easily (greater than 95% chance) be overclocked to 3.2 Ghz on air. How far can the 6000+ be OC'ed?

Facts are facts.. AMD got their @sses handed to them this round. I am merely wondering if they have the cajones to pull their collective heads out and get back in the game. Deep down, I don't want AMD to get their teeth kicked in, but they need to actually do something. This habit they're getting into of sticking their fingers in their ears and humming real loud, and occassionaly shouting "INTEL SUX!" , isn't doing anything..

Not sure what your reply has to do with the fact that a Athlon X2 6000+ offers the same performance as a E6600 for the same price. OCing isn't always a lock and isn't always cheap when HQ parts need to be purchased. I read THG do you? http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/02/20/does-amds-athlon... New stepping hits 3.30 all day if thats what your looking for.
March 31, 2007 8:56:34 AM

Quote:
first off its not the same performance and not the same price
where are you getting this information?




http://www.tgdaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&tas...

AMD ADX6000CZBOX AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 3.0GHz Socket AM2 Processor AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ Windsor 3.0GHz 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket AM2 Processor -- NEWEGG -- $409 FS

Intel BX80557E6600 Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 2.4GHz LGA 775 Processor Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz 4M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor -- NEWEGG -- $308 FS

Then add $50 cause that's what a decent mobo for the E6600 will run you over the X2. At this rate the CPUs should reach parity within a few weeks.
March 31, 2007 9:21:54 AM

AMD did something really amazing for several years.

Intel has always been, and will likely remain for quite a while, the 800 lbs gorilla of CPU land

"Chimpzilla" stole 25% of Intel's banana's due to the Netburst fiasco and right now the Gorilla is very, very angry.

Intel's executing very well right now, and they have vast resources to throw at the problem.

AMD will adapt and live, or fail to adapt and die.

Who knows, maybe Barcelona really does rock?
March 31, 2007 9:26:26 AM

Quote:
first off its not the same performance and not the same price
where are you getting this information?




http://www.tgdaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&tas...

AMD ADX6000CZBOX AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 3.0GHz Socket AM2 Processor AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ Windsor 3.0GHz 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket AM2 Processor -- NEWEGG -- $409 FS

Intel BX80557E6600 Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 2.4GHz LGA 775 Processor Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz 4M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor -- NEWEGG -- $308 FS

Then add $50 cause that's what a decent mobo for the E6600 will run you over the X2. At this rate the CPUs should reach parity within a few weeks.

Not trying to pick a fight here, but you are not correct.

The platforms for C2D versus X2s are basically the same cost.

The AMD chips are quite sensitive to memory speed, there is about a 15% delta speed wise between DDR533 and DDR800 on an X2, while on a C2D (due to the huge cache) there is about only a 2-3% delta.

Basically, DDR533 costs you +/- a speed grade on an X2, but almost zero on a C2D, so this balances the price differences at the motherboard level.

A CD2 motherboard costs more, but you can use cheaper ram, so on a systemn wide basis the tow platforms have essentially identical costs.
March 31, 2007 9:28:24 AM

In a tribute to the late Bob Marley, I propose a new song... Sort of. The title is 'no benchie, no cry'.

On the other hand, I have to apologise to Mr. Bob Marley, his song actually meant something.

G'night all.
a b à CPUs
March 31, 2007 9:28:53 AM

Quote:
Not only is AMD meeting Intel head-to-head; C2D E6600 = X2 6000+ they are doing this with a 4 year old architecture. Fact is Intel has sold crap for the last 4 years and thats what they will be selling for 4 years more once AMD releases in 3 months. You forget Intel is a master at marketing more than electronics, like IBM.


ROFLMAO same as Netburst vs K8? the P4 was what 5+ years old and performed very close to AMD's of the time, and if anything the Core 2 Duo is the K8 compeditor - K6 to P6/Pentium Pro, K6-2 to Pentium 2, K6-3 to Pentium 3, K7 to Pentium 4, K8 to Core 2 Duo, take note every generation i listed here, Intel had the upper hand with exceptions.

If Intel has sold "crap" then why is there "crap" crapping on AMD now? That must make amd's "crap" crap-tastic compared.

Your crapping about crap you crappy pile of craptastic crap smelling crap hole :mrgreen:

And as for this mysterious AMD cpu coming out in "3 months" - any ES's floating around? And benchmarks? anything at all? its all bum fluf atm, i do hope to god its something good - for there sake.
March 31, 2007 10:23:44 AM

Quote:


Not trying to pick a fight here, but you are not correct.

The platforms for C2D versus X2s are basically the same cost.

The AMD chips are quite sensitive to memory speed, there is about a 15% delta speed wise between DDR533 and DDR800 on an X2, while on a C2D (due to the huge cache) there is about only a 2-3% delta.

Basically, DDR533 costs you +/- a speed grade on an X2, but almost zero on a C2D, so this balances the price differences at the motherboard level.

A CD2 motherboard costs more, but you can use cheaper ram, so on a systemn wide basis the tow platforms have essentially identical costs.


i can't believe there are ppl who still argues that MBs for Core 2 cost more than X2s. i thought we've been through all that in the first three months of Core 2's launch.
March 31, 2007 10:23:56 AM

Considering X2-6000+ is right with an E6600 I would think that the QC-Barcelona might just be a little faster just maybe, just maybe not like AMD has sunk most of it's R&D into it since A64 like 4 years ago. Just maybe i'm not sure if Intel is f'd in like 3 months or not maybe.
March 31, 2007 10:28:11 AM

Except your off a generation P4 vs. K8; P4D vs. K8L; C2D vs. K8L -- see the problem with your logic.
March 31, 2007 10:44:51 AM

Quote:
Considering X2-6000+ is right with an E6600


At double the TDP.

If Intel bumped the Core 2's TDP to 130w with clock speeds of around 3.0-3.6GHz, they would completely destroy the entire Athlon line up.

Also, it's interesting to note that Kentsfield (Extreme) has a TDP of around 130w. Consumes the same amount of power as a 6000+, but has twice the cores and four times the amount of L2 cache.

Oh yeah, the 6000+ is right up there. :roll:
a b à CPUs
March 31, 2007 11:37:50 AM

Quote:
Except your off a generation P4 vs. K8; P4D vs. K8L; C2D vs. K8L -- see the problem with your logic.


huh wtf?

Pentium 4, Pentium D - same cpus, wether it be one or two cores :roll:

K8L? what did ever happen to that name anyhow? or was the L too much like L for Late or Lame or what?

P4 VS K7
C2D VS K8
March 31, 2007 12:34:14 PM

Quote:
Not only is AMD meeting Intel head-to-head;

BS! AMD have no CPU that can compete against E6700, X6800, Q6600, QX6700.
Quote:
C2D E6600 = X2 6000+

Performance: E6600 = X2 6000+
Performance/Wh: E6600 > X2 6000+
Performance/$: E6600 > X2 6000+
Overclocking: E6600 >> X2 6000+
Heat dissipation: E6600 < X2 6000+
---------------------------------------------------------------
So, E6600 != X2 6000+.
Quote:
they are doing this with a 4 year old architecture.

Nope. The first K8 was released 2 years and 9 months before Core2. But Core2 was not comepting against the first K8, but with the most recent, only 1 month older than Core2, the sAM2 K8. There is a huge difference between Clawhammer and Windsor: native dualcore, SSE3, better production process, better energy efficiency. X2 6000+ came 6 months after Core2, so as a product it is newer than any Conroe.

Quote:
Fact is Intel has sold crap for the last 4 years
I agree, Pentium4 & Pentium D are crap.
Quote:
and thats what they will be selling for 4 years more once AMD releases in 3 months.

What a load of BS & FUD!
This is more appropriate to say about AMD, because they are selling K8 for the last 3.5 years. Do you have double standards about them?
In the next 4 years Intel will introduce an update of Core2(Penryn) and 2 new architectures: Nehaleem and Gesher.
IMO, Penryn will outperform K10 by a large margin. But much more interesting would be when Nehaleem comes. I wonder what are AMD plans against Nehaleem.

Quote:
You forget Intel is a master at marketing more than electronics, like IBM.
Don't worry, AMD are trying to catch up Intel in the marketing segment. To bad, they speak too much, but haven't supported any of their bold claims, yet. I am tired of hearing those clowns in suits, BS-ing about how their unseen product would be wonderful, amazing, fast and etc. Without an ES, the cherry picked synthetic benchmark scores, proclaimed by those clowns are useless and are meaning nothing.
March 31, 2007 12:43:11 PM

Quote:
Except your off a generation P4 vs. K8; P4D vs. K8L; C2D vs. K8L -- see the problem with your logic.


Umm...what the hell are you smoking?

K8L has been cancelled and was never even released! So saying that P4D was designed to compete with the K8L is just retarded.
March 31, 2007 12:51:36 PM

Let's hope for all our sakes that AMD doesn't go out of business anytime soon.

Whether you're an Intel or AMD fanatic we need both these companies around. The minute AMD goes out of business prices will rise and innovation will slow down. It goes both ways. I wouldn't want AMD to run Intel out of business either. I don't believe they would be anymore benevolent toward the consumer if they were the only game in town.

Profit margins would become the goal rather than beating a competitor. While compeating these companies throw gobs of money into R&D and bring it to the market as quickly as possible to get our money. It's good for us.

If you're going to be a Fan-boy/girl be a fan of yourself.

I want AMD and Intel to duke it out forever. Why? Because it's good for me and my wallet.

Long live the CPU war!
March 31, 2007 12:56:28 PM

If K10 has a 40% FP increase over Core2Duo when the benchmarks finally come out, than you need to apologize, eat your hat, and admit you were wrong for calling them clowns, and questioning their integrity....

I can't wait to hear all the intelers on here, who have been bashing the barcelona claims without any proof that it does not do what AMD says it does, start backpeddling their comments....

I on the other hand will be the first to admit AMD lied if barcelona is not everything they say it is.... But you have to give them the benefit of the doubt, since they have a good track record with their integrity....

So until proven otherwise - AMD is innocent until proven guilty - barcelona smashes Core2Duo, until proven wrong....
March 31, 2007 1:31:19 PM

Quote:
Not only is AMD meeting Intel head-to-head; C2D E6600 = X2 6000+ they are doing this with a 4 year old architecture. Fact is Intel has sold crap for the last 4 years and thats what they will be selling for 4 years more once AMD releases in 3 months. You forget Intel is a master at marketing more than electronics, like IBM.


As punishment for being so stupid you should only buy AMD for the next four years. :lol: 

Intel released Quad core processors for desktops last year. AMD will be close to a year behind in releasing their first Quad core. AMD has nothing to compete with Intel's top of the line processors and won't until Fall 2007/Spring 2008. Intel has not even tapped into the headroom on their current processors and are just now starting to dink with the FSB to refresh their product line up. Anyone who thinks Intel couldn't release a C2D tommorrow with a 1600FSB or at 3.5 GHZ has never owned one. The reason they don't is because their is no competition and they can wait until 45nm and do it with less heat and pwr.

No I am not a fanboy, I am just a crusader against blantant stupidity.
March 31, 2007 1:50:51 PM

Quote:
If K10 has a 40% FP increase over Core2Duo when the benchmarks finally come out, than you need to apologize, eat your hat, and admit you were wrong for calling them clowns, and questioning their integrity....

K10 might have 40% FP increase, BUT it can't be 40% faster overall!!! AMD are claiming Barcelona to be 40% faster than the fastest Clovertown. For server apps, the ALU performance is much more important than the FPU performance. According to the K10 architectural improvements, clock for clock, it will have faster FPU(40% is likely), roughly same SSE performance, but it will have slower ALU than Core2. So their 40% are in memory bandwidth and FP dependent applicatons, and the list of such is very short. The benchmarks of the ES will debunk me if I am guessing wrong. I have no problems with admitting when I am wrong, so don't worry. But I will always consider Henri Richard as hypocrite clown, no matter how Barcelona will perform or what AMD will do!

Quote:
I can't wait to hear all the intelers on here, who have been bashing the barcelona claims without any proof that it does not do what AMD says it does, start backpeddling their comments....
Why do you think that "intelers" are only bashing AMD's claims about Barcelona. I am not an "inteler", nor I am "AMDer" or "VIAer", but I am bashing AMD bold claims with no support. Without releasing ES, without presenting K10 at CeBIT, I am thinking that they are hiding something from the public. So what is it?

Quote:
I on the other hand will be the first to admit AMD lied if barcelona is not everything they say it is.... But you have to give them the benefit of the doubt, since they have a good track record with their integrity....
I disagree. AMD are exactly the same $h1+ as Intel. They are using the same marketing tactics and are playing the same intriguing games. Sorry, but I don't trust to marketing.

Quote:
So until proven otherwise - AMD is innocent until proven guilty - barcelona smashes Core2Duo, until proven wrong....
If they are not showing public benchmarks and are not letting ES to float arround, they better be quiet about K10's performance.
March 31, 2007 2:27:52 PM

Quote:
If K10 has a 40% FP increase over Core2Duo when the benchmarks finally come out, than you need to apologize, eat your hat, and admit you were wrong for calling them clowns, and questioning their integrity....

K10 might have 40% FP increase, BUT it can't be 40% faster overall!!! AMD are claiming Barcelona to be 40% faster than the fastest Clovertown. For server apps, the ALU performance is much more important than the FPU performance. According to the K10 architectural improvements, clock for clock, it will have faster FPU(40% is likely), roughly same SSE performance, but it will have slower ALU than Core2. So their 40% are in memory bandwidth and FP dependent applicatons, and the list of such is very short. The benchmarks of the ES will debunk me if I am guessing wrong. I have no problems with admitting when I am wrong, so don't worry. But I will always consider Henri Richard as hypocrite clown, no matter how Barcelona will perform or what AMD will do!

Quote:
I can't wait to hear all the intelers on here, who have been bashing the barcelona claims without any proof that it does not do what AMD says it does, start backpeddling their comments....
Why do you think that "intelers" are only bashing AMD's claims about Barcelona. I am not an "inteler", nor I am "AMDer" or "VIAer", but I am bashing AMD bold claims with no support. Without releasing ES, without presenting K10 at CeBIT, I am thinking that they are hiding something from the public. So what is it?

Quote:
I on the other hand will be the first to admit AMD lied if barcelona is not everything they say it is.... But you have to give them the benefit of the doubt, since they have a good track record with their integrity....
I disagree. AMD are exactly the same $h1+ as Intel. They are using the same marketing tactics and are playing the same intriguing games. Sorry, but I don't trust to marketing.

Quote:
So until proven otherwise - AMD is innocent until proven guilty - barcelona smashes Core2Duo, until proven wrong....
If they are not showing public benchmarks and are not letting ES to float arround, they better be quiet about K10's performance.

I think you did a very good, intelligent, elequent job responding to this.... The only thing I would question you on is the last statement....

I don't think Intel stayed quiet about bold Core2Duo claims before benchmark releases(I may be wrong).... And I don't think they should have stayed quiet, since they were telling the truth.... So I don't think AMD should stay quiet about the K10 truth either....

Also AMD shareholders have a right to know that they finally have a 'Valid' response to Core2 - as opposed to AMD Quad FX(failure)....
March 31, 2007 2:45:01 PM

Quote:
as opposed to AMD Quad FX(failure)....


I wouldn't quite say that QFX is a failure. How many have they sold? 10? 20? Even Baron backed away from his purchase.

More like devastation! 8O
March 31, 2007 2:49:15 PM

Quote:
as opposed to AMD Quad FX(failure)....


I wouldn't quite say that QFX is a failure. How many have they sold? 10? 20? Even Baron backed away from his purchase.

More like devastation! 8O

I bet ASUS could tell you how many QFXs were sold....
March 31, 2007 2:52:07 PM

Quote:


I bet ASUS could tell you how many QFXs were sold....


Sounds good to me. How do we ask them? Anyone have an email addy for someone at Asus other than the standard webmail form that's never gonna get answered?
March 31, 2007 2:58:34 PM

Quote:


I bet ASUS could tell you how many QFXs were sold....


Sounds good to me. How do we ask them? Anyone have an email addy for someone at Asus other than the standard webmail form that's never gonna get answered?

If you get ASUS to give you an actual number on how many were sold, that will be the forum scoop of the year.... And if that number is 'extremely' low I will wet my pants laughing....
March 31, 2007 3:04:44 PM

Quote:


If you get ASUS to give you an actual number on how many were sold, that will be the forum scoop of the year.... And if that number is 'extremely' low I will wet my pants laughing....


This just arrived in my Inbox.

Dear Capt. April.

Thank you for your enquiry with regards to the number of L1N64-SLI WS sold by Asus. We can confirm that the number is more than a dozen but less than a score.

Sincerely,

A. Sus
CEO
Asus Motherboard Company
March 31, 2007 3:06:17 PM

Quote:


If you get ASUS to give you an actual number on how many were sold, that will be the forum scoop of the year.... And if that number is 'extremely' low I will wet my pants laughing....


This just arrived in my Inbox.

Dear Capt. April.

Thank you for your enquiry with regards to the number of L1N64-SLI WS sold by Asus. We can confirm that the number is more than a dozen but less than a score.

Sincerely,

A. Sus
CEO
Asus Motherboard Company


I can't decide whether that's true or not :p 
March 31, 2007 3:08:33 PM

Dont forget - We will have to multiply the number of motherboards TIMES '2' to figure out the number of AMD QFX processors sold.... Then again couldn't you just stick 1 CPU in the motherboard, until you could afford the second one...
March 31, 2007 3:22:26 PM

Quote:


I can't decide whether that's true or not :p 


You doubt me???

Well, here is the certificate of authenticity!!!



:lol: 
March 31, 2007 3:23:26 PM

Quote:


I can't decide whether that's true or not :p 


You doubt me???

Well, here is the certificate of authenticity!!!



:lol: 

Do you really have nothing better to do :p :p 

Then again, all i'm doing is watchin the latest episodes of Southpark! Gets better each season, imo.
March 31, 2007 3:23:32 PM

Quote:
BS! AMD have no CPU that can compete against E6700, X6800, Q6600, QX6700.


What are you talking about? AMD has the 4x4! :lol: 

Quote:
Except your off a generation P4 vs. K8; P4D vs. K8L; C2D vs. K8L -- see the problem with your logic.


C2D vs K8 is correct. When K10 launches in "late summer" Intel will have, or will be close to, releasing Penryn. K10/K8L/Barcelona vs Penryn is correct.
March 31, 2007 3:23:56 PM

Quote:
Dont forget - We will have to multiply the number of motherboards TIMES '2' to figure out the number of AMD QFX processors sold.... Then again couldn't you just stick 1 CPU in the motherboard, until you could afford the second one...


Au contraire, mon chere. QFX CPUs are sold in pairs and shown as a single unit everywhere, including THG's CPU price charts. As far as I know, you could theoretically stick one FX-7x processor in one slot, as long as you stuck a K6 in the other! :lol: 
March 31, 2007 3:30:37 PM

Quote:


Do you really have nothing better to do :p :p 

Then again, all i'm doing is watchin the latest episodes of Southpark! Gets better each season, imo.


As a matter of fact, I don't. My Chrysler 300C SRT-8 is in the shop having the engine swapped to a Viper V10 with five turbos, my gf is in a Level 4 Biocontainment Lab to have her STDs checked out, my friends have all changed their phone numbers and moved out of state, and the high school is closed so I can't even go hang out in the parking lot and ask the chicks if they have Chris Hansen waiting at home. So what's a guy to do? :twisted:
March 31, 2007 3:31:26 PM

Quote:
Dont forget - We will have to multiply the number of motherboards TIMES '2' to figure out the number of AMD QFX processors sold.... Then again couldn't you just stick 1 CPU in the motherboard, until you could afford the second one...


Au contraire, mon chere. QFX CPUs are sold in pairs and shown as a single unit everywhere, including THG's CPU price charts. As far as I know, you could theoretically stick one FX-7x processor in one slot, as long as you stuck a K6 in the other! :lol: 

You might want to keep that theory of yours to yourself.... 8O
March 31, 2007 3:32:02 PM

Quote:
So what's a guy to do? :twisted:


Go to the pub?

Get raped by Jessica Simpson?
March 31, 2007 3:35:36 PM

Quote:

You might want to keep that theory of yours to yourself.... 8O


Well, you do need to balance an FX-7x with a processor of equal capacity in the other socket! :D 

Quote:
Go to the pub?

Get raped by Jessica Simpson?


Hey, find me a pub where Jessica is waiting for me, and I'm grabbing a taxi and heading over there! Especially if she's washing the General Lee in a bikini... WHOOOOOOOOOOWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! :twisted:
March 31, 2007 3:36:39 PM

Quote:

You might want to keep that theory of yours to yourself.... 8O


Well, you do need to balance an FX-7x with a processor of equal capacity in the other socket! :D 

Quote:
Go to the pub?

Get raped by Jessica Simpson?


Hey, find me a pub where Jessica is waiting for me, and I'm grabbing a taxi and heading over there! Especially if she's washing the General Lee in a bikini... WHOOOOOOOOOOWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! :twisted:

Drooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool :D :D :D 
March 31, 2007 6:03:30 PM

I just got the LAUGH OF MY LIFE with the K6-3 VS P3 compairison.Have you ever even owned a friggin K6-2 or K6-3 series which was released about the time of the K7.They K6-3 was NOTHING MORE than a k6-2 produced with 256K of L3 Cache running at the processor speed which was never higher than 570Mhz.All it was made for was a last ditch effort to use up the remaining SS7 parts and to provide an upgrade path for these boards.Now a K6-3 + , which is a mobile chip that can overclock like the wind , can run 650MHZ-700 EVEN but will never in a million years beat a good P3 , I mean they are different generations I mean come on , you defend AMD with an intel mindset(oh goodie a K6-3 must compete with a P3 because it has a 3 in it too , ohhh wonder wat the K7 runs with.Come on AMD has been and will be " around" but they will never have the Abilities that intel has but what good are they if intel is tooo stupid to use them.
March 31, 2007 9:09:02 PM

Quote:
If K10 has a 40% FP increase over Core2Duo when the benchmarks finally come out, than you need to apologize, eat your hat, and admit you were wrong for calling them clowns, and questioning their integrity....

I can't wait to hear all the intelers on here, who have been bashing the barcelona claims without any proof that it does not do what AMD says it does, start backpeddling their comments....

I on the other hand will be the first to admit AMD lied if barcelona is not everything they say it is.... But you have to give them the benefit of the doubt, since they have a good track record with their integrity....

So until proven otherwise - AMD is innocent until proven guilty - barcelona smashes Core2Duo, until proven wrong....


gmano1,
Is your whole point that if you can't prove something wrong, it must be true? 'Cause if that's how it works, man have I screwed up... :oops: 

This whole time I've been living under the impression of "put up, or shut up". Or , if you like, "Those who can, do.. Those who can't, go into marketing and PR." :wink:
April 1, 2007 10:31:39 AM

Quote:
Poor, poor AMD. Some of these guys will miss you. :twisted:


Poor, poor Intel. Some of these guys will miss you. :twisted:[/quote]

Lets take back at 2003 when A64 was release how many years did Intel Catch up July 2006 .........it took Intel almost 3 years to beat A64 Poor Intel Engineers what are they doing with that timeframe..........and now it will take 1 year for AMD to counter the Poor Core Duo so bye bye Poor Core 2 Duo.

Penryn and Nahalem Can Intel catch up to Fusion, Bulldozer, 4X4+
April 1, 2007 2:39:39 PM

Quote:

It is appropriate the have the same level of skepticism when AMD makes a claim just as Intel makes a claim in the absence of data to support.


I have no problem with skepticism.... That is what we are here for to discuss CPUs like K10.... What I have a problem with is people BASHING AMD, and calling them LIERS, and etc., when there is no proof whatsoever that AMD is lieing about k10.... They will release chips for benching when they want to, not when we want them to....

If k10 claims do turn out to be a 'blatant' lie(not a slight exaggeration), then yes we certainly do need to call them on it....
April 1, 2007 2:55:21 PM

Quote:

Is your whole point that if you can't prove something wrong, it must be true? 'Cause if that's how it works, man have I screwed up... :oops: 


My whole point is I believe in 'Innocent Until Proven Guilty'.... Some people on this forum, have already tried and convicted AMD for lieing about k10 performance, when we haven't even seen benchmarks showing that it underperform their claims.... It is ok to be skeptical, but some people are being liable and slanderous, by accusing AMD of being liers....

That is completely hippocritical....
April 1, 2007 3:12:54 PM

Quote:
That is completely hippocritical....


And this is a hippo in critical condition!



:lol: 
!