Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Let the Flame Wars begin!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 22, 2003 3:56:34 PM

<font color=blue><b>So who has the better processor?</b></font color=blue>


I think that AMD has put together a good product and it will only get better.




<A HREF="http://www.millionmanlan.com/MMLDefault.asp" target="_new">Million Man LAN 2 is June 25-29, 2003 in Louisville Kentucky... Be there!</A>

More about : flame wars begin

April 22, 2003 4:06:25 PM

Pricing is too close to the Xeons for the Opteron - why switch all your server infrastructure for a CPU that is slightly better in a few areas when the price is almost the same? Again AMD are guilty of over-rating their products - a 1.8 at 1.6 prices would've made things interesting.

As for the Athlon64, unless they drop the single channel plans and go with dual channel then I'm afraid Prescott will eat it for breakfast. And no doubt the prices will be quite similar too.

Overall I am an AMD fan but I am more inclined to switch to an Intel setup next time I upgrade.
April 22, 2003 4:22:39 PM

What about people buying new servers or upgrading?
Related resources
April 22, 2003 4:32:06 PM

I would believe that is why everyone will buy them. I agree with rain_king when companies arnt ging to scrap their xeon setups just to go opteron for only a slight performance increase. Unless they have a specific need for 64Bit for something.
AREA_51

'It's only when you look at an ant through a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames'
April 22, 2003 4:32:07 PM

I don't understand this reasoning. Sure, servers that already run a very heavy Intel setup wouldn't benefit as much as newcomers would, but realize that the performance gain is actually quite substantial in some cases, and that the Opteron offers more of almost everything than the Xeons does (It offers, 64 gb of max system memory for instance.)
I'd say AMD is definitely ahead of Intel this time.
But that's just my opinion. You sure can have yours.

Prescott may be faster than the Athlon 64 by the time of release, who knows? Or maybe it'll be slower. Interesting battle for sure.
April 22, 2003 4:39:24 PM

Any company that buy intel processors, particularly Xeons, are stupid. Xeons are so pathetic they had to name them after a 'Warrior Princess' to get anyone to buy them.

Intel is Stupid. 'nuff said.
April 22, 2003 4:44:55 PM

OH JOY! another fake user.

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 22, 2003 5:03:03 PM

I'm not fake. It's intel's 'Superiority' that's fake!!

Intel is Stupid. 'nuff said.
April 22, 2003 5:07:18 PM

Good product, needs optimized. I like the fact that it allows a company to stick with current software, and migrate forward, and I like the fact that it can keep on a level of a cpu that is 1000 mhz or more ahead in clock speed (then again, we have seen stuff like that for a while).

AMD needs to get moving with performance, needs to get the A64 at a pretty high caliber by September.

They are on the road, but can they get to the destination?

<font color=red>*</font color=red><font color=white>*</font color=white><font color=blue>*</font color=blue>
... And I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free, and I won't forget the men who died, who gave that right to me.
April 22, 2003 5:10:51 PM

The thing about it performing equal/better than a proc iwth 1ghz advantage is good really good. But IMHO it'd be useful if they had a higher clock speed! I mean whats the use of being better performing clock to clock when you top model only performs equal or only a bit better than the rivals top model. I want to see a 3 gig AMD which will tear the 3 gig Intel to pieces, then they can truly claim to be the best.

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 22, 2003 5:13:18 PM

I doubt we will see a 3ghz cpu from amd soon... at least at this size of fabrication.

I would like to see some benches against the Itanium cpus in this 8-way config, might be interesting.

<font color=red>*</font color=red><font color=white>*</font color=white><font color=blue>*</font color=blue>
... And I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free, and I won't forget the men who died, who gave that right to me.
April 22, 2003 5:21:36 PM

I havent really read the article coz well the site is being bombed. But i'm surprised that it doesnt feature the Itaniums. What the hell are they comparing it with then??? You have to have a 64 bit Proc.

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 22, 2003 5:32:46 PM

I think that the AMD will do well. So far it does not look good as a workstation but it is still way to early in the game. P4 looked like a piece of junk back when it first hit the street. It got the first couple of rounds under its belt and came out swinging with higher clock speeds, a better FSB, and tweaked out toys.

The benches we see today are only the start of it all for the Hammer. Take STREAM 5.1 for example. STREAM was never written to handle extra bandwidth through the X-Bar and Hypertransport. Notice how it makes even the dual Xeon systems look bad compared to a single P4 3.0 GHz. Hammer systems can use info from all of the other DIMMs in the entire system. If it looks only to the DIMMs attached to the immediate MCH then of course you are going to see poor results on the memory benches. The bandwidth is much higher than what was shown. HT would allow for an additional 19.2 GB/s on top of the memory in the DIMMs under the immediate MCH. Take a request from CPU1 that draws from the memory as a whole. It can pull info from the DIMMs attached to CPU2. Limit it as much as you want. Even if there were two CPUs with two channels a piece.

DDR333 = 500/3 or 166.667 MHz ~ 2666.667 MB/s or 2.67 GB/s

Take that and multiply it by 4 (two sets of dual channels) = 10666.667 MB/s or 10.67 GB/s

The benches returned only 1.7 GB/s.

Part of that could be because of the motherboard. There is no way to tell how the memory buses were allocated on the motherboard. Maybe it only used two channels for both CPU's? That would be a possible solution, in theory, since you could have CPU1's MCH run the DIMMs and CPU2's be disabled. "That is a SPECULATION."

The bandwidth is much better than 1.7GB/s and when a single P4 got a score of over 700 MB/s better there has to be a problem with the benchmark. Just to show haw bad some of these benches are look at the <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030422/opteron-27.htm..." target="_new">Sisoft Sandra 2003 Memory bench</A>. The single Xeon did better than a dual Xeon.

I think one reason there is some improvement in the scores of the Dual Opteron verse the single XP 3000+ is the simplicity of incorporating the MCH into the die. No FSB bottleneck between the MCH and the CPU. Both are operating at the same clock frequency.

There are a lot of things that need to change in the world of benchmarks. There has never been a system like this before and now that it is here there needs to be a way to rate the two against each other.



There are my two cents.


<font color=blue><b>
Quote:
Why is it a penny for your thoughts but you have to put your two cents in? Somebody is making a penny. - Steven Wright

</b></font color=blue>






<A HREF="http://www.millionmanlan.com/MMLDefault.asp" target="_new">Million Man LAN 2 is June 25-29, 2003 in Louisville Kentucky... Be there!</A>
April 22, 2003 5:33:52 PM

CPU benched:

Opteron 1.8 GHz (1800 MHz / 128/1024 kB)
Athlon XP 3000+ (2166 MHz 128/512 kB)
Athlon XP 2800+ (2083 MHz 128/512 kB)
Athlon XP 2500+ (1833 MHz 128/512 kB)
Athlon XP 2700+ (2166 MHz 128/256 kB)
Athlon XP 2600+ (2133 MHz 128/256 kB)
Athlon XP 2400+ (2000 MHz 128/256 kB)
Xeon 3.06 GHz (3066 MHz 12-8/512 kB)
Xeon 2.8 GHz (2800 MHz 12-8/512 kB)
Pentium 4 3.00 GHz (3000 MHz 12-8/512 kB)
Pentium 4 3.06 GHz (3066 MHz 12-8/512 kB)
Pentium 4 2.80 GHz (2800 MHz 12-8/512 kB)
Pentium 4 2.66 GHz (2800 MHz 12-8/512 kB)
Pentium 4 2.53 GHz (2533 MHz 12-8/512 kB)

No itanium.... Dissapointing. Im gonna look around for other reviews later tonight.

<font color=red>*</font color=red><font color=white>*</font color=white><font color=blue>*</font color=blue>
... And I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free, and I won't forget the men who died, who gave that right to me.
April 23, 2003 7:33:39 PM

I think the tests were to show not just the 64 bit performance but also the backwards compatible 32bit performance of the chip. When the Itanium tries to do this it sucks to the extent where it's nearest rival is a Pentium 1.

There was therefore no need to include this chip in the test as placing it in such a poor light would have given wrong impressions. Also theres not much point including a chip in a group test where you're benchmarking the good bits and leaving out the bad as this would be deemed favourable or inconclusive.

Therefore I'd only expect to see the Itanium next to the Opteron in strictly 64bit mode. It's what the two processors are designed for.

The case with the Opteron is that it will run your 'old' legacy 32bit applications just as good as current 32bit CPU's but not better, it just does that to allow you a stepping stone to 64bit computing where it's real power lies.

<b>Vorsprung durch Dontwerk</b>.....<i>as they say at VIA</i>
April 23, 2003 7:45:26 PM

Quote:
The thing about it performing equal/better than a proc iwth 1ghz advantage is good really good. But IMHO it'd be useful if they had a higher clock speed! I mean whats the use of being better performing clock to clock when you top model only performs equal or only a bit better than the rivals top model. I want to see a 3 gig AMD which will tear the 3 gig Intel to pieces, then they can truly claim to be the best.

All other server processors have well over 1 ghz disadvantage from xeon, most of which are chosen by companies over xeon, which is considered just as much as a joke as the Athlon MP is. opteron is just about the only one aside from Athlon MP that even gets close to the clockspeed gap. Opteron would have been better compared to Itanium, Ultraparc, power4+ and the like
April 23, 2003 7:55:06 PM

I think the only thing that could hold the Opteron down is if it proves to have instability issues. Considering the pains AMD went to in order to avoid any thermal issues, I would think the only potential problems might lie in core logic instabilities. It seems as if the integrated memory controller will help avoid some of the ways core logic might screw it up.

Still, knowing that VIA will be a major player in Opteron's core logic makes me a bit nervous. VIA doesn't have the greatest reputation for stability.

I think if Opteron proves to be rock-solid stable, there is no reason it won't be a very succsessful product. After all, it is unique in the computer world. If you want high-end 32-bit performance and very good 64-bit performance, there will only be one real choice.

Those who live in glass houses shouldn't take showers. :tongue:
April 23, 2003 8:28:16 PM

Note that finally AMD has integrated on-die thermal shut-off, à la Intel. I think instability is no longer an issue at AMD for Opteron.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 23, 2003 8:34:49 PM

Yeah...that was a very good move by AMD. That's why I say the only real worry I have is in the chipsets designed by VIA, nVidia, SiS, etc. As long as those are stable, I think Opteron will have its niche. And I think the integrated memory controller on the Opteron takes away about 75% of the opportunity for VIA and others to mess up the core logic.



Those who live in glass houses shouldn't take showers. :tongue:


<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Twitch on 04/23/03 04:36 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 23, 2003 8:39:00 PM

Yeah, now it's more relying on chipset features. Which is pointless IMO, since all servers need is a reliable CPU connection to others, they won't bother checking and using individual racks to tinker with USB 2.0, Firewire or even integrated 5.1!

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 23, 2003 9:44:53 PM

Ok, here's my flame:







you ready?








sure u r?







ok, here goes:


















<b>YO MOMMA!!!</b>

Hilbert space is a big place.
April 23, 2003 9:58:27 PM

But Wait, what if the integrated memory controller has a Bug. For Athlon MPs and Xeons you can just go with another verdor for the chipset. But Opteron you can't even do this because you will have same issue on all the chipsets.

So instead of just replacing a MB you have to replace the whole processor.

KG

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity." - Sarah Chambers
April 24, 2003 12:02:13 AM

Ummm...well you could say the same thing about any type of CPU bug. I haven't heard anything about AMD's IMC having any bugs though.


<font color=green>The Netherlands is where you go when you're too good for heaven.</font color=green> :tongue:
April 24, 2003 1:56:29 AM

Plus, the fact we got many websites, testing the Opterons in real-world applications, even their own servers, stress-testing it, to me proves that for a new product, it is not only high-performing, but stable as well.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 24, 2003 2:14:56 AM

Quote:
P4 looked like a piece of junk back when it first hit the street.

P4 is still a piece of junk. Let's see why people told initial P4's junk.

1) It was beaten by P3 and T-bird at equal clock.
2) Clock speed difference from AMD was not big
3) No support for SSE2

Now more softwares have SSE2 support, and AMD introduced PR system, so it looks good. But the processor itself is sill a piece of junk. 533 MHz FSB looks good when you compare it vs. a 266 MHz FSB AXP. 533 vs. 333 (AMD) is equal to 400 vs. 266 (AMD). Clock vs. clock, Barton vs. Northwood "B" is equal to T-bird vs. Willamette. And latest 800 MHz FSB is another big joke. With 50% more memory bandwidth, it's unable to show significant performance boost in most benchmarks, in many cases 3.06 GHz (533 MHz FSB) can beat the new 800 MHz FSB crap. And all P4's are inefficient as hell. AXP 333 MHz FSB catches 400 MHz FSB P4s in terms of memory bandwidth, 400 MHz will catch 533 MHz FSB. And new 800 MHz FSB crap is FAR AWAY from 6.4 GB/s memory bandwidth.


----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>
April 24, 2003 2:28:35 AM

True, as Holicho was only to achieve 6.17 GB/s overclocking an unlocked 3.0 to a 1,280mhz bus which had 10.4 GB/s theoretical max
April 24, 2003 6:47:24 AM

LOL that's a typical rant. I mean yea the AXP are cool in their clock to clock efficiency and all but you obvioudly did'nt get what i said in my previous post. Mhz doesnt matter right? OK now for all i care a 1000+ AXP can go on and beat the 3 GHZ intel but the thing is AMD dont have a processor that beats the Intel by a large margin!!! A 3000+ may equal the 3.06 despite the huge clock disadvantage but the thing is that AMD dont have the 3 Ghz AXP to show that they rule the roost. Most people dont think about the fact that the two processors have a compltely different architecture.
In concise:
AMD have the better efficiency but they only equal the the top of the line Intels. So the thing about AMD being the king does'nt even appear in the picture. IMO both the Intels and AMD are equally good processors. Each one has it's advantages and disavantages. Intel has worked out it's willamete disaster and AMD have stop being the furnace from hell. ANd the fanboys actually find that hard to digest.

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 24, 2003 10:35:30 AM

You are little wrong, Athlon is built on some sort of architechture, but P4 has no architecture at all. It's based on markitecture. If it was based on architecture, it would perform better than P6 clock vs. clock, like P6 vs. P5; P5 vs. i486.

Speed is not everything, if it is- then you should call K6 architecture better than P6, because K6-2 500 MHz faster than P2 266MHz. They have different architecture, that's true, but one is better and one is inferior.

And I am not telling that- "AXP 3000+ is the fastest processor on the market now. Go to buy it over 3.06 GHz P4, because it's more efficient." If you want the fastest, buy it, regardless the architechture of the CPU is good or bad.

Quote:
Intel has worked out it's willamete disaster

Willamette was no diaster for Intel. Willy's were a crazy seller, it's one of the Intel's most successful CPU. It's disaster for people who bought this CPU (especially combined with i845)

Quote:
ANd the fanboys actually find that hard to digest.

If you are calling me AMD fanboy, then I have to say- you're wrong. I'm neutral for AMD and every other CPU manufacturers, except Intel. I HATE INTEL. Everybody should hate them, because they are robbers. They looted money from people by making Willamette and combining it with i845 and PC133 SDRAM. People buy 1.6 GHz Willy with i845 mobo and PC133 CL3 and think that their system is way better than my 1 GHz Duron (with nForce and DDR). Reason? Simple! It's a P4, woooohoooo! And look at the clock speed!! It's soooooooo fast!!!

What about recent Celerons? You answer.

I want to see Intel dead, because it's the only way to make average joes beleive that "Intel = CPU God / everything of them is good" is not true. It doesn't matter who kills them. If AMD can't kill Intel, it doesn't matter for me, I want to see them dead.

Anyway, I'm neutral about Intel, when it comes to discussing about CPU's.

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>
April 24, 2003 1:27:31 PM

Quote:
If it was based on architecture, it would perform better than P6 clock vs. clock, like P6 vs. P5; P5 vs. i486.

WTF are you trying to say here. It went over my head

Quote:
I want to see Intel dead

Oh sure why not so that AMd can be the sole company in the market and enable them to bring out 5000+ at 2ghz clock speed and 1000$. Think with you mind about what you said.
Quote:
I'm neutral for AMD and every other CPU manufacturers, except Intel

How many manufacturers are left if intel is left out??? Via..Motorola. OkKK
Quote:
If you are calling me AMD fanboy

Did i say that??? This was for the pointless flamers who bash any company without giving sufficient reasons. And that is because no company neither AMD nor Intel is bad. Just the fact that you "hate" Intel makes any of your opinion biased.
Quote:
They looted money from people by making Willamette and combining it with i845 and PC133 SDRAM

True very true. But it's only the ignorant people who get fooled into such marketing ploys. Did you go out and buy a willy ..NO Did I ...NO Thats because we're intelligent enough to do some research before we choose what we buy. The company is not to blame for this. It's a PROFIT MAKING ORGANIZATION not a people welfare society. It's main objective is to make money. They dont care about the people. Same goes for any other company. This is also myanswer for your celeron question too. One AIM : MONEY! To blame :p EOPLE
Talking about marketing ploys. How much of an improvement is the barton over the thoroughbred Bs?? Minimal if any. And the price improvement a lot. IMO thoroughbred are still better than Bartons.
Quote:
Anyway, I'm neutral about Intel, when it comes to discussing about CPU's.

ROFLMAO ---->"I HATE INTEL"




<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 24, 2003 2:30:54 PM

Why yes, she is my momma. Thanks!

And a very nice lady she is.




Oh happy day! The Flame wars are back in the CPU forums. Thank you AMD!




<A HREF="http://www.millionmanlan.com/MMLDefault.asp" target="_new">Million Man LAN 2 is June 25-29, 2003 in Louisville Kentucky... Be there!</A>
April 24, 2003 5:43:41 PM

Quote:
WTF are you trying to say here. It went over my head

A newer architecture usually is more efficient that an older architecture. But markitecture based products aren't. P6 is an architecture, so it performs better than the older P5 at equak clock speed. But since P7 is a markitecture, then it doesn't need to perform better than P6 at equal clock. It needs clock speed to cheat people

Quote:
Oh sure why not so that AMd can be the sole company in the market and enable them to bring out 5000+ at 2ghz clock speed and 1000$. Think with you mind about what you said.

It would take loooooooong time for AMD to be another "Intel". So we don't have to worry about this now and in near future. But the current reality is, Intel is monopolist.

Quote:
How many manufacturers are left if intel is left out??? Via..Motorola. OkKK

I would love to see Transmeta TM-8000 (Astro) killing Pentium-M. This is not an AMD processor, but can be a worthy competitor aginst Pentium-M's.

We have to blame Intel for cheating noobs. Taking advantage of your position and somebody's weakness is real dirty work. Since AMD is not doing that bad, and far more honest than Intel (so far), I don't want to buy Intel processors.

Quote:
It's a PROFIT MAKING ORGANIZATION not a people welfare society.

Dude, there are two different ways of making profit- honest and dishonest. Intel falls into the second category.

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, I'm neutral about Intel, when it comes to discussing about CPU's.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ROFLMAO ---->"I HATE INTEL"

Explaination :- I would never buy Intel CPU's unless there's no real alternative (like there's no alternative for Pentium-M). This is my personal thoughts.

I don't think being neutral means speaking good words for Intel. If I think something is bad, then I should tell it. This is true unbiased opinion. But trying to speak little good things about a product (though I think it sucks) for sounding neutral is real biased information.


----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>
April 24, 2003 5:49:19 PM

Dont get all excited. This is not a flame war :tongue: Just a honest discussion.

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 24, 2003 6:15:04 PM

Quote:
P6 is an architecture, so it performs better than the older P5 at equal clock speed. But since P7 is a markitecture, then it doesn't need to perform better than P6 at equal clock.

So The current Barton qualifies as a markitechture.
Quote:
A newer architecture usually is more efficient that an older architecture

I am yet to see an Athlon core running at same clock as a K6-2 so i dont think anyone can really compare the two.

Quote:
Dude, there are two different ways of making profit- honest and dishonest. Intel falls into the second category

Tell me some companies which fall into the first category except ATI.
Even AMD does'nt qualify as a completely "honest" company. I haven't recieved an answer on my Barton question btw.
Quote:
It would take loooooooong time for AMD to be another "Intel".

LOL i doubt that. It's common sense ..Any company tries to take advantage of it's monopoly.

Quote:
I don't think being neutral means speaking good words for Intel. If I think something is bad, then I should tell it. This is true unbiased opinion. But trying to speak little good things about a product (though I think it sucks) for sounding neutral is real biased information.

Being neutral means looking over the past performance of the company and looking at the new cores without a "OOOH i Hate INtel thought in Mind" When i went to buy my new computer. I researched and chose products of my liking from both Intel and AMD.I had two rig charts when i went to the market. But a7n8x deluxe being recently launched was more expensive than my Asus P4T533C. I Bought the one that fitted my budget and still Sufficed my needs. You sir will never be able to do that ever with "I HATE INTEL" on your forehead.

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 24, 2003 7:21:46 PM

Quote:
But it's only the ignorant people who get fooled into such marketing ploys. Did you go out and buy a willy ..NO Did I ...NO Thats because we're intelligent enough to do some research before we choose what we buy.

I didn't go out and buy a Willy either, but I am stuck with using one here at work. It could be worse and I could have my old P3 500, but I'd much rather have a better CPU. The Willamette wasn't a top performer on its own, but combine that with PC133 SDRAM, and it sometimes doesn't seem a whole lot faster than my old P3 500.

I believe that it was wrong of Intel to even think of selling a chipset that matched a P4 with single channel SDRAM. It was clearly not a good option for people that wanted good performance. And for people that wanted to save some money, they could have still bought a slower CPU with good RAM and saved money while having more performance. It didn't benefit the customer at all, it only gave a lot of people slow computers while Intel made a lot more money. It also isn't all the purchasing people's fault either. When Willy was sold with SDRAM, it was sometimes hard to find it sold with good RAM unless you bought top of the line. Well, when you are buying hundreds of computers you can't afford to buy top of the line and you also can't afford to put together those hundreds of computers yourself.

I do not hate Intel. But I won't try to defend them for things that they did wrong just so I can feel unbiased.
April 24, 2003 7:30:46 PM

Quote:
But I won't try to defend them for things that they did wrong just so I can feel unbiased

And just when did i "protect" intel and bash AMD?

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 24, 2003 7:44:55 PM

Quote:
So The current Barton qualifies as a markitechture

I wasn't aware that the current Barton performed worse than the Thoroughbred 'B' core clock for clock. What it doesn't do is perform as well PR rating for PR rating. But the CPU architecture was still improved to give better performance out of each clock cycle.

I am not sure what I believe about the P4 architecture vs Athlon archetecture. The P4 does well by being able to reach those high clock speeds. The P3 could not. I don't know if Intel could have made a CPU with a higher IPC that still scaled as well as the P4. However, your point about the Barton being markitecture was just obviously false. You can argue about the PR rating all you want, but that deals with marketing while the Barton core deals with the architecture.

Quote:
Even AMD does'nt qualify as a completely "honest" company. I haven't recieved an answer on my Barton question btw.

True. The justification of 'everyone else is doing it' is used all the time. If you are happy using that justification, then that is fine. I still appreciate giving my money to companies that are the most honest. Your point about every company doing bad things is valid. Well, in my mind there are still levels. Going through and finding one wrong thing that every company did doesn't put them all in the same category. I am sure that if you looked hard enough you could even find something that ATI has done that wasn't that great.

Quote:
It's common sense ..Any company tries to take advantage of it's monopoly.

Well that explains a lot about your viewpoint. You expect the worst in people and companies so that you just accept it as normal when it is done instead of seeing it as being that bad.

Quote:
Being neutral means looking over the past performance of the company

Well if that is what it takes to be neutral, I hope I am never neutral. Being objective is what I like to be and that includes looking at the past performance of a company and weighing it accordingly. If a company did something bad in its past, and since got new management and has done better since, objective people will see that. If a company has a long history of similar behavior, objective people will see that too. Just ignoring the past doesn't seem very smart. You can go ahead and be neutral, but I don't like being neutral. As soon as you have an opinion, you are no longer neutral. More people should have opinions. More people should also strive to be objective when making their opinions too.
April 24, 2003 7:58:00 PM

Quote:
And just when did i "protect" intel and bash AMD?

I wasn't trying to say that you were doing that, just saying that I wasn't going to do that. But since you asked:

Quote:
>They looted money from people by making Willamette and combining it with i845 and PC133 SDRAM

True very true. But it's only the ignorant people who get fooled into such marketing ploys. Did you go out and buy a willy ..NO Did I ...NO Thats because we're intelligent enough to do some research before we choose what we buy. The company is not to blame for this. It's a PROFIT MAKING ORGANIZATION not a people welfare society. It's main objective is to make money. They dont care about the people. Same goes for any other company. This is also myanswer for your celeron question too. One AIM : MONEY!

You seemed to agree with the statement, but you followed by excusing Intel from any blame because they are a greedy company and that is all that can be expected. You then bashed AMD for putting out the Barton and charging too much money for it. So you "protected" Intel by excusing them from doing wrong and you bashed AMD by what you said about the Barton being overpriced.

I don't know why you feel like you have to spend effort sticking up for Intel. Do you work for them? Do you own a lot of stock? I wasn't trying to bash Intel too much, I just wanted to comment when you seemed to be protecting them for something that was wrong. No need to protect companies. Just keep things factual and people can come up with opinions of their own. I will repeat, I don't hate Intel. In fact, I don't think they have done anything very wrong since the Willy and single channel RAM. I am not trying to protect AMD. I disagree with their PR rating on the Barton and the prices they charge for them.
April 24, 2003 8:06:45 PM

Quote:
I wasn't aware that the current Barton performed worse than the Thoroughbred 'B' core clock for clock. What it doesn't do is perform as well PR rating for PR rating. But the CPU architecture was still improved to give better performance out of each clock cycle.

Oh yes i'm sorry about this one. I just checked the results to make sure. I'm wrong on this one. But the Thing you said about PR rating to PR rating definitely hasnt gone down well with many people.
Quote:
I am sure that if you looked hard enough you could even find something that ATI has done that wasn't that great


I am unaware of any ...Please enlighten me.
Quote:
You expect the worst in people and companies so that you just accept it as normal when it is done instead of seeing it as being that bad.

Thanks but I'd rather not keep my expectations high on marketing ploys only to be depressed later. Such as the case of the willamettes.
Quote:
If a company did something bad in its past, and since got new management and has done better since, objective people will see that

So tell me why is this thread bashing the Northwoods?? Even after being a very good proc.
OH BTW I'm sure you have an AMD in your PC. But unlike you i have both AMD and Intel.
Noone knows about this But i have the following:
P42.4B
AMD Athlon 1700+
AMD Duron 600
A P3 600
AMD k6-2 300
I only use two of them at the mo. And have lent out the rest to one of my friends who just opened up a cyber cafe.

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 24, 2003 8:13:41 PM

For beginners. I'm a student and dont really care about brand loyalty. For instance i have an Nvidia card with me but still root for ATi nowadays since they have been churning out some awesome products.

So Calling a company greedy and money minded and not thinking about their customers is Supporting them?? OKK I'll have to change my definition of support from now on. :p . I bashed intel for the willamette fiasco. I am doing this for the barton because IMHO it doesnt really deserve the price tag it has right now. The 400MHz FSB barton will definitely deserve that price tag.

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 24, 2003 8:20:20 PM

ATi had used a Quake 3 cheat which reduced image quality for more performance, and claimed it added free performance through "optimization". It was later found it was cheating and definitely useless as it degraded image quality for a few more frames.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 24, 2003 8:23:14 PM

OMG
i've been wrong twice. Maybe i should leave the debating to the experts.

BTW i ws wondering Is ati actually written as ATi with the small "i". I have noticed it quite a few times here. But i just do it because i dont hold the shift for long enough. What is ATi 's fullform anyway.
<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by jaythaman on 04/24/03 04:30 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 24, 2003 8:53:11 PM

Are you telling me that I CAN'T GET EXCITED!!!!

<b>IT IS A FREE COUNTRY! I CAN GET EXCITED IF I WANT TO!</b><font color=red>*</font color=red>






or...




Who's says that I am getting excited? Find me a link to where you you saw Bum_JCRules get excited. You are basing all of your <i>opinions</i> off of unsubstantiated, non-factual, hype. Show me your proof.



or...



This IS flame war and not a discussion. A discussion is two people talking rationally. These three statment are clearly not any form of rational speach.



Hehehehe!

<font color=red>* (I thought that I should throw in a little AMDMELTDOWN just for old time's sake.)</font color=red>

<A HREF="http://www.millionmanlan.com/MMLDefault.asp" target="_new">Million Man LAN 2 is June 25-29, 2003 in Louisville Kentucky... Be there!</A>
April 24, 2003 9:02:06 PM

Thats damn gooood strategy. I have to congratulate you you've turned this into a true flamewar :lol: 
Quote:
Find me a link to where you you saw Bum_JCRules get excited

*IN a lawyer's tone*
Here's a pic where it proves that you were so excited that you got completely wasted.
http://www.veryfunnypics.com/kids/imagepages/image11.ht...
(it's kinda hard to identify which one's you though.) :lol: 

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 24, 2003 9:19:08 PM

Eden thats nothing compared to the tricks Nvidia is doing to get extra performance out at the expense of visual quality, and that goes for ALL games, not just Quake 3 or benchmarks
April 25, 2003 2:46:58 AM

Quote:
So The current Barton qualifies as a markitechture.

Barton is not a whole new architecture. And it doesn't peform worse than T-bred clock vs. clock. We should blame the PR system.

Quote:
I am yet to see an Athlon core running at same clock as a K6-2 so i dont think anyone can really compare the two.

You can compare K6-2 500/550 MHz and Athlon 500/550 MHz.

Quote:
Tell me some companies which fall into the first category except ATI. Even AMD does'nt qualify as a completely "honest" company. I haven't recieved an answer on my Barton question btw.

Nobody is 100% honest, I know it. I've never claimed AMD is 100% honest. I said AMD is much more honest than Intel. Most of the newbies don't buy Athlons. And techies are aware of wrong PR system of Barton. So this AMD cheating will do much less harm than any Intel cheating does.

BTW, ATI is no saint. They cheated with their driver when they launched R8500, they considerd quality for better performance in Q3A

Quote:
researched and chose products of my liking from both Intel and AMD.I had two rig charts when i went to the market. But a7n8x deluxe being recently launched was more expensive than my Asus P4T533C

#1. Rambus is DEAD. So you will be unable to use your current RDRAM modules in future. Plus RDRAM is much more expensive than DDR

#2) You are getting an Audigy2 for almost free with ASUS A7N8X Deluxe. nForce APU is better than Audigy2 for gaming. If you don't buy AMD + nForce system, then you aren't getting it.

So AMD was a better deal

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>
April 25, 2003 2:54:51 AM

Quote:
I bashed intel for the willamette fiasco.

Why you will bash them for Willy? According to your opinion, Intel should only look for money. Intel has made a lot of money from Willamette, so why it's a bad processor?

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>
April 25, 2003 5:53:07 AM

Quote:
#1. Rambus is DEAD. So you will be unable to use your current RDRAM modules in future. [/quote} Yes but i do not fee; cheated because it was a good product for the P4. I dont know about bangladesh but i am pretty able to buy as much RAMBUS rimms as i like. And I will not be able to use my RDRAM modules in the futue???What do you mean ...it's not like they will expire after a certain time limit....I will still have an upgrade option in the form of 1066modules which i would not be able to if i bought say a 845pe i'd be stuck with SC ddr333 with performance equal to my "inferior" PC800
Quote:
BTW, ATI is no saint. They cheated with their driver when they launched R8500, they considerd quality for better performance in Q3A

Did yo keep that in mind when you went to buy you R9000??? No obviously not because that is a thing of the past and the companny has some realy good products in th market. You should be able to do the same with intel. Northwoods are undoubtedly a good core so you shouldnt go on to believe that Oh they suck just because intel cheated in the past.

Quote:
#2) You are getting an Audigy2 for almost free with ASUS A7N8X Deluxe. nForce APU is better than Audigy2 for gaming. If you don't buy AMD + nForce system, then you aren't getting it.


The a7n8x was 5000Bucks more expensive than the P4t533C and oh if you're thinking about the price of the modules, I have some very good relations with a big retailer so i was able to get the Pc800 for less than i would've got ddr333(which was new in India at that moment BTW)
Again The sound card didnt matter to me at all because i dont use any 5.1 speaker system but instead i hook up one of the channels of the soundcard to the system....so 5.1.61.7.1 it'll all be the same for me and besides i already had a Soundblaster Live with me so Soundcard was a non issue.
Plus add the cost of a good cooler if i bought the AXP since it was the palomino core.
I'm very satisfied with my choice and dont fret that rambus is dead and stuff.


<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 25, 2003 5:57:57 AM

Quote:
Why you will bash them for Willy? According to your opinion, Intel should only look for money. Intel has made a lot of money from Willamette, so why it's a bad processor?

If you go on to read my original reply to your post, i have said that willamette was a disaster in terms of performance. I did not say that Intel SHOULD LOOK FOR MONEY so please dont put words into my mouth. I said that it's a selfish profit making organization that doesnt give a [-peep-] about the people. As long as they are making money they dont care. Intel's previous prestige was so high at the time of Willys that people blindly went out to buy an underperforming proc when even a duron could've beat them. This is the perfect example of a company misusing it's market hold.

<b><font color=blue>Algebra was easy for the Romans because "X" was always 10 :lol:  </b></font color=blue>
<font color=red>Jay Kay</font color=red>
April 25, 2003 7:47:32 AM

I don't think you will ever upgrade to PC1066 RDRAM. It will cost $$$ and give you very little performance boost considering the price.

In Bangladesh it's impossible to get PC1066 RDRAM. If you know that RDRAM has various speeds and make sure you are getting PC800, then it's possible to get PC800. If you rely on retailer, and say him to give you some RDRAM, you're sure to get PC600 RDRAM.

Rambus is another company I hate. I'm so happy that it's dead in PC. Once I told somebody BF1942 won't run well in his comp. because he has 128 MB RAM. But he told me it will be OK because he has RDRAM. I bet he got PC600 stuff, these newbies will never get PC800 from retailers, because he only wanted RDRAM. And I've even heard people are buying P4 with 64 MB RDRAM (of course PC600), because he wants best P4 platform. These systems (PC600 @ single channel) areperform worse than even i845 + PC133 SDRAM.

Rambus and Intel is the reason for dealying DDR taking the place of SDRAM. DDR would replace SDRAM as smoothly as SDRAM replaced EDO. But Intel put RDRAM and SDRAM in way of DDR, and made a confusing (for newbies) memory market with 3 kinds of memory types.

Quote:
Did yo keep that in mind when you went to buy you R9000??? No obviously not because that is a thing of the past and the companny has some realy good products in th market. You should be able to do the same with intel. Northwoods are undoubtedly a good core so you shouldnt go on to believe that Oh they suck just because intel cheated in the past.

ATI is better than Intel, because they tried to cheat people who know about stuff that they are going to buy. It's not very easy, and ATI didn't make a success in their attempt of cheating. But Intel tried to cheat poor clueless people, which is very easy and easier for them for their Intel and Pentium name. They are 100% successful at their dirty work. They've made a lot of money from cheating, it won't hurt them if I don't buy Intel processors.

My ATI buy was a different situation, Gigabyte R9000 was much cheaper than MSI (or other good brand) GeForce4 MX440. Not only cheaper, it's better than MX440 in everywhere. AMD vs. Intel is totally different case.

Quote:
Again The sound card didnt matter to me at all because i dont use any 5.1 speaker system but instead i hook up one of the channels of the soundcard to the system....so 5.1.61.7.1 it'll all be the same for me and besides i already had a Soundblaster Live with me so Soundcard was a non issue.

You will benefit from nForce APU even if you don't use 5.1 sound system. nForce APU uses less CPU than any other sound card, including Audigy2. Not to say, it's way better than SB Live! Anandtech had comparison of SB Live! and nForce APU in 2001, I'll give you a link, then you'll see.

Quote:
The a7n8x was 5000Bucks more expensive than the P4t533C

Is it a typo? IMO, it should be 500 instead of 5000. I don't think ASUS A7N8X Deluxe can cost more than Rs. 10000 and P4T533C isn't as cheap as Rs. 5000.

Quote:
Plus add the cost of a good cooler if i bought the AXP since it was the palomino core.

Stock AMD cooler is enough if you don't overclock. From my personal experience, a cheap alluminium based cooler (shouldn't cost more than Rs. 500-600) is good enough to keep and AXP 1800+ (palomino) cool unless you don't use thermal pad. It's true for all Palominos upto 2100+. In fact T-bred's require more expensive cooler with copper tip to keep them cool, because they have smaller die.


----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>
!