Intel and AMD marketting decisions

[Zenthar]

I'm neither pro or against Intel, I simply uses the best I can find (money-wise of course), but I would like to discuss with you Intel and AMD's marketting decisions.

Last year, it was simply a Mhz race between the 2 giants (and AMD won that race). Now that both revealed they roadmap for next year, I found myself perplex toward some of their decisions. If both companies achieve their goals by the end of next year, Intel will once again have the Mhz lead, but with no chipset supporting MP for it. On AMD side, they should achieve less energy consumption by the CPU (and less HEAT), chipsets that support MP and a little increase in CPU speed. Since both intend to support DDR memory, I will not consider it.

What that means is that Intel will neglect commercial market to try to regain the big chunk of PC market they have lost to AMD. On AMD's side they do quite the opposite, they try to gaine some commercial credibility by adding MP support and making their CPU heat less (they would probably last longer and be able to enter portable PC market). I personaly think they should have both choose one of the 2 markets instead of trying to do everything at the same time.

My major concern is about the P4. We probably all saw the benchmark resuslts of the P4 and we all noticed that non P4 optimized softwares will basicaly suck un a P4. I wonder if that is not some way Intel has come up to make the Software companies choose between Intel support or AMD support. Just like companies have to choose to support Mac or not. It is probably a wild shot for Intel, but as they say: "Who risks nothing gains nothing".

I would like your opinions on that.

 

[RavenPrime]

Since AMD will support SSE2 with the sledgehammer, software makers won't have to decide between Intel and AMD.

The T-bird is the fastest processor on the market for the software that is out there now and Intel isn't touching that with the P4.

What AMD needs to focus on, is getting better chipset support for thier processors. The best chipsets out there belong to Intel and of course go with Intel processors. The chipsets for the AMD processors are less stable and less reliable than thier Intel counterparts. The only way AMD can truly break into the business marketplace is to overcome this weakness. IT professionals only care about stability, reliability, security, and then speed as a distance fourth in importance.

A little advertising from AMD would also do them a lot of good. But I think AMD still sees itself and a clone manufacturer, following in the footsteps of others like Intel, rather than a true inovator or market leader. This is a business attitude and approach that AMD needs to change.

Also, has anyone seen an advertisement for a P4? I see plenty on the P3, I find that very curious.

James

 

[Hit]

Since AMD will support SSE2 with the sledgehammer, software makers won't have to decide between Intel and AMD.
...
But I think AMD still sees itself and a clone manufacturer, following in the footsteps of others like Intel, rather than a true inovator or market leader. This is a business attitude and approach that AMD needs to change.

Yes, AMD will support SSE2 in the sledgehammer. However, the sledgehammer is a 64bit processor. Intel, in collaboration with HP, has a 64bit architecture that I believe they call IA/64. The sledgehammer is not a clone of this architecture. Rather, it's bases on the current X86 stuff. This is interesting because developers will have to choose between AMD and Intel for the next generation of consumer software.

Note: 64bit processing has been around a while in industry applications... Sun Spark.

It is my opinion that both Intel and AMD need to improve their chipsets. I personally see not need for these faster processors right now. But in the eyes of the consumer, 'faster is better'.

As Zenthar said

What that means is that Intel will neglect commercial market to try to regain the big chunk of PC market they have lost to AMD. On AMD's side they do quite the opposite, they try to gaine some commercial credibility by adding MP support and making their CPU heat less (they would probably last longer and be able to enter portable PC market). I personaly think they should have both choose one of the 2 markets instead of trying to do everything at the same time.

The sledgehammer is AMD's quest for commercial credibility.

Also, has anyone seen an advertisement for a P4? I see plenty on the P3, I find that very curious.

I haven’t seen an add for P4. I was talking to my bro-in-law, who is a Mac fan and has much more credibility they I do, about this subject. He thinks that Intel is not ready to put P4 in the main stream. P3 is still in the consumer sweet spot.