Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD becomes Intel as trio socket switch frenzy

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 1, 2003 6:30:34 PM

Wow, this has Intel beat!

AMD to introduce 3 damn sockets for Athlon 64 alone. Heheh, well that compensates for any changes they were to do with Socket A AthlonXPs. I wonder what excuse the fanboys will now use, now that AMD also will screw up lots of consumers who buy the 754 pin A64s.
"sigh"

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10794" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10794&lt;/A>
and
<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10811" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10811&lt;/A>

An even more interesting yet funny example of how consumers will be screwed up even more when paying for Workstations:
Quote:
So, the burning question is, what's the difference between the 940 pin Opteron 1xx and the 940 pin Athlon64? Before you ask that question, make sure your local AMD representative is not a) standing upright b) around anything that they could hit their head on c) holding any sharp objects. The difference is the laser etching on the heat spreader that says Opteron 1xx or Athlon64. Yup, that's it.

Quote from this interesting article revealing it: <A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10686" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10686&lt;/A>

Ahh I love the Inquirer :wink: .

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 1, 2003 11:22:58 PM

They are using actually 2 sockets. The 940 pin version exists only for compatibility with Opteron mobos.

However, this also sux. Before you could buy a Duron and then upgrade to Athlon without changing the mobo. Now you can't.

----------------
<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>
August 1, 2003 11:27:49 PM

It's going to be like Celeron/P2. Here socket/socket instead of socket/slot.

AMD is following Intel's path slowly to achieve success. I hope within few years some 3rd CPU manufacturer will be strong enough to compeat with Intel/AMD.

----------------
<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>
Related resources
August 2, 2003 1:07:22 AM

only way to beat INTEL is to play thier game

socket-a-roo
August 2, 2003 5:11:05 AM

And Spud saves the day...

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 2, 2003 6:19:11 AM

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10811" target="_new">Extra Athlon64 pin mystery solved</A>

Oh and btw, it's 2 sockets. Sure it still sux but it's not three, it's two. One for the 754-pin Athlons (64-bit Durons anyone?) and one for the 940-pin Athlons, which will later on be able to also accept the 939-pin ones.
August 2, 2003 10:46:57 AM

There is also speculation that the 940 pin Athlon 64 will need registered memory. As far as I see there is very little diffrence between an A64 and Opteron other than multi processor support. A64 is a Opteron in sheeps clothing.

<A HREF="http://www.amdzone.com/#8" target="_new">Clicky</A>

<font color=purple>Ladies and Gentlemen, its...Hammer Time !</font color=purple>
August 2, 2003 6:57:18 PM

there he does it again...Spud the Stud!

<font color=red>No job. No girl friend. No life.</font color=red>
August 2, 2003 9:04:39 PM

I don't get it, it was said that there is Socket 754, 939 AND 940. Why is it not 3 sockets?
Regardless of market availability, it seems to me there are three socket versions out there for A64.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 2, 2003 9:16:48 PM

the matter is that probably the 940 e 939 pin versions will use the same socket and the added pin will be introduced to make the first Athlon 64(the one equipped with Dual Channel and launched the 23rd Semptember) compatible with opteron mobos.
August 2, 2003 9:19:25 PM

And that just makes things more confusing. Why on earth would there be an A64 Opteron combo. It's pointless, I don't see any advantage.

AMD is mixing consumers far worse than Intel EVER did.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 2, 2003 9:27:19 PM

I don't think so. I can be wrong but it's clear that there will be a first version (Single Channel) with 754 pin and two version (Dual Channel) with 940-939 pins. We will never see three different processor on the market because the 939 will replace , the next year, the 940. So there will be two choices: single or dual channel. And two different kind of mobos, with support for single or dual channel, just like the CPUs. I think it's not too confused ;) 
August 2, 2003 11:03:45 PM

well if your an INTELLIOT... its your duty to make sure u make everyone think its very confusing for AMD to have 2 sockets... one for dual high end and one for single lower end...
August 3, 2003 4:00:08 AM

You missed my point. In ONE YEAR, in fact less than one, 3 sockets have been introduced for one CPU. This is ridiculous, there probably is no new core during the 3!

The worse thing is probably that the A64 will likely be a bad performing CPU relative to Prescott, there will be ridiculously 3 sockets in one year, and fanboys will still go on.
Ah well, I guess at least the Socket A argument is forever killed.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 3, 2003 7:44:18 AM

Quote:
If the 754 pin A64's are usable in 940 pin socket , then there should not be any problem.

Exactly! What does it matter whether they have 1, 2 or 15 different sockets? If they all fit on the same mobo, then there is no problem for the consumers.

Quote:
The worse thing is probably that the A64 will likely be a bad performing CPU relative to Prescott...

And I assume you know this because .....? Currently, nobody knows for sure what clock frequency the 3400+ will have. If AMD managed to work things out with SOI and ramped up their speeds, then they could have a very competitive product there. And I still haven't seen any proof of Prescott's performance. I think you must agree with me that we can never judge by the specs (remember Geforce FX 5800?).

Be patient and only time will show. I trust AMD that they know what's best for them, and that they will do the right thing. I just can't understand your obsession of showing that AMD is just crap. Yes, I currently have a Barton and if A64 is a flop, then I will change to Intel. But I know for sure that nobody can predict what the outcome of the A64 vs Prescott fight will be.
August 3, 2003 5:55:41 PM

1) there are only 2 sockets, opteron hardly counts.
2)they are being released at the same time, if it was intel they would release one, let everyone upgrade, then introduce the next so everyone has to upgrade again, whereas in this situation you could just buy a 939 pin one from the start,
3)when was the last time AMD introduced a new socket? long time ago (relatively).

i'm not a fanboy, but those are the facts.
August 3, 2003 6:50:59 PM

your such a intelliot its sickening
August 3, 2003 7:25:45 PM

You're such a hypocrite it's unbelievable.

Oh and I OWN an AMD XP, please review your facts.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 3, 2003 7:42:05 PM

1)There are <b>3</b> sockets, did you read the article?

Quote:
let everyone upgrade, then introduce the next so everyone has to upgrade again, whereas in this situation you could just buy a 939 pin one from the start,

Please count me the timelength of Socket 478's life. In fact, include Prescott as well which is supposed to use the same socket. Don't even evade my request, answer me.

2)The point being that AMD is now doing this, when they shouldn't do it. Why did AMD NOT switch sockets when Dual Channel mainboards came out for it, but now Dual-Channel-supported A64s NEED an extra socket? Why not all into one? It's ridiculous at its best.

3)Long time ago but hey, tell me which schmuck actually got to upgrade his 1GHZ Tbird into a Barton 400MT 3200+ using the same socket same mobo. Please, tell me. Educate me with how glorifying the "Same socket" argument is valid. THEN, educate me how having an old chipset like an AMD750 is just as performing as an nForce 2 system, despite giving you about 60% of the new chipset's performance according to THG. Please, show me.

Quote:
i'm not a fanboy, but those are the facts.

Facts only uninformed like to use.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 3, 2003 7:53:59 PM

Quote:
Exactly! What does it matter whether they have 1, 2 or 15 different sockets? If they all fit on the same mobo, then there is no problem for the consumers.

By your theory a 478 P4 should fit and work on Xeon mainboards. Pray tell when did we ever use Socket-to-Socket configurations? This is probably the most ridiculous suggestion I ever heard and I will hit my head hard on the wall if it happens. It's beyong technical reasoning.

Quote:
Currently, nobody knows for sure what clock frequency the 3400+ will have.

AMD's leaked roadmap had revealed ~2GHZ. Now you look at Opteron with 1MB L2, and you tell yourself A64 is the very same design. Now you tell me how the hell can A64 win, if sometimes the on-die mem controller DOESN'T help, making it an AXP in disguise occasionally?
There is btw no way they can change any A64 now. One month left, far from having the time to design, implement, in fact create chips out of the fab, and ship them. If the A64 is an Opteron with no SMP, it's done for. There is so little in it that can do much. It has SSE2 and the on-die mem controller, that's it. Prescott will continue offering more and more multimedia features that are USABLE.

Quote:
I think you must agree with me that we can never judge by the specs (remember Geforce FX 5800?).

The FX5800 was based on a NEW CORE. NV3x has to be the most poorly conceived core with no future. P7 core is the total opposite. As for specs, it can ONLY GO UP. Prescott adds L2 over NW, adds even more SSE instructions, adds an improved HT, and some more I forgot. PLUS, it starts at 3.4GHZ. If the 3.2GHZ nails the 3200+, how on earth has Prescott any chances of being weak? It won't devastate, but it will have such an easy time against Athlon 64, and that is a sure thing thanks to 0.09m technology.

Quote:
I trust AMD that they know what's best for them, and that they will do the right thing.

They've not done a single right thing in the past year except for Thorton (using more out of wafers and stopping Tbred production). Everything they did is purely marketting crap, and horrible decisions on Barton's clock speeds.
Quote:
I just can't understand your obsession of showing that AMD is just crap.

Where did I say that, pray tell?
Prove me that. I only showed just how bad AMD has become, by having to resort to 3 different Athlon 64 sockets within a year. Not even implying anything about 3 market sockets at once, just TECHNICALLY SPEAKING, which some here are still not understanding, sadly. It's stupid, inefficient, and pointless. On top of that, Duron was Socket A, so if Athlon64 Socket 754 is a Duron, then you got proof of bad management on their part.
I don't understand AMD anymore, but can only say that Opteron is their only lifeline left. Forget A64 for now, to me, this thing is simply NOT gonna be enough in the long run. The K7 core should just be put to rest already, and a new 20-stage design should be created. Lord knows if the design dept. has even began researching this at least, so that we don't wait 3-4 more years before it happens (P7 took 5 years I believe to be designed).
Quote:
But I know for sure that nobody can predict what the outcome of the A64 vs Prescott fight will be.

While I do agree, my tilt is strongly towards Prescott. Thermal problems aside, Intel has the power anytime to throw AMD off, thanks to their advanced core and robust fab knowledge and funding.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 3, 2003 8:15:50 PM

you are confused, a64 has 2 sockets, and opteron has one, and you cant count the opteron as it is aimed at workstations/servers which are an entirely different story as i'm sure you are aware.

i dont know how long 478 has been around, but not as long as socket A, i am glad you mention the socket 478 and prescott, as prescott will shortly change to a different socket so 478 prescotts will have a very short lifespan!!

"tell me which schmuck actually got to upgrade his 1GHZ ", i upgraded thunderbird to palomino to tbred, my father has, my brother will shortly and my uncle has, i'm sure millions of other people have to. socket A with 266 bus has been around for a long time, give AMD credit for that.

i know changing bus is almost as good as changing socket as motherboards arent always compatible which is the point your making, but intel does that all the time to.

your reply to me was very agressive, this was innappropriate as this community is for discussion not arguements, it is common knowledge that intel changes specification more often than AMD.
August 3, 2003 8:41:57 PM

Quote:
tell me which schmuck actually got to upgrade his 1GHZ ", i upgraded thunderbird to palomino to tbred, my father has, my brother will shortly and my uncle has, i'm sure millions of other people have to. socket A with 266 bus has been around for a long time, give AMD credit for that.

You are cutting my words and playing with them. Don't put words in my mouth. I asked you which person can upgrade their old Tbirds to Bartons 400s on the same mobo.
Heck, I even mentioned old chipsets like the 750. Yet you put words in my mouth. Do that again and I won't have to waste my time argumenting with someone who can't.

Quote:
you are confused,

No I am not.
It just proves you really did not read before replying to this discussion. Here, FYI, again is the Inquirer quote:
Quote:
When AMD releases the Athlon 64 in September, it is widely expected to introduce a 754 pin model and a 940 pin model too.

But it also has plans for a 939 pin CPU and we presume this will slot into 940 sockets – otherwise the mobo makers will go stark staring bonkers

And I am commenting that should this be true, it will be ridiculous. Stupid on their part to have 3 pin versions for one core already, when Intel wouldn't do that yet.

Quote:
i am glad you mention the socket 478 and prescott, as prescott will shortly change to a different socket so 478 prescotts will have a very short lifespan!!

If we were to stay on the Socket-only argument, Socket 478 will have been a very long socket life. If we were to talk about compatibility however, it's another entirely different story. But since fanboys just LOVE to use the "same-socket" argument in favor of AMD, I'd love to see just how truthful it is. Yes, it has more upgradability, but not BY THAT MUCH. It's a huge overrated statement to say you can upgrade easily. Most can't or won't. Instead they will go upgrade and buy an nForce 2 mainboard. Most won't be able to upgrade to a CPU Barton only.
Quote:
but intel does that all the time to.

And in no way do I applaud them for it. However Socket 423 was a mistake all by itself, it had electrical problems and was huge. Socket 478 is the true P4 socket IMO. Besides, Socket 370 has been around, mind you, for 3 years now easily.
An Intel employee told me in fact that Intel's engineers use a very lazy tactic of not planifying for future socket switches with technology added. I commented on how lazy it was but we both agreed. That's probably the worst thing those engineers could do on themselves. Then again Athlons have not had such a huge change in themselves internally, compared to how much the P7 core will. From having:
-Added cache
-To 2 extra bus speeds
-To HyperThreading
-To all of Prescott's added improvements including once again added cache
-To (if Tejas is P7) even more improvements by Tejas
It is fairly obvious Intel is improving a lot, and that requires socket changes, logically. AMD didn't do much improvements mind you, which only explains why Socket A was so viable, and why upgrading fairly aged chipsets (excluding any Barton 400MT upgrade since no chipset without 400MT support can) could still work with newer CPUs.
Intel OTOH has tons of extra features, which logically requires more advanced chipsets and mainboards.
Quote:
your reply to me was very agressive, this was innappropriate as this community is for discussion not arguements, it is common knowledge that intel changes specification more often than AMD.


Then leave. No offense, but here at THG, we DEBATE and debate HARD when we have on the other line, people who don't properly argument or resort to weak facts. And I do enjoy in fact being agressive in debating when the other party does those things I mentioned. Convince me and be more realistic, (and stop modifying what I say) and we'd have a good calm debate.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile: <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 08/03/03 04:43 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
August 3, 2003 9:01:04 PM

A64 939 and 940pin are commonly thought to be interchangable, the extra pin is for multiple cpus (and A64 is obsolutely not for multiple cpus) if i remember correctly, thus they clearly count as one socket.

please dont tell me i put words in your mouth, you know exactly what i meant, and that is that without doubt the socket A 266 bus has been the most upgradable socket ever by a long shot.

"I asked you which person can upgrade their old Tbirds to Bartons 400s on the same mobo." i didnt respond because it is obviously a rhetorical question.

"Intel OTOH has tons of extra features, which logically requires more advanced chipsets and mainboards." which is as you know why AMD has been forced to introduce a new socket, this means the only problem is that AMD is introducing 2 seperate sockets, which is annoying, but history has shown Intel doing things just as bad.

I just meant that you obviously get very annoyed when people disagree with you, and react unnessecarily agressively, and you dont need to, agressiveness is a last resort, so gives the impression you know your wrong but wont give up, whether this is the case or not.
August 3, 2003 10:06:40 PM

I become agressive but I don't resort to name-calling like "you're stupid or an A-hole". Agressive because you did begin with quite the lax argumenting.

Quote:
please dont tell me i put words in your mouth, you know exactly what i meant, and that is that without doubt the socket A 266 bus has been the most upgradable socket ever by a long shot.

You DID answer to something else. I was indeed posing a question that was a bit without answer, but that was exactly my argument, to prove you that it's not a perfect platform by any means.

And yeah the only reason why it's that, is because of little upgrades in the feature set. If AMD's A64 has little architectural improvements, it'll likely stay Socket 939, but I'll be damned if it's gonna work well. You got the on-die mem controller which right off removes flexibility anyways. I just don't see the point in what AMD is doing, they are only shooting themsevles in the foot. Even Intel doesn't throw 2 pin versions for P4s on the Desktop front.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 3, 2003 10:16:15 PM

I believe you should try and take this easy, you don't own Intel or anything do you? Did they hire you to advertise them in THG or something? Gosh!

Wait a couple of months until the two CPUs are released, and then you can create a nice topic where you can praise Prescott using facts. Right now we are all only guessing, and I don't really see the point in this.
August 3, 2003 10:25:08 PM

I am only basing this on real-world leading hints.
I never said for sure Prescott will win, however I do say with great belief it will have an easy time competing. All signs point to it, and not only do you look like you did not read my previous post to you with the comparison to the FX5800 and new cores, but you discredited yourself by doing so.

But hey, who am I to speak. Let us just wait till September for benchmarks to release. If I am wrong, I'll gladly concede to being too much zealous for nothing. Despite the fact I am equal towards Intel and AMD. But if I'm right, you owe me! :wink:

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 3, 2003 10:27:49 PM

I think we can both agree that things will become very interesting when A64 and prescott are released, A64 may have problems due to socket annoyances, but prescott equally has power consumption annoyances, i get the impression you arent too hopefull about A64, which i understand but i think it may well surprise everyone in a positive way, either way, the first p4 was a complete dog, and now it is a really good (if very expensive) cpu, so maybe if first A64 is a dog, it will mature into something amazing.
August 3, 2003 11:10:04 PM

Uh...nope.

Intel power consumption problems are rumors, until someone with a "real" release die proves them true. Hell, it's like the whole mobo incompatiblity rumor a few weeks ago.

A64 socket issue is not a rumor, but truth. It's doesn't matter if it's 2, 3, or 100, it's too many sockets for a desktop system that has even been released yet. Also, why would anyone need an Operton socket for A64? Doesn't make sense. Plus, what exactly do you lose between the 754 pin and 940 pin sockets? If nothing, why the differences?

Quote:
the first p4 was a complete dog, and now it is a really good (if very expensive) cpu

Nope. Look at top line Bartons compared with top line P4s...prior to AMDs price cuts, the high end Bartons were priced <i>more</i> than Intel's high end P4s. Now, there is a difference, but only because the high end AMD CPUs didn't live up their ratings in most review site's benchmarks.

In mid-road CPUs, AMD is still a great deal...but with the upcoming A64, they are AMDs last great offer.

Quote:
so maybe if first A64 is a dog, it will mature into something amazing.

I don't know if AMD has the capital headroom or the investors interest if A64 is not an immediate hit. If A64 (version 1.0) flops, AMD will be in bad shape, and might have to sell or even merge with another company to continue developing A64. Or...AMD might just pull out of the desktop realm, and work more in server/workstations. Either way....AMD has put too much effort, delayed this thing too many times, and has placed most of it's capital and R&D to A64 to not expect it to be a hit. But AMD's biggest issue to overcome is waiting for Microsoft to develop an O/S, cause if it doesn't arrive within months of A64s arrival, I don't think many mainstream consumers will buy one, knowing they can't run their Windows programs on it.

Just my $.02

:) 

How many watts does it take to get the center of CPU core?
August 3, 2003 11:33:31 PM

I think the rumors were confirmed, or at least from 2 seperate sources, and where i am although high end Amds are more similar to p4s in price, typically AMDs are half the price of equivalent p4s, and AMDs tend to drop quicker. (amd 2400 = £50.49, p4 2.4ghz = £119.9, and htats the cheaper p4 with 533 bus!!, prices exclude VAT)
August 3, 2003 11:35:37 PM

sorry, AMD with fan (as p4 was) is £59.9, but it is still an amazing difference in price.
August 4, 2003 12:50:07 AM

Anyway, when I'm ready to upgrade CPU, I'm removing the mobo, the cpu, the memory, because there always something new in that make that it just dont worth it to upgrade only the cpu. I did upgrade to a 2500+ from a 1700+. I built that system one and half year ago and right now, running my 2500+ at 266 FSB on my old board when I can run it at 400 FSB on my new board with DDR 400 memory make my upgrade worth it. And it is easyer to sell the complete mobo/cpu/memory kit than just a cpu. I've build a nice system for my friend that doesnt have the same need that I have and it is perfectly happy with it.

so, if I upgrade to A64 next year, I will buy what fit my need at this time. Maybe it will be an Intel too. And if I ever upgrade years later, I will just sell my old parts, buy newer one that may offer more value, performance or both.



-Always put the blame on you first, then on the hardware !!!
August 4, 2003 12:54:56 AM

Quote:
the first p4 was a complete dog, and now it is a really good (if very expensive) cpu

It's still a dog. Initially there wasn't much difference in clockspeed between Athlon and P4's, and there was no SS2 optimized apps, so it looked horrible. Now the clockspeed difference is huge and there's many SS2 optimized apps, so it looks usable. AXP @ 2.6 GHz would outperform P4 3.2 at vitually every benchmark (except heavily SSE2 optimized apps like LightWave)

----------------
<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>
August 4, 2003 2:52:57 AM

I can agree that it will be interesting. It will be very interesting to see just WHAT AMD has to compete Intel.

Quote:
the first p4 was a complete dog, and now it is a really good (if very expensive) cpu, so maybe if first A64 is a dog, it will mature into something amazing.

There is one problem with this statement, it's that the P4 is a new core, A64 isn't. We know by now the early P4s were released 2 years prematurely due to competition AND had been stripped of needed components just to compete quickly. The P4 was designed from ground up to have a future. The 20 stage pipeline is there, it will drive it far.
AMD's K8 is a K7 in disguise, and that ain't gonna help at all. The 12-stage pipeline will soon have a physical limit.
So while P4 was young and now is significantly better, the Athlon 64 is a grown-up heading for retirement. THAT'S the problem.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 4, 2003 2:55:07 AM

Quote:
amd 2400 = £50.49, p4 2.4ghz = £119.9, and htats the cheaper p4 with 533 bus!!, prices exclude VAT

Fair enough, and indeed, no one even disagreed, mid to low-end is still largely overtaken by AMD, there is no doubt. But due to the C serie NWs being here down to 2.4GHZ, it has created a huge hole in the mid-end for AMD, Intel is greatly being the better choice. Only low-end remains, but I doubt I'll ever see the day a P4 is 100$ and under.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 4, 2003 3:14:55 AM

You are really grasping at straws Spitfire, hints of a falling.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 4, 2003 4:26:25 AM

your expertise in CPU micro-architecture is awe-inspiring.

why dont you start a website based on how bad you think AMD is doing and how BAD AMD will do in the future and how GREAT the Prescott will perform from paper stats.

i am sure u will have tons of INTELLIOT hits on that site
August 4, 2003 5:46:44 AM

All the while having a "My system specs" mentioning "Athlon XP 1600+"...

Geez Pope, try harder, you've been only a hypocrite lately, and you're losin' it. Take a breather man!

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 4, 2003 6:37:41 AM

You may have an Athlon XP, but I to have noticed your post have went from being pro AMD to Pro Intel now. Just the Facts!
August 4, 2003 7:42:28 PM

What do you want me to say, "GO AMD GO AMD, YOUR ATHLON 64 WILL KICK ASS"?

Seriously, when people comment on a processor, they're labeled fanboys?
If I chose now to go ATi because all the reasons point to their products being more honest, cheaper and more performing, I am a fanboy?
So if I can't find a good AMD upgrade for my system, unless I went low-end, and find that Intel is doing better hence they're the better choice now, I am a fanboy?

Run along little one.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 4, 2003 7:55:13 PM

What is wrong with liking the cpu that is best at the time?

What is so bad about someone who buys a cpu for performance rather than brand?

Jeez...Eden is anything but a fanboy...a fanboy it someone who uneducatedly and blindly buys another brand just because they like that brand...

I think the word fanboy is being overplayed way to much in these forums...Popey is a fanboy...but latley I havn't seen many people other than him that are blindly following a company...

Now don't label me as any type of fanboy...

I have an amd k6, pentium II, and am currently writing from a pIII...

I have owned bot amd and intel cpus in the past too (amd 386dx 40, pentium 100)

3 386DX-25's...12 volts...glue some ln2 and a wicked amount of overclocking and you get a willamantee minus 36 pins, 33.75 million transistors and a couple hundred mhz... :cool:
August 4, 2003 9:25:23 PM

Since there are lot of confusion in this forum about if there are two or three socket. Let me be more clear. There are THREE Socket for Athlon 64 and one for Opetron.

For Athlon 64 we will see the original 754 pin socket. Then there will be 940 pin socket which will be compatible with Opetron. But since the actual product will be Athlon 64 with 940 pin it will count. And finally there will be 939 socket just for Athlon 64. That makes THREE Socket in a year.

Also let me add that all the links above came from the inquirer. If this is true then it will be a major blow to AMD.

If I understand correctly the change in socket is required because of dual channel support for Athlon 64. I think AMD finally realized that that's the only way they can compete with P4 HT.

This also brings up an other question. Will there be a new socket (again) to support DDR II?

KG

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity." - Sarah Chambers
August 4, 2003 9:33:27 PM

RE: Eden...I was here a couple years ago when Eden was clearly enjoying the smacking Intel was receiving during the early P4's. He has an interesting style and seems to try to merely point out the best product at the time. Instead of the stereotypical view that a critic (who is not aligned with a particular side) should be unbiased while reviewing products, Eden seems to enjoy supporting the king chip at the time. It's really been very interesting (I mean no disrespect, just commenting on what i see). If this didn't make any sense...
When Intel is the best (for at least a month), Eden points out why they are doing well
When AMD is the best (for at least a month), Eden points out why they are doing well

Maybe popey isn't a fanboy, he he, maybe it's meltdown. Maybe he does the opposite of Eden...when AMD is getting spanked, he stands up for AMD...when Intel is being spanked, he stands up for Intel. Anyone like that theory?

And I have to admit, I'm curious how the chip race is going to go. I think we're really all fence-sitters at this point in time (especially because both companies are having process issues with their respective chips) I say first week of september for AMD64 - PAPER LAUNCH and 2nd week of October for Prescott/P5 - YOU CAN BUY FROM DELL, WAIT 3 WEEKS BEFORE BEING ABLE TO BUY ON Pricewatch, newegg, etc. AMD64 will have low Ghz, but will compete with p4 3.2 800 quite well (let's say...it wins 55% of the tests). Prescott will come out, be very expensive (~$697), but will stomp the AMD64. In mid December the 64-bit Windows will finally become fully optimized for x86-64, and will bring AMD64 performance up to Prescott levels...but alas, AMD will have missed the Christmas season (because benchmarks will only show 32 bit results until it's too late). Amd will end Qtr 3 and 4 with losses and will have to refinance their loans...AGAIN. :) 

Anyone else up for looking in their crystal balls? (BTW, i think this is the best case scenario for AMD...does anyone seriously think 64-bit arch is going to give much of a performance boost for day to day apps?)

I'm just your average habitual smiler =D
August 4, 2003 9:53:32 PM

i pretty much agree, although i think the cpus will be available very soon after launch as they have been in production for a while, and AMD will want a successful launch.
August 4, 2003 11:41:49 PM

Sounds good, but there is no way that Windows 64 comes out in December....it usually takes about 12-18 months to finalize a new O/S...especially with MS working on it's new O/S, as well, for non-64 bit application. I say Win64 around May/June of 2004, at the earliest.

As for the AMD launch being on time and not a paper launch...well have to see. They have gotten a rep. for paper launches recently, except for Barton, but even the "limited edition" type launches weren't seen as true releases, but a nicely put paper launch....

:) 

How many watts does it take to get the center of CPU core?
August 5, 2003 1:04:02 AM

You are showing desperation, you're hanging on a fine line over the canyon. Meaning you've got nothing to add, you're only trying to defend now.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
!