Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

K10 at 2.5 GHz beats Intel quad at 3.0+

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 23, 2007 5:17:09 PM

Quote:

K10 at 2.5 GHz beats Intel quad at 3.0+
Written by Fuad Abazovic
Monday, 23 April 2007 08:56

Intel in trouble, code red




The new K10 based processors will really make Intel run for its money, at least till the end of the year. Just as Intel stole K8's mojo with Merom aka Core 2 Duo and quad, AMD is ready to finally fight back. It took them almost a year to prepare for the big clash.

Barcelona / Agena FX will beat Intel Core 2 Quad at 3.0 GHz+. Intel knows it and it is scared. Intel also knows that it cannot go over 3.0 GHz with 65 nanometre, at least not at 120 W TDP. Some reports already claim that QX6850 with FSB 1333 and 3 GHZ clock is already pushing the envelope as intel's 120W TDP is actually 150W+ at least on AMD's TDP scale. TDP stands for Thermal Design Power.

Intel needs to go over 3.0 GHZ to 3.2 or more to match Barcelona / Agena parts at 2.5 GHz. Intel knows that it needs to go to 3.2+ GHz and it needs the 45 nm Yorkfield core to match Agena 2.5 GHz.

Finally AMD should be able to make 2.7 if not even more with its 65 nm process. Intel has a good fighting chance with next the generation Nehalem core in the second half of 2008.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

It is on the internet so it must be true?

Is it time to sell all my INTC?
April 23, 2007 5:19:33 PM

Quote:

K10 at 2.5 GHz beats Intel quad at 3.0+
Written by Fuad Abazovic
Monday, 23 April 2007 08:56

Intel in trouble, code red




The new K10 based processors will really make Intel run for its money, at least till the end of the year. Just as Intel stole K8's mojo with Merom aka Core 2 Duo and quad, AMD is ready to finally fight back. It took them almost a year to prepare for the big clash.

Barcelona / Agena FX will beat Intel Core 2 Quad at 3.0 GHz+. Intel knows it and it is scared. Intel also knows that it cannot go over 3.0 GHz with 65 nanometre, at least not at 120 W TDP. Some reports already claim that QX6850 with FSB 1333 and 3 GHZ clock is already pushing the envelope as intel's 120W TDP is actually 150W+ at least on AMD's TDP scale. TDP stands for Thermal Design Power.

Intel needs to go over 3.0 GHZ to 3.2 or more to match Barcelona / Agena parts at 2.5 GHz. Intel knows that it needs to go to 3.2+ GHz and it needs the 45 nm Yorkfield core to match Agena 2.5 GHz.

Finally AMD should be able to make 2.7 if not even more with its 65 nm process. Intel has a good fighting chance with next the generation Nehalem core in the second half of 2008.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

It is on the internet so it must be true?

Is it time to sell all my INTC?

Without any REAL BENCHMARK, any info about AMD's Next Gen. Arch. performance rumours are non-sense at all.
a b à CPUs
April 23, 2007 5:19:42 PM

Fuad is pro AMD.

He's pro AMD in graphics (Pro Radeon) and Pro AMD in CPU's (you can tell as his article sounds like something Sharikou would say).

Barcelona will be faster per clock then Core 2. At least that's what I believe. But it won't be anything huge enough to threaten Penryn's clock advantage.
Related resources
April 23, 2007 5:24:15 PM

I was reading some other things on the site and i saw this

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...



Is that really how big the cards are getting?
I have a old system and i was thinking about getting a micro-case for my next build, will this fit?

Why does it still have a ati logo?
April 23, 2007 5:24:32 PM

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

Somebody wake me up when there's a benchmark, willya?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...
April 23, 2007 5:30:41 PM

Quote:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

Somebody wake me up when there's a benchmark, willya?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...

Your job lets you sleep during lunch?
April 23, 2007 5:33:38 PM

Quote:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

Somebody wake me up when there's a benchmark, willya?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...


Don't be surprised if Fuad breaks NDA somewhat. AMD is at least reporting SPECInt scores now. They have a comparison with 3GHz Opteron ( well not a comparison) which implies that they are basing the numbers on Opteron scores. If it's x% faster than Opteron it's x-20% faster than C2Q.

I would really like to see Kuma numbers though, too.
April 23, 2007 5:35:35 PM

Even if they "broke" NDA, why would anyone take fudzilla.com seriously?
a c 99 à CPUs
April 23, 2007 5:35:38 PM

I'd hold onto your Intel stock as Intel is a large enough company and dominant enough in its market that at worst, you'll see the long-term valuation of the stock be more or less the market average.
April 23, 2007 5:43:09 PM

Quote:
I'd hold onto your Intel stock as Intel is a large enough company and dominant enough in its market that at worst, you'll see the long-term valuation of the stock be more or less the market average.

My only concern with Intel is the longer term margins of cpus compared to graphics chips.
a c 99 à CPUs
April 23, 2007 5:45:13 PM

Intel is supposedly getting (back) into the discrete graphics market, or so the rumor mill says.
April 23, 2007 5:46:35 PM

i woudlnt worry too much.

Intel is still #1 for marketshare of IGP's which gives them the biggest market share of all graphics chips. Unless AMD kicks something up to offer something in the IGP market, Intel will probably retain that lead.

as for CPU's. Intel seems to be gonig very strong
April 23, 2007 5:46:40 PM

I wish Cyrix was still around. I sold my Intel stock (10k worth) and invested in them since they were versatile, and I saw great things for their future. Unfortunately, they went out of business 10 days later.
April 23, 2007 5:53:53 PM

Quote:
I wish Cyrix was still around. I sold my Intel stock (10k worth) and invested in them since they were versatile, and I saw great things for their future. Unfortunately, they went out of business 10 days later.


Oh geez. A little more research would have been great...

Did they just close up shop or were they bought and their assets re-appropriated?
April 23, 2007 5:54:43 PM

Quote:
It is on the internet so it must be true?

Is it time to sell all my INTC?


Just because you found this on the net doesn't necessarily needs to be true! About your INTC stocks...c'mon man, you cannot be serious! :lol: 

NP
April 23, 2007 5:57:37 PM

I was joking. I dont think Cyrix was ever a worthy competitor. What was their last chip? 366mhz? or 5xxmhz. I forgot.
April 23, 2007 5:58:07 PM

Quote:
I wish Cyrix was still around. I sold my Intel stock (10k worth) and invested in them since they were versatile, and I saw great things for their future. Unfortunately, they went out of business 10 days later.


Just had to post and say hilarious!

"Unfortunately, they went out of business 10 days later" Still laughing out loud at that one.

Thanks for the laugh.

high regards,
a c 99 à CPUs
April 23, 2007 5:58:18 PM

National Semiconductor bought out Cyrix and then shuttered Cyrix's factory. The Cyrix chip became the National Semiconductor's Media GX chip. AMD bought the Media GX from National Semiconductor and sells it as the Geode LX embedded processor. The Geode LX is not to be confused with the Geode NX, which is a low-power K7.
April 23, 2007 6:04:29 PM

Quote:
National Semiconductor bought out Cyrix and then shuttered Cyrix's factory. The Cyrix chip became the National Semiconductor's Media GX chip. AMD bought the Media GX from National Semiconductor and sells it as the Geode LX embedded processor. The Geode LX is not to be confused with the Geode NX, which is a low-power K7.


I knew we kept you around for something.

When I was in high school they had the C++ and Visual BASIC classes on Cyrix 466Mhz Windows 98 systems (they crashed a lot).
April 23, 2007 6:19:00 PM

Quote:

K10 at 2.5 GHz beats Intel quad at 3.0+
Written by Fuad Abazovic
Monday, 23 April 2007 08:56

Intel in trouble, code red




The new K10 based processors will really make Intel run for its money, at least till the end of the year. Just as Intel stole K8's mojo with Merom aka Core 2 Duo and quad, AMD is ready to finally fight back. It took them almost a year to prepare for the big clash.

Barcelona / Agena FX will beat Intel Core 2 Quad at 3.0 GHz+. Intel knows it and it is scared. Intel also knows that it cannot go over 3.0 GHz with 65 nanometre, at least not at 120 W TDP. Some reports already claim that QX6850 with FSB 1333 and 3 GHZ clock is already pushing the envelope as intel's 120W TDP is actually 150W+ at least on AMD's TDP scale. TDP stands for Thermal Design Power.

Intel needs to go over 3.0 GHZ to 3.2 or more to match Barcelona / Agena parts at 2.5 GHz. Intel knows that it needs to go to 3.2+ GHz and it needs the 45 nm Yorkfield core to match Agena 2.5 GHz.

Finally AMD should be able to make 2.7 if not even more with its 65 nm process. Intel has a good fighting chance with next the generation Nehalem core in the second half of 2008.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

It is on the internet so it must be true?

Is it time to sell all my INTC?

This tells us less than we already know. Also it's AMD with the TDP problems not Intel. There are plenty of reviews around that show that to be true. He's trying to make out Intel under state the power the cpu's use.
April 23, 2007 7:14:10 PM

Quote:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

Somebody wake me up when there's a benchmark, willya?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...

Your job lets you sleep during lunch?

The benefits of porking the office manager and making her scream that the Captain IS the daddy. :twisted:

Quote:
Don't be surprised if Fuad breaks NDA somewhat. AMD is at least reporting SPECInt scores now. They have a comparison with 3GHz Opteron ( well not a comparison) which implies that they are basing the numbers on Opteron scores. If it's x% faster than Opteron it's x-20% faster than C2Q.

I would really like to see Kuma numbers though, too.


Well, I'd love to see Fuad or anyone at least admit that the demo happened on some iteration of K10, but I've called the Sheraton and confirmed that the event ended almost three and a half hours ago. I can't see too many journalists going to the sunset camel races before posting something, anything!!!

What's this about the INQ posting earlier today that Tunisian Customs stopped two separate AMD vendors with R600s? Don't have a link. Anyone know anything about that???
April 23, 2007 11:23:43 PM

Quote:
okay after a visit to xs i found this link.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

Pretty much sums up what a total **** FUaD is!

RMA procedure might have changed.

I once bent a intel cpu pin and installed it on a board, it fryed on load, and it was sucessfully RMAed it after i fixed the pin LOL

It was not over clocked so!
April 23, 2007 11:38:14 PM

Quote:
Look at the size of the heatpipes, it's ridiculous but this is necessary to do remove 200W+. This is an OEM card and it should be ready by middle of the May that is the day.


Ugh
April 23, 2007 11:46:14 PM

Quote:
Look at the size of the heatpipes, it's ridiculous but this is necessary to do remove 200W+. This is an OEM card and it should be ready by middle of the May that is the day.


Ugh

Agreed. That thing's gotta weigh...how much?

edit: http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

Lol Fudzilla.
a c 99 à CPUs
April 23, 2007 11:51:55 PM

My x1900GT had roughly a pound of heatsink on it before I put a bigger one on it. I figure the new one weighs about twice as much and it works a lot better. I think the 90 watts or so my card throws off is a bunch; I can't imagine more than doubling it :o  That would make a P4 Prescott at 5 GHz look like an icebox...
April 23, 2007 11:55:11 PM

Weren't they bought out by VIA ? its highly likely I am imagining things though.
April 24, 2007 6:18:04 AM

I agree on this Jack. Unfortunately, when somebody comes to many forums, be it this one or others, the advice given for the deciding factor on which cpu to buy, is buy a certain processor because when it's overclocked it handily beats anything out there. I suspect if this was stated with the recommendation, said user wouldn't be swayed one way or the other quite as easily. But yeah, OCing should void warranty, but what if those folks that have been saving up for a new system, and with the advice given, decide to overclock it because it will kick**s, finds themselves in a position that they need to return it. Sure it's rare, but for anyone but an enthusiast there really is no advantage to one system over the other. That's something that should be mentioned, but rarely if ever is. Agree?
April 24, 2007 7:02:05 AM

Quote:
The new K10 based processors will really make Intel run for its money, at least till the end of the year.

Quote:
Barcelona / Agena FX will beat Intel Core 2 Quad at 3.0 GHz+. Intel knows it and it is scared.


I could just quote the whole ridiculously terribly written article.
Seriously who writes for that terrible website?

Apparently, reading from the article of wisdom, the writer knows everything that is going on at intel, and the writers also somehow knows that the whole Intel company is sitting shaking in its boots in terror...

What a terrible article.

Can't wait to see AMD's next line though, although I am uncertain as to whether Intel will simply bring out a better line of Processors to better it.

Oh well, the plot thickens.
April 24, 2007 7:43:53 AM

Because Intel is doing th exact same thing?
April 24, 2007 8:16:43 AM

Quote:
Well, here's another then. I could experience serious backlash though, but what the heck.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

I have to believe they are somewhat accurate numbers. Imagine a QuadFX system.

Thanks for the link, I got up this morning expecting to see leaked benchies all over the web, but only Fudo leaks for now :wink: We dont know yet how reliable data is, but so far it seems promising.
a b à CPUs
April 24, 2007 8:48:15 AM

Quote:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

Somebody wake me up when there's a benchmark, willya?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...


Don't be surprised if Fuad breaks NDA somewhat. AMD is at least reporting SPECInt scores now. They have a comparison with 3GHz Opteron ( well not a comparison) which implies that they are basing the numbers on Opteron scores. If it's x% faster than Opteron it's x-20% faster than C2Q.

I would really like to see Kuma numbers though, too.

were seeing intel push better (and REAL) % numbers between its revised core 2 then what AMD has "told" us about its up and coming processor :oops: 
April 24, 2007 8:53:25 AM

Looks pretty good if true! For once I hope Fudzilla isn't full of shite! :wink:
April 24, 2007 8:59:25 AM

Quote:
I agree on this Jack. Unfortunately, when somebody comes to many forums, be it this one or others, the advice given for the deciding factor on which cpu to buy, is buy a certain processor because when it's overclocked it handily beats anything out there. I suspect if this was stated with the recommendation, said user wouldn't be swayed one way or the other quite as easily. But yeah, OCing should void warranty, but what if those folks that have been saving up for a new system, and with the advice given, decide to overclock it because it will kick**s, finds themselves in a position that they need to return it. Sure it's rare, but for anyone but an enthusiast there really is no advantage to one system over the other. That's something that should be mentioned, but rarely if ever is. Agree?


The reason c2d is recomended is because they o/c very easily thus you won't need to RMA it. If you don't need the extra power buy cheap crap from your local store :p 
April 24, 2007 9:02:11 AM

Quote:
Intel's warrant specifically states the warranty does not cover:
any Product which has been modified or operated outside of Intel’s publicly available specifications or where the original identification markings (trademark or serial number) has been removed, altered or obliterated from the Product.


Interesting, so it should be fair to a company to let a customer run the product into the ground beyond any reasonable restrictions....

heh, i know that. I'm not sure where he gets his stupid ideas from. It's always been the case, else everyone would buy the bottom of the range cpu, try and overclock it then send it back.
I wish i had a million AMD cpus which i could oc and send back just to prove a point to this idiot.
April 24, 2007 9:02:43 AM

Quote:
I agree on this Jack. Unfortunately, when somebody comes to many forums, be it this one or others, the advice given for the deciding factor on which cpu to buy, is buy a certain processor because when it's overclocked it handily beats anything out there. I suspect if this was stated with the recommendation, said user wouldn't be swayed one way or the other quite as easily. But yeah, OCing should void warranty, but what if those folks that have been saving up for a new system, and with the advice given, decide to overclock it because it will kick**s, finds themselves in a position that they need to return it. Sure it's rare, but for anyone but an enthusiast there really is no advantage to one system over the other. That's something that should be mentioned, but rarely if ever is. Agree?


The reason c2d is recomended is because they o/c very easily thus you won't need to RMA it. If you don't need the extra power buy cheap crap from your local store :p 

Ok, but will you buy the chap that has to RMA it and is refused a new processor if it does need to be returnred? I'm just pointing out that for new users that come on to forums looking for advice on a new processor should be warned that's it's a possibility. But then that just may level the playing field, so i'm not sure how well that would go over.

[edit]

:wink: Watch your mouth.
April 24, 2007 9:06:47 AM

Quote:
Well, here's another then. I could experience serious backlash though, but what the heck.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

I have to believe they are somewhat accurate numbers. Imagine a QuadFX system.


Penryn will hit 3.6 + 10% IPC. Not going to be enough is it?
April 24, 2007 9:09:03 AM

Quote:
Well, here's another then. I could experience serious backlash though, but what the heck.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

I have to believe they are somewhat accurate numbers. Imagine a QuadFX system.


Penryn will hit 3.6 + 10% IPC. Not going to be enough is it?

Certainly looks like you hope it won't be as much as I hope it will be.
April 24, 2007 9:15:32 AM

Quote:
Well, here's another then. I could experience serious backlash though, but what the heck.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

I have to believe they are somewhat accurate numbers. Imagine a QuadFX system.


Penryn will hit 3.6 + 10% IPC. Not going to be enough is it?

Certainly looks like you hope it won't be as much as I hope it will be.

I hope it will be more, but i'm not going to get caught up in all the hype.
Remember it has to beat penryn, not equal it. To regain any decent respect they need to trash Intel too. 20% faster than top penryn part? I think that would mean it being over twice the speed of anything AMD have on offer now.
a b à CPUs
April 24, 2007 9:23:30 AM

Quote:

When I was in high school they had the C++ and Visual BASIC classes on Cyrix 466Mhz Windows 98 systems (they crashed a lot).


My salivation was over Apple II+'s and that only showed up my Junior year :(  <starts to show age>
April 24, 2007 9:29:42 AM

And has been posted as twice as fast. OK maybe 3.6 times as fast, but thats a 4p vs a 2p, where you lose some performance. It would be 1.8 timwes as fast, IF this is true, and of course scale better at 2p, maybe 200%? ALL speculation and hype added in for spice as well
April 24, 2007 9:32:11 AM

Quote:
And has been posted as twice as fast. OK maybe 3.6 times as fast, but thats a 4p vs a 2p, where you lose some performance. It would be 1.8 timwes as fast, IF this is true, and of course scale better at 2p, maybe 200%? ALL speculation and hype added in for spice as well


I thought AMD already said it was going to be 80% faster than current opterons.
See what I'm saying here. People are getting excited about old information in new words.

I want real benchies! :D 
April 24, 2007 9:51:07 AM

Im just waiting, and hoping. IF AMD pulls this off....Intel with all their R&D...ok ok Im just waiting...
April 24, 2007 10:08:37 AM

Quote:
i woudlnt worry too much.

Intel is still #1 for marketshare of IGP's which gives them the biggest market share of all graphics chips. Unless AMD kicks something up to offer something in the IGP market, Intel will probably retain that lead.

as for CPU's. Intel seems to be gonig very strong

but with vista they will need some serious power in the igp to compete since vista can now take advantage of gpus and people to try all the features out in the new os and with no flip 3d they wont fell saisfied
April 24, 2007 10:47:17 AM

my godness that must be the biggest die i have ever seen
!