Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD's roadmap

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • AMD
  • Product
Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 11, 2000 9:58:07 AM

I just saw over on another site (directed there by one of Tom's news items yesterday) the info being put forth by AMD about their 2001 road map. I'm surprised Tom hasn't put up some editorial about this, because it looks to me like there may be some bad news lurking in what was _not_ said.

Aside from identifying two new Athlon products for 2001 release which only appear to have 64K and 256K (assumably L2) cache respectively (hey, we're already there in 2000 - why are the numbers not growing for next year as die sizes shrink?), there is no mention of the name 'Mustang' - which was supposed to arrive this year and go to 512K L2 cache soon. Also, the only dates quoted for Hammer releases suggested that the recent buzz about early 64-bit silicon may have been well over-optimistic (I do recall that Jerry Sanders first mentioned Hammer in the context of '...a Q4/2001 event - 2002 in quantity...').

I have a very positive regard for AMD, and I'm pinning all my plans for cost-effective computing on them. I get uneasy when I see AMD execs apparently being less bullish about their plans than I feel they have been of late. Does this hint at any secret problems? Could the too-good-to-be-true execution of their Athlon road map have been just that? Where are the skeletons in the cupboards?

More about : amd roadmap

November 11, 2000 1:16:58 PM

Yeah I am a MAD AMD fan... I heard that P4s are huge, clunky and unattractive. Well, performance is important, but still that is doubtful. I support AMD!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 11, 2000 2:11:15 PM

I don't understand you, AMD and Intel fans. If I am buying a new cpu I just buy the one that has the best price/performance ratio. How can the brand be that important when there are no differences in the reliability of both AMD's and Intel's products?

--
Masa
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 11, 2000 2:21:40 PM

Hey,

I do buy CPU's based on pirce/performance. For the last few years Intel has had decent performance to price, but with the PII, III, and IV that price/performance is gone. AMD has been able to always keep the price down, and they caught of with performance. That is why I'm and "AMD FAN". When a company gets big they realzie they can charge more for less. It happened to Intel, and It will probably happen to AMD. When it does I'll root for the underdog, if they can get that performance to the level of the big guy, which AMD did.

Timothy Stankus
One of the First AMD Athlon Users =)
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 11, 2000 2:26:58 PM

Good point! For me it comes down to keeping Intel honest. If left unchecked Intel would have us spending 1,000 more for a chp that should cost a lot less.

Make it so.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 11, 2000 5:52:08 PM

I agree completely with you softwizz. Something isn't right at AMD. Things doesn't seem to go as smoothly as they used to and I don't like it. I also agree with TripleH about what prossessor to buy. Don't let'em get monopoly. We as consumers will loose on that. Does anyone remember what the PIII 500 and 550 cost when it was released just before we got the Athlon? Like a perfectly good used car.

Boy am I full of it - in every respect.
November 29, 2000 11:59:02 AM

Sounds like a conspiracy.

If the fat lady's singing at least shes losing weight.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 30, 2000 4:35:03 AM

*cough* amd is using motorola's SOI to decrease heat on mobile parts *cough*
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
December 6, 2000 3:50:50 AM

AMD's palomino is supposed to go 1.5Ghz with only a heatsink and NO fan, they must be doing something right on future CPUs !

SOI & 'pure silicon' must be helping.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
December 7, 2000 6:33:48 AM

AMD seems to have decided to focus on the Palomino.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
December 7, 2000 9:53:47 AM

> How can the brand be that important when there are no differences in the reliability of both AMD's and Intel's products?

I agree tha there is no difference in reliability btween thr processors. Unfortunately there is a difference in reliability between the different chipsets that support the processors. Intel's chipsets (for the most part) are more stable, and handle different hardware configurations better than the ones designed for the AMD. It is not that VIA doesn't have a decent product, but they certainly should have done more testing with a wider range of products.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
December 8, 2000 3:02:19 AM

.... With AMD dropping its fastest Athlon 1.2Ghz to $289 or less now, it looks like they are about to launch the next step on their RoadMap !!

............................................... -Buzz+
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
December 8, 2000 7:07:00 AM

And where do chipmakers get their names i wonder...palomino what is that ??? A mustang i can understand..

Hey man i dont know .. i just think i do !!
!