Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Looking back 1 year ago at AMD
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
xpresso   05-03-2007 at 05:42:33 AM

This blog, almost 1 year old now, sums up how AMD messed up. The ambiene in the room is nicely captured by George and I bet will haunt Hector and AMD's executive staff for many years. If you check the messages posted to the article, none other than Mr. PhD leads the debate, simply amazing :? "Only the paranoid survives", did AMD simply forget that? :)

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=240

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
RichPLS   05-03-2007 at 05:46:02 AM
- 0 +

Intel’s ~$250 E6600 CPU annihilated AMD’s ~$1000 Extreme Edition AM2 based FX-62! This effectively means that AMD’s flagship desktop performance CPU will be obsolete by the end of next month when Intel released the CPUs codenamed Conroe. The 2.4 GHz Conroe E6600 CPU is a 65 watt part while Intel’s Extreme Edition Conroe CPU will operate at 2.93 GHz and still be 40 watts lower than AMD’s FX-62 which runs at 120 watt TDP. AMD’s power advantage over Intel’s current Pentium 4 NetBurst architecture just vanished in to thin air with the introduction of Intel’s Core 2 architecture next month.


Funny yet true...

Reply to RichPLS
Assman   05-03-2007 at 05:46:13 AM
- 0 +

May I ask what's the purpose of this post?

Reply to Assman
turpit   05-03-2007 at 05:55:17 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

May I ask what's the purpose of this post?



Actually interesting. I remember reading the original article, but never saw Sharipoo-poos comments. Talk about single minded obcession..he refernecs his own blog so many times as 'proof' its just numbing

Reply to turpit
runswindows95   05-03-2007 at 05:57:39 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

baron bait...



LMAO!!

Reply to runswindows95
xpresso   05-03-2007 at 06:12:26 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

May I ask what's the purpose of this post?



Nothing other than I think this blog captures the AMD mindset that lead to their downfall in 9 months.

Reply to xpresso
Mandrake_   05-03-2007 at 06:17:04 AM
- 0 +

From the good Ph.D's comment in the article:

Quote :

But even at 40% better performance (which is impossible, I tell you), Intel will be far below AMD's 4x4 platform in performance.

4x4 will pin Intel permanently at half of AMD's performance.



:lol: :lol: :lol: Lets go compare the performance of the QX6800 to that of the 4x4!! :mrgreen:

Reply to Mandrake_
Assman   05-03-2007 at 06:18:34 AM
- 0 +

gay, gay, gay I tell you

P.S. No offense to you personally

Reply to Assman
turpit   05-03-2007 at 06:20:44 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

From the good Ph.D's comment in the article:

But even at 40% better performance (which is impossible, I tell you), Intel will be far below AMD's 4x4 platform in performance.

4x4 will pin Intel permanently at half of AMD's performance.



:lol: :lol: :lol: Lets go compare the performance of the QX6800 to that of the 4x4!! :mrgreen: Overkill

Reply to turpit
Assman   05-03-2007 at 06:29:42 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

The facts are in and it looks like AMD screwed the pooch on this. Make your own list and do the math. smells like stupid arrogance.



:trophy:

Reply to Assman
viperabyss   05-03-2007 at 06:31:45 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

But even at 40% better performance (which is impossible, I tell you), Intel will be far below AMD's 4x4 platform in performance.

4x4 will pin Intel permanently at half of AMD's performance.


not to be mean.... but i can't help but LMFAO.... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Reply to viperabyss
xpresso   05-03-2007 at 06:36:15 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Speaking of Mr. PhD, did you read his first post, the last line is hilarious:

4x4 will pin Intel permanently at half of AMD's performance.



Bwahaahaaaaaa.... it could manage anything while consuming almost 3x the power.

yes, and I had to blink twice and read it again before dropping my laptop and falling out of my chair. I decided to take a piss after that and my cat raced me upstairs thinking it was bed time... It is exactly then I realized that my cat would beat Sharikou is a game of chess anyday even if he consulted his 4x4 chess playin' big blue PC, while keeping a close eye on the birds outside. What a MAROON :lol: :lol:

Reply to xpresso
xpresso   05-03-2007 at 06:39:43 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

The facts are in and it looks like AMD screwed the pooch on this. Make your own list and do the math. smells like stupid arrogance.



:trophy:

true dat :trophy: :trophy:

Reply to xpresso
viperabyss   05-03-2007 at 06:51:31 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

AMD's 4x4 technology gives you near 100% improvement at the blink of an eye



another famous quote by our beloved P.hD

Reply to viperabyss
xpresso   05-03-2007 at 06:55:20 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

AMD's 4x4 technology gives you near 100% improvement at the blink of an eye



another famous quote by our beloved P.hD

damn, now must we start Sharikou'sm of the day sticky? :wink:

Reply to xpresso
xpresso   05-03-2007 at 07:07:56 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

AMD's 4x4 technology gives you near 100% improvement at the blink of an eye



another famous quote by our beloved P.hD

damn, now must we start Sharikou'sm of the day sticky? :wink:

we can name it the tao of idiocy. :twisted: :lol: :lol:

Deep 4x4 Thoughts by Arshi Kou :idea:

Reply to xpresso
G01NTC   05-03-2007 at 07:08:35 AM
- 0 +

Wow, very funny looking back into the past. This is kinda like looking back at women in the 80's and wonder what the heck they were thinking with the big hair and the legging. :lol:

Reply to G01NTC
1Tanker   05-03-2007 at 07:23:11 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Speaking of Mr. PhD, did you read his first post, the last line is hilarious:

4x4 will pin Intel permanently at half of AMD's performance.



Bwahaahaaaaaa.... it could manage anything while consuming almost 3x the power.I think this one's better. :wink:

Quote :

The more pressing question is: why is Intel doing this? what is it hiding?

If Intel wants to prove Conroe is good, just give some chips to reviewers. Isn't that fair?



Bet he wishes that comment was forever forgotten. :D :D

Reply to 1Tanker
viperabyss   05-03-2007 at 07:27:42 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

The more pressing question is: why is Intel doing this? what is it hiding?

If Intel wants to prove Conroe is good, just give some chips to reviewers. Isn't that fair?



Bet he wishes that comment was forever forgotten. :D :D

bet somewhere in his mind... he must be thinking (but definitely not admit it) the same thing...

Quote :

If AMD wants to prove K10 is good, just give some chips to reviewers. Isn't that fair?


:lol: :lol:

Reply to viperabyss
xpresso   05-03-2007 at 08:03:07 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Speaking of Mr. PhD, did you read his first post, the last line is hilarious:

4x4 will pin Intel permanently at half of AMD's performance.



Bwahaahaaaaaa.... it could manage anything while consuming almost 3x the power.I think this one's better. :wink:

Quote :

The more pressing question is: why is Intel doing this? what is it hiding?

If Intel wants to prove Conroe is good, just give some chips to reviewers. Isn't that fair?



Bet he wishes that comment was forever forgotten. :D :D

LMAO :lol: :lol:

Reply to xpresso
SK711G   05-03-2007 at 09:09:54 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

4x4 will pin Intel permanently at half of AMD's performance.

I cant even read it without laughing.

edit* had 2 I's so i could see :P

Reply to SK711G
epsilon84   05-03-2007 at 09:24:42 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

4x4 will pin Intel permanently at half of AMD's performance.

I cant even read it without laughing.

edit* had 2 I's so i could see :P

What are you laughing at you dimwit low IQ Intel fanboy! Everybody knows that 4x4 @ 250W pins down Intel's double cheeseburger QX6700 @ 130W. AMD has twice the POWER!

AMD - Smarter choice!

:lol:

Reply to epsilon84
gOJDO   05-03-2007 at 09:29:21 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

From the good Ph.D's comment in the article:

But even at 40% better performance (which is impossible, I tell you), Intel will be far below AMD's 4x4 platform in performance.

4x4 will pin Intel permanently at half of AMD's performance.



:lol: :lol: :lol: Lets go compare the performance of the QX6800 to that of the 4x4!! :mrgreen:
Mine E6400 @3.2 is still waiting on the benchmark field for BaronBS's Christmas present - 4x4, FX-70.
I hope shakira is right and BaronBS's present will counter my pet.

Reply to gOJDO
epsilon84   05-03-2007 at 09:32:32 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

From the good Ph.D's comment in the article:

But even at 40% better performance (which is impossible, I tell you), Intel will be far below AMD's 4x4 platform in performance.

4x4 will pin Intel permanently at half of AMD's performance.



:lol: :lol: :lol: Lets go compare the performance of the QX6800 to that of the 4x4!! :mrgreen:
Mine E6400 @3.2 is still waiting on the benchmark field for BaronBS's Christmas present - 4x4, FX-70.
I hope shakira is right and BaronBS's present will counter my pet.

Err... I'm sure Baron meant Christmas 2007, and he's gonna come on these forums and brag when his QuadFX Agena Octocore rig OWNS your puny E6400 @ 3.2GHz you little punk! :lol: :wink:

Reply to epsilon84
diabloazul126   05-03-2007 at 09:34:09 AM
- 0 +

Speaking of 4x4, isn't Intel rumored to have a dual socket setup on the way? V8 or whatever it is.. all I gotta say is it better not taste like tomato juice or whatever.

Reply to diabloazul126
epsilon84   05-03-2007 at 09:36:02 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

Speaking of 4x4, isn't Intel rumored to have a dual socket setup on the way? V8 or whatever it is.. all I gotta say is it better not taste like tomato juice or whatever.



Yeah, and it uses FB-DIMMs too, pretty pointless if you ask me.

Reply to epsilon84
darious00777   05-03-2007 at 09:45:21 AM
- 0 +

There was a V8 system demonstrated that Intel already has something to compete with AMD's 4x4. However, as mentioned, the type of RAM used hinders gaming performance. Thus, the upcoming Skulltrail (or possibly Bonetrail) motherboard line-up is supposed to use 2 CPUs with non-ECC RAM and two PCI-Express x16 ports. Could be remembering parts of it wrong, but that would be fun to use with Nehalem, I would imagine.

Reply to darious00777
diabloazul126   05-03-2007 at 10:11:44 AM
- 0 +

Even if it's got better performance over the FB-DIMM/ECC ram, wouldn't the power consumption be horrendous, albeit not nearly as bad as the 4x4?

Reply to diabloazul126
Mandrake_   05-03-2007 at 10:45:25 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

What are you laughing at you dimwit low IQ Intel fanboy! Everybody knows that 4x4 @ 250W pins down Intel's double cheeseburger QX6700 @ 130W. AMD has twice the POWER!

AMD - Smarter choice!

:lol:



AMD is dedicated to driving open innovation, choice and industry growth by delivering superior customer-centric solutions that empower consumers and businesses worldwide. :lol: :lol: :lol:

There is proof that AMD is faster than Intel! I suppose AMD didn't include Intel in it's 4x4 benchmarks since they couldn't use integrated graphics for the 4x4 platform. :tongue:

Reply to Mandrake_
yakyb   05-03-2007 at 12:34:19 PM
- 0 +

i dont know about you but i would love to see 4x4 running on the agena's (or 8x8 or whatever) not trying to be a fanboy or anything (cause im really not!) just thought i would throw this into the arguement as dont forget you are still comparing a 3 year old arch with a 10 month year old arch.

anyway whatever is better in 4 months when i plan my new build i will buy i just dont see what you stand to gain by laughing at a 3 year old tech that was great only 12 months ago!

Reply to yakyb
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Looking back 1 year ago at AMD
Go to:

There are 1337 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.554 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
How do I win badges?