Looking Ahead: AMD or INTEL platforms...

Looking ahead 2-3 months and beyond, what do you think is going to happen? Will AMD bring success with B3 or will it be destroyed by INTEL's 45nm Quads?

AMD's 780g chipset shows they may be on the right track, I just want your opinions.

Message quoted 3 times
Message edited by akore on 03-21-2008 at 03:31:38 AM

Add a reply

Register or log in to remove.

B3 will be little more than a TLB bug fix. It will be 'destroyed' by 45nm Penryns in performance, overclocking and performance/watt. AMD could play the price/performance card again, but with the Q6600 dropping to $225 in April they don't have a lot of room to work with.

AMD's 780G is ideal for HTPCs. It has 3D performance nVidia and Intel can't match, making it better for casual gamers, but any serious gamer worth their salt would get a discrete GPU, and by that I don't mean adding a Radeon 3450 for 'CF' either .

In a nutshell, for the foreseeable future, I think AMD will be behind in CPU performance and will try to compete on price. On a platform level things look better, I'm sure nVidia and Intel will try to respond with better IGPs on their upcoming chipsets.

Reply to epsilon84

Intel is deffo the brand that are pulling out all the moves.

Ill put my vote towards intel.

Thanks

Reply to scottoliver

Who would even dare to say AMD on this? LOL.

Message quoted 3 times

------------------------------ Intel E8400 @ 3.8ghz Under Arctic Pro 7
ASUS P5KC
2GB DDR2 800 Patriot
EVGA 8800GTS
Reply to ocguy31

Yeha i am for Intel to but i wish AMD wood do better. I loved my 939 x2 3800+ but my e6600 kicked it's ass to the kerb and soon i hope to get a e8400.

Reply to topman

akore wrote :

Looking ahead 2-3 months and beyond, what do you think is going to happen? Will AMD bring success with B3 or will it be destroyed by INTEL's 45nm Quads?

AMD's 780g chipset shows they may be on the right track, I just want your opinions.

AMD will bring success, but not in the same market. Too many people on both sides here have fanboy attitudes. This is business, not a FPS. Both Intel and AMD can win in their markets now that Intel's anticompetitive OEM rebate programs are out of the way.

AMD won't have a chance to "destroy" Intel technologically until Deneb and Shanghai. 65nm Phenom's, even with 7% boosts from B3 stepping, won't catch up to Penryn, though they should be able to hold their own against stock speed Q6600's.

I plan on going cheap AMD. I'll get a 780G board with an 8450 triple core B3 in April for the next year. Then, I'll go Deneb with a Crossfire board. I like ATI/AMD chipsets too much and ATI cards too. So, I can tolerate a slightly slower CPU, as I don't overclock anyways.

In the budget enthusiast market (where I am) , and in the totally clueless OEM mass market, AMD will do well. I also think they'll do well in notebooks because of the 780G chipset and hybrid Crossfire. Intel can have the overclocker's enthusiast market. That way, everyone's happy and no one loses.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ Phenom 8750, ASUS M3A78T
4 gigs Kingston DDR2 800 two 1T SAMSUNG HD103UI
Sapphire 4870x2, Sony BDU-X10S BD-ROM
Antec Neo 650 PSU Antec Nine Hundred, Acer H213H 1080p LCD
Reply to yipsl

Hopefully AMD can come back, but it won't be with B3. Their integrated graphics are looking really good and that's really going to help them sell AMD procs. Pretty nice entry level gaming, it won't get you playing Crysis, but there's tons of games that are coded more efficiently.

------------------------------ jennyh wrote: AMD break-even Q4 2009. *Gauranteed*

RabidFanboysSpreadingFalse.Info
Reply to TechnologyCoordinator

akore wrote :

Looking ahead 2-3 months and beyond, what do you think is going to happen? Will AMD bring success with B3 or will it be destroyed by INTEL's 45nm Quads?

AMD's 780g chipset shows they may be on the right track, I just want your opinions.

I hope like all that AMD will become competitive again, but it total honestly, they can't compete with the Q6600 as of yet. If they do beat the Q6600 then Intel will release the Penryn on them. Not only that, they have Nehalem coming out this fall! That’s a new architecture which has been heavily rumored that they are already packaging them. I don't see AMD able to keep up with Intel for the next few years. They may be able to drop a die size or so... But Intel has been at least 1 year ahead of AMD on that since Conroe.

All in all, I will put my money with Intel.... if I had to bet. Sandy Bridge FTW!!!! (late 2009 - early 2010)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy [...] hitecture)

------------------------------ And on the third day, God created the Remington bolt-action rifle, so that Man could fight the dinosaurs. And the homosexuals.
Reply to spaztic7

Depends what your looking for. Over the majority Intel.

On low end systems with IG, or ultra high end workstations/servers (talking 4-8 socket) AMD is still the way to go.

When Nehalem comes out, I expect AMD's ultra high end advantage to disappear very quickly.

Reply to Amiga500

I wish amd would be able to compete with intel again so we could get a nice price war going. In a competition between 2 companies there is only 1 true winner. the consumer.

That said amd still has a long way to go to even catch up with intel as of now.

Reply to Topcover

ocguy31 wrote :

Who would even dare to say AMD on this? LOL.

Have you never seen a rabid animal?

Reply to rodney_ws

I feel like AMD is turning things around, overall. Obviously, their CPUs dept is having some problems, which become painfully obvious when compared to the Intel CPUs. But, that doesn't mean that their CPUs are crap, either. But, in other areas, such as 780g and CrossfireX, they are making some ground. I think once they can get some CPUs that are a little better (doesn't have to absolutely stomp intel) they will be held in a little better light.

I guess I need to wait and see...

------------------------------ http://www.custompcmax.com
Reply to basketcase

ocguy31 wrote :

Who would even dare to say AMD on this? LOL.

Thunderman.

Reply to snarfies1

yipsl wrote :

AMD will bring success, but not in the same market. Too many people on both sides here have fanboy attitudes. This is business, not a FPS. Both Intel and AMD can win in their markets now that Intel's anticompetitive OEM rebate programs are out of the way.

AMD won't have a chance to "destroy" Intel technologically until Deneb and Shanghai. 65nm Phenom's, even with 7% boosts from B3 stepping, won't catch up to Penryn, though they should be able to hold their own against stock speed Q6600's.

I plan on going cheap AMD. I'll get a 780G board with an 8450 triple core B3 in April for the next year. Then, I'll go Deneb with a Crossfire board. I like ATI/AMD chipsets too much and ATI cards too. So, I can tolerate a slightly slower CPU, as I don't overclock anyways.

In the budget enthusiast market (where I am) , and in the totally clueless OEM mass market, AMD will do well. I also think they'll do well in notebooks because of the 780G chipset and hybrid Crossfire. Intel can have the overclocker's enthusiast market. That way, everyone's happy and no one loses.

Have you ever noticed that in almost every post you say the same thing. First something about the topic, next something about Intels OEM rebates, then what you plan to do and then something random.

BTW, where did you get that the B3 stepping is going to give Phenom a 7% performance boost? I have yet to see any benchmarks.

But for me, with all the messups from AMD this past year, I feel Intel is the best bet. I just feel that Nehalem is not going to be some push over. And considering AMD has been changing its roadmap as they move its hard to say they will be the best in the next platform. I do hope though that they bring it back up a level but that might not be until the next uarch.

------------------------------

http://www.steamcalculator.com/76561197970703804/camo_sig.png

Reply to jimmysmitty

I like the tri core concept, if it's cheap enough, but honestly i think intel will hands down be the plaform of choice.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ Q6600 (overclocked to 3.2ghz) GAp35-DS-3L mobo, 8BG G-SKILL ddr2-1066, gigabyte gts 250(1GB), 2x dvd burner,320gb hard drive,640gb hard drive, black antec p182 case with corsair 750 watt psu.
Reply to reconviperone1

reconviperone1 wrote :

I like the tri core concept, if it's cheap enough, but honestly i think intel will hands down be the plaform of choice.

Yea the only bad thing is that a tri core is not a concept its just smart binning. Also when the yeilds improve the tris will slowly be pahsed out.

------------------------------

Reply to jimmysmitty

For pure horsepower and balls out performance, Intel is the way to go. But as mentioned, for entry to mid-level and OEM systems, AMD will be the platform of choice.

Actually, with the way the AMD and Intel product offerings and performance differences are today, it reminds me of the way AMD and Intel were before the Athlon64. Back then, AMD firmly held the entry and mid-level offerings and were easily identified as the an underdog favorite offering "close-but-no-cigar" performance comapred to Intel but also at a cheaper price. For the budget enthusiast and comparing the cost of an original Athlon compared to a P3, the Athlon was the way to go. Aside from the processor, Intel compatible mobos were also far more expensive than AMD compatible mobo; but that was also when VIA was the AMD chipset of choice.

Given that Nehalem is going to require a new chipset and socket, while it may beat the pants off 45nm AMD quad-cores, there are many folks with AM2+ mobos who (much like the Skt939 and Skt775) who can just drop in a new chip and update the BIOS to increase their cpu power.

At best, the B3 steppings will (hopefully) redeem AMD and get them back on track to producing issue free products. And, hopefully the new CIO and Marketing guy can and will do a better job at dealing with any issues that may arise.

It's been noted that Intel skipped creating a monolithic quad-core at 65nm because of (possibly) the same issues that AMD has experienced. But there are two sides to the 45nm monolithic quad-core coin. On one hand AMD has had extensive experience with and IMC, monolithic design, and now implementing an L3 cache. Whereas Intel has extensive experience producing high yields of 45nm chips. However, it would be niave to think that Intel will not suffer their own "growing pains" implementing 45nm, monolithic quad-core, and IMC, as well as an L3 cache. So with that said, the fanbooys can claim Intel this or AMD that, the fact remains that we won't know for sure until the chips are available for review and testing.

Message quoted 2 times

------------------------------ ASRock X58 Extreme - Core i7 920 - 6GB Crucial Ballistix DDR3 1600 - Sapphire 4890 2GB - Creative Xtreme Gamer - 4-80GB WD in RAID0 on HighPoint RR 2310 as OS drive - 1-320GB WD scratch drive - Corsair CMPSU 750TX - HAF 932 - Hanns-G 281DPB @ 1900x1200
Reply to chunkymonster

I really don't know why the Phenoms are bashed so much. Everyone acts like they're terrible because they're not quite as fast as the Q6600. We all knew AMD wouldn't be on top forever, especially with Intels market, brand, and cash advantage, but maybe if all the press wasn't so horrible pessimistic and bashed them at every moment, the guys over there wouldn't be so god damn discouraged. Media critics love to bash the underdogs, because they're so smart don't you know? That's why they write associated press articles instead of actually, you know, working for AMD or Intel.

Ever notice how much more humble AMD and Intel employees are about the whole thing. Maybe because they actually know how hard it is to innovate... And now both of them have been in the stagnant rut. I have faith in AMD, but seriously, I'm really starting to question the quality of writing here at Toms.

Reply to Acagold20

I voted AMD. I run AMD at home and have been for years. I few points on some test isnt even noticable to an end user. I like the performance/price point that AMD is consistantly at.

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to retro77

chunkymonster wrote :

For pure horsepower and balls out performance, Intel is the way to go. But as mentioned, for entry to mid-level and OEM systems, AMD will be the platform of choice.

Actually, with the way the AMD and Intel product offerings and performance differences are today, it reminds me of the way AMD and Intel were before the Athlon64. Back then, AMD firmly held the entry and mid-level offerings and were easily identified as the an underdog favorite offering "close-but-no-cigar" performance comapred to Intel but also at a cheaper price. For the budget enthusiast and comparing the cost of an original Athlon compared to a P3, the Athlon was the way to go. Aside from the processor, Intel compatible mobos were also far more expensive than AMD compatible mobo; but that was also when VIA was the AMD chipset of choice.

Given that Nehalem is going to require a new chipset and socket, while it may beat the pants off 45nm AMD quad-cores, there are many folks with AM2+ mobos who (much like the Skt939 and Skt775) who can just drop in a new chip and update the BIOS to increase their cpu power.

At best, the B3 steppings will (hopefully) redeem AMD and get them back on track to producing issue free products. And, hopefully the new CIO and Marketing guy can and will do a better job at dealing with any issues that may arise.

It's been noted that Intel skipped creating a monolithic quad-core at 65nm because of (possibly) the same issues that AMD has experienced. But there are two sides to the 45nm monolithic quad-core coin. On one hand AMD has had extensive experience with and IMC, monolithic design, and now implementing an L3 cache. Whereas Intel has extensive experience producing high yields of 45nm chips. However, it would be niave to think that Intel will not suffer their own "growing pains" implementing 45nm, monolithic quad-core, and IMC, as well as an L3 cache. So with that said, the fanbooys can claim Intel this or AMD that, the fact remains that we won't know for sure until the chips are available for review and testing.

You are right on most every point except one thing. Intel has had L3 cache so I doubt they will have any problems with it. The Pentium 4 EE 3.4GHz had a 2MB L3 cache. IMC and mono may be a slight trip but I doubt they will have any major problems.

retro77 wrote :

I voted AMD. I run AMD at home and have been for years. I few points on some test isnt even noticable to an end user. I like the performance/price point that AMD is consistantly at.

The only reason they are at that price point is b/c they don't have the top performance. When they were the top dogs their price/performance wasn't that great. Just their price/per watt.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------

Reply to jimmysmitty

Im still waiting for the Intel igp...one that can actually play a game better than pong

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
Reply to jaydeejohn

jaydeejohn wrote :

Im still waiting for the Intel igp...one that can actually play a game better than pong

Their next generation IGP will...

and if it doesn't it will be the generation after that...

and if it doesn't it will be the generation after that...

and if it doesn't it will be the generation after that...

and if it doesn't it will be the generation after that...

repeat ad nauseam.

Reply to Amiga500

chunkymonster wrote :

Given that Nehalem is going to require a new chipset and socket, while it may beat the pants off 45nm AMD quad-cores, there are many folks with AM2+ mobos who (much like the Skt939 and Skt775) who can just drop in a new chip and update the BIOS to increase their cpu power.

Then there's the other side of the coin - the new chipset/socket will be at the beginning of it's useful life, so Nehalem adopters make have a drop-in upgrade path to the next intel uArch.

Quote :

At best, the B3 steppings will (hopefully) redeem AMD and get them back on track to producing issue free products.

Damn well better. The day of reconing for those class A shares is on the horizon. A ways off, but I don't know if there's time for a new uArch to save them.

Quote :

So with that said, the fanbooys can claim Intel this or AMD that, the fact remains that we won't know for sure until the chips are available for review and testing.

Amen.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ Give a man a fish, and you'll have fed him for a day. Give a fish a man, and he'll eat for weeks.
Reply to spongebob

I voted for the dog ... which currently has fleas.

It's an entry level dog now ... kinda like a mongrel.

Good at odd things ...

Not a greyhound ...

Not a pitbull.

More Like a St Bernard ... but low on alcohol ... and lost in the desert instead of the snow ... oh ... and it's license is due and the guy from the pound is looking for it too.

ok ... enough with bad analogy.

------------------------------ Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds

Reply to reynod

ocguy31 wrote :

Who would even dare to say AMD on this? LOL.

You used the word EVEN.

Amiga500 wants to know why you say AMD doesn't exist.

------------------------------ jennyh wrote: AMD break-even Q4 2009. *Gauranteed*

RabidFanboysSpreadingFalse.Info
Reply to TechnologyCoordinator

jimmysmitty wrote :

You are right on most every point except one thing. Intel has had L3 cache so I doubt they will have any problems with it. The Pentium 4 EE 3.4GHz had a 2MB L3 cache. IMC and mono may be a slight trip but I doubt they will have any major problems.

Refresh my memory: How many cores did the L3 in the Pentium 4 EE 3.4Ghz need to communicate between?

Experience gained implementing an L3 on a single core CPU will mean almost nothing when they implement it between multiple cores.

Reply to keithlm

spongebob wrote :

Then there's the other side of the coin - the new chipset/socket will be at the beginning of it's useful life, so Nehalem adopters make have a drop-in upgrade path to the next intel uArch.

Might want to be careful making that assertion, Nehalem is slated to have 3 socket variations for the desktop; Skt715, Skt1160, and Skt1366 and possibly (if rumor web-sites are true) one just for the MP server chips, Skt1567. So, depending on what flavor of Nehalem you decide on, your upgrade options may be very limited.

Check out this article for some more info, a few months old but still relevant.

Message edited by chunkymonster on 03-21-2008 at 07:16:23 PM

------------------------------ ASRock X58 Extreme - Core i7 920 - 6GB Crucial Ballistix DDR3 1600 - Sapphire 4890 2GB - Creative Xtreme Gamer - 4-80GB WD in RAID0 on HighPoint RR 2310 as OS drive - 1-320GB WD scratch drive - Corsair CMPSU 750TX - HAF 932 - Hanns-G 281DPB @ 1900x1200
Reply to chunkymonster

Anyone who says,...AMD is out of the game,...has the ignorance of mold! AMD is recovering,...nevertheless intel is still snowballing,...But winter comes and all the trees have a turn to bud again! For the average user,...with a 9850,..and a 4870x2,...(mid june)...fire that against crysis or any game! Then buy a qx97XX and play the same game with the same res! You wont see a single difference! Just you'll have to operate with a 14inch CRT and a 40 gig hard drive because your money just went to Intel's fancy gloss box fund! I'm not a fanboy,...but my money goes where ill get what I pay for. Nothings is wrong with a E8400,...or them yorkfields,...Intel's great,...but AMDs' usually got a end at the price tab!

Reply to adlertheman

Once Nvidia gets an x86 license, amd will die a swift death.

Reply to jkflipflop98

With the Information that's out there now, I would say Intel, but this is the tech industry, things can change within months, so foresight will never be 20-20.

Reply to goldragon_70

akore wrote :

Looking ahead 2-3 months and beyond, what do you think is going to happen? Will AMD bring success with B3 or will it be destroyed by INTEL's 45nm Quads?

AMD's 780g chipset shows they may be on the right track, I just want your opinions.

It all depends on what you are trying to make. AMD's 780G is a heckuva chipset and that plus a 45-watt Brisbane or Athlon 64 1600-series would make an excellent HTPC or office/Internet computer and for less money than Intel charges for lesser products. However, I'd have to give the nod to Intel for a high-end gaming rig or workstation as the Phenoms and X2s simply are not as fast as the Core 2s for gaming and AMD does not *at the moment* have a shipping dual-socket quad-core setup while Intel has quite a few of them.

Also, if you want to believe in the hope of upgrading (and I wouldn't count on it), the end of the line for any current Intel platform is about a year away when LGA1366/11xx/715 and Nehalem/Bloomfield/Beckton ships. Supposedly AM2+ motherboards will support future AM3 CPUs, but that's all BIOS dependent, which means that it's unlikely if AM2 -> AM2+ is any indication.

------------------------------ Upcoming Overdue Build: Dual-socket workstation, ~32 GB DDR3, OS on a fast SSD, high-end GPU, all wrapped up in a huge tower case. Coming H2 2011.

Yes, I am actually still running the Pentium III 1.0B Coppermine in the picture.
Reply to MU_Engineer

Controversy, hmmm nVidia wont get a x86 license, and even if it ever did, it still has to produce something. ATI isnt dead, as time will show, whether this helps the AMD situation, who knows, but if anyone has to worry its nVidia. The average Joe doesnt oc, the average Joe wants to: play games (Intel currently is unable to do so) search the web: I think its a toss up eh? Maybe watch some HD content on his pc : AMDs current solution, the 780G is tops (including nVidias) and he likes a descent price. Now you tell me where the average Joe wont like and AMD platform? And dont go saying oc, cause thats not where the moneys at

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
Reply to jaydeejohn

Exactly jaydee, really, we talk so much about benchmarks, but your average user, myself included. Give me a fast dual core chip, good video card, couple gigs of memory, I'm set for gaming for a while. I just actually was on another thread, and was trying to show the guy how he could do something like a 3800+ x2, power supply(albeit cheap one), 2 gb ddr2, and AMD compatible mobo for about 150 before shipping. Can intel touch that pricing? Maybe....but seems like it's not a stretch to do it with the AMD. What would your average joe go for??? Hmm...

Reply to ohiou_grad_06

Nothing touches Intel. The 20 month old C2Ds are still king of the hill for dual core. Doesn't look like that'll be changing any time soon.

Reply to Mandrake_

This isnt a brand against brand thing as much as common sense and cost. If average Joe likes the price and does what he wants, hes going to buy it, no matter what. The performance in gaming is hugely determined by the gpu NOT the cpu, so who cares if they put a AMD cpu in there. Average Joe has to go and look just to see which one he has, but you can bet he will know what graphics card he has

Message quoted 2 times

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
Reply to jaydeejohn

jaydeejohn wrote :

This isnt a brand against brand thing as much as common sense and cost. If average Joe likes the price and does what he wants, hes going to buy it, no matter what. The performance in gaming is hugely determined by the gpu NOT the cpu, so who cares if they put a AMD cpu in there. Average Joe has to go and look just to see which one he has, but you can bet he will know what graphics card he has

Well I just want to know where Thunderman is crying about how good AMD is and how evil Intel is....

Bahh, Ill miss him

Reply to Hellboy

jaydeejohn wrote :

This isnt a brand against brand thing as much as common sense and cost. If average Joe likes the price and does what he wants, hes going to buy it, no matter what. The performance in gaming is hugely determined by the gpu NOT the cpu, so who cares if they put a AMD cpu in there. Average Joe has to go and look just to see which one he has, but you can bet he will know what graphics card he has

Cost is some of the average Joe. But don't forget technology as well. Some will want the best bang for their buck cheapest PC out there. Me I prefer to spend aroung $1500 making equivalent Alienware/HP/Falcons look like crap whils saving $1-3k and have the latest in PC technology.

I can normally do that better with Intel than AMD as Intel will introduce something like DDR2 and have it for a while before AMD. But that all depends on what you want thats new. I am very interested in WiMax now and am woundering when it will come out.

But to the average Joe, anything that runs what he does is fine. Although its not to say AMD will always be able to hold the cheap low end market. Intel has plenty of CPUs they can bin as lower end, plus it cost them very little to make the chip in the first place.

Now with Nehalem it will be interesting to see their GPU/CPU combo and see how fast AMD tries to get Fusion out. Of course the first one to get it out might grab that market and make the other one work for their share. Like two hobos fighting for a Ney York steak.

------------------------------

Reply to jimmysmitty

LOL Who knows? Tho if youre used to 50cent steaks, it may make you a lil tougher heheh

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
Reply to jaydeejohn

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs - Looking Ahead: AMD or INTEL platforms...

Please mind

Focus On

Looking Ahead: AMD or INTEL platforms...

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs - Looking Ahead: AMD or INTEL platforms...

Please mind