Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

new amd processer

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 17, 2001 11:19:37 PM

does anybody know when the new amd procsser realse date might be

More about : amd processer

January 17, 2001 11:22:12 PM

are you refering to the AthlonC or the Palomino (next gen athlon)? The AthlonC is out im pretty sure

If at first you don't succede, skydiving isn't for you.
<font color=blue>Intel Inside</font color=blue> = Idiot Outside
January 18, 2001 2:08:58 AM

Well, according to AMD's most current road map (which came out today) the Clawhammer will be released next year =( And the Palomino will be launched next quarter (April). The Athlon C's should be out anytime now.

-MP Jesse
Related resources
January 18, 2001 4:12:47 AM

At the same clock speed it will. However- the palomino is only going to carry AMD so far. In the long run, the P4 is much more scalable than the Athlon. AMD has got to come up with something before the end of the year other than the Palomino.

-MP Jesse
January 18, 2001 5:05:48 AM

yes but software that will run faster on the P4 needs to be optimized. It takes a long time to shift the compilers over to optimize, usually by then the chip is already obsolete.
-=-Sean-=-
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 18, 2001 8:02:45 AM

People people its pure and simple.

Both approaches as to porcessor development hev theierr advantages and disadvantages.

Amd
1) Is clock per clock faster right now if you compare the thunderbirds and the p4/p3
2) Also is cheaper in price /performance
3) Has the het problem when heatsink not installed properly the cpu is dead within sec. (this is negated by most new socket a mobo`s who outamatically shut down in case of temp. rise)
4) May! be at its development end soon i.e. cant go much faster (mhz) with current technology.

Intel
1) Has the better name and market share.
2) Flaws aree more easily overlooked by customers.
3) Right now the hardware is ahead of the sofware and due to design this means the performance is not top notch with current applications, but is possibly top notch in optimized app.
4) There is more room for faster CPU development (theoretically)
5) It is very expensive (prices are dropping rapidly thow)

I do know this is by no means a complete list of advantages / disadvantages of either one of the cpu`s. It is clear that botyh compagnies just have chosen a different direction right now.
We just have to wait and see what compagny will get the beter hand in the years to come. Competition is stiff for both right now and thats the way it should be!

my 6 dolllars

Hey man i dont know .. i just think i do !!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 18, 2001 8:05:55 AM

I agree , the harder the competition the better deal we get ....

M

one of the first UK T-Bird users....
January 18, 2001 9:18:48 PM

Not really- it just depends on the promise of the optimizations. Look at Flask- an SSE2 version was created in no time. Almost every driver and game is already SSE optimized and was a long time ago. Don't forget that Intel gives out engineering samples of these chips to companies WAY before we ever get them- giving companies like Nvidia lots of time to optimize their drivers. Even before the "new" optimized chip hits. I can tell you the DoD had samples of the P4 a long long time ago and got one of the first Merced's/Itanium's from Intel.

-MP Jesse
January 18, 2001 11:46:34 PM

so if the p4 was out that long ago for testing shouldn't it have been bug checked yet? Wouldnt' they already know not to release it? The simple fact is that intel f'd up. They released a chip that was not ready to be released yet, they were trying to undercut their competition by using their already built name then they messed up big time and hurt their name.
-=-Sean-=-
January 18, 2001 11:54:37 PM

oK kiddie, lets read the article on toms main page. Athlon will do 3d rendering among other things better but Pentium does still have somewhat of a lead in some other catagories. I run an athlon system and like it a lot. But I have the balls to admit intel does some things better. It's a trade off. You will learn about trade offs someday in school. Good luck~
-=-Sean-=-
January 19, 2001 2:17:37 AM

Quote:
In the long run, the P4 is much more scalable than the Athlon

well, quite simply it wont be. remember intel will be replacing their current p4 with a different socket design later THIS YEAR? who would by a p4 now? you have about 6 months of upgradability before you have to get a new mobo.

If at first you don't succede, skydiving isn't for you.
<font color=blue>Intel Inside</font color=blue> = Idiot Outside
January 19, 2001 2:24:43 AM

I'm not trying to excuse Intel for the crappy performance of the P4. I'm just saying it's been out for a while and ppl have had time to optimize for SSE2. Have you seen the original design of the P4? It was awesome. I think Intel just plain screwed up. They should have stuck to something more similar to the original plans for the P4.

-MP Jesse
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 19, 2001 8:40:06 AM

Thats true but remember that's not far from what AMD did with the Athlon.....

M

one of the first UK T-Bird users....
January 19, 2001 2:32:04 PM

He's right- comparitively speaking in the pure power sense the Athlon is still more powerful than any P4 at any clockspeed. I'm talking about the FPU- which is one of the most powerful part of the CPU.

-MP Jesse

PS, try to be a little more respectful of peoples thoughts and opinions. calling someone a "kiddie" is a little immature.
January 19, 2001 4:21:23 PM

I haven't heard of any bugs in the P4. It just has a castrated FPU. That's not a bug, it's a design decision. Personally, I think it was a bad one. I think Intel should have just gone with the larger die size since they're already planning on bailing on the P4 for a better design anyway. But who says management ever listents to the engineers?

I'm sure that with the .13 Micron version Intel will be able to fix that. I just hope that they actually do fix that. In any event it's almost assured that they eventually will make a chip based on the P4 but with a good FPU. And that's all that's holding Intel chips back from being as good as AMD chips.

Either way though, the P4 based line has more room to grow than anything AMD has at the moment. Especially when Intel goes to a socket with more pins. And AMD is going to have to do some serious work if they want to design a chip that has as much of a future.

Hopefully they will. It's been nice to see the competition between AMD and Intel. I hope it goes on for years to come.

And if AMD doesn't put a freaking thermal protection in their chips soon, I'm going to start thinking AMD doesn't care about their customers any more than Intel does (doesn't). Personally, to me it's worth paying double the price just to know that my CPU won't fry if my heat sink loosens a little or something when I move my computer. I want that assurance that three years from now my computer will still be working without having needed any replacement parts.

Either way though, whether you have an Intel chip or an AMD chip, at least it isn't a Macintosh. :) 

And for anyone who doesn't think software optimizations are going to catch on, just remember a few years ago how many software titles REQUIRED a Pentium 166 just because of MMX. Good optimizations get accepted fast. And when Intel and AMD both plan on making chips using SSE2, software will adopt that fast enough to make your head spin.

My only real question is how well will AMD's Hammer run SSE2 optimized software compared to Intel's P4 replacement? (Since neither chip exists yet, I think it's a fair enough thing to wonder about.)

I think maybe then we can finally decide which company can actually design the better chip. Until then though the two chips are just so different it's really unfair to make any judgements other than price.

- Sanity is purely based on point-of-view.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 19, 2001 5:53:59 PM

Intel cannot rely on un-optimized code for their performance of the Pentium 4. What they are relying on right now is the ignorance of the general public to only b wanting the fastest CPU. It is funny that even their own P3 will outperform the P4 on some tests. The P3 will outperform all other previous Intel CPUs running any software. AMD will do the same, as they not need to rely on optimized code, just good designs.
January 19, 2001 6:11:14 PM

Yes yes, the current P4 seems to suck.

Granted, when running optimized code it doesn't suck anymore, but you don't want to hear that.

But what about when Intel makes a chip based on the P4 but with two FPUs instead of one? Then it'll run such math intensive code faster. Do you really think Intel will go for long without fixing that when it was in the original design specs to have a second FPU in the first place and they only took one out because they wanted a smaller die size?

What will be your excuse for AMD when Intel releases a new chip based on the P4 but with a better FPU? Do you have one thought out already? Or will you just jump over to Intel's side like a mindless sheep?

My point is not that either AMD or Intel is better. It is that to think for one's self instead of just going with the flow is better. Unless you're a lemming.

There are people who believe in Intel for a reason. That reason is that for years they have provided the fastest and most stable CPU of all of their competition. And that CPU has been the foudnation of the fastest and most reliable entire system for years. Following them for that reason is not ignorance, it's intelligence. Ignorance is believing that AMD is better and will always be better than Intel just because of one bad year for Intel.

Ignorance is thinking that AMD cares more about it's customers than Intel does when AMD doesn't even put thermal protection in their CPUs. And when Intel has proven that they will replace defective products with more expensive products paying for it out of their own pocket just to keep their customers happy.

There are people who buy AMD. They do it because it's cheap and it's fast. There are people who buy Intel. They do it because they know they can trust Intel and Intel based systems, and that assurance is worth the extra price.

Is either customer wrong for doing so? No. Is either customer ignorant for making their choice? No. The only ignorant people are the ones who put other people down without first trying to see things from their point of view.

- Sanity is purely based on point-of-view.
January 20, 2001 4:32:39 AM

the palomino WILL have thermal protection (supposedly beating out anything Intel has currently) and will reportedly run without a fan on the heatsink at decent temperatures. while this is kind of a rumor right now, AMD has been hinting at this kind of thermal performance. and I am not really sure what you are talking about with the assurance thing. I have had two AMD chips which have been running solid for over 2 years and a third which is overclocked and stable and cool as hell. people are not "mindless sheep", they just want the best price:p erformance ratio possible, so if Intel comes out with something better, yes they will go with Intel, thats the way market economies work bud, take it or leave it

If at first you don't succede, skydiving isn't for you.
<font color=blue>Intel Inside</font color=blue> = Idiot Outside
January 20, 2001 5:27:17 AM

hey, if amd dual solution has thermo protection and runs cool like in the rumor you just spat out then ppl will serious consider it, but if it is still sitting on a pile of horse sh*t a/k/a via then let all the gamers and slackers buy them. 'cause I ain't touching that!


- Amd Helpdesk -
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 20, 2001 6:56:47 AM

According to AMD's Q4 conference call the Palomino will be announced this quarter and available in April. AMD is being very vague about how much headroom the Palomino has, saying only they expect 1.7 GHz in the second half and not to hit 2 GHz until Clawhammer in Q1 2001. I'm guessing AMD is trying not to escalate a clock speed war, which they can't win, by revealing the true potential of the Palomino. I would guess that if needed, AMD can probably push it to 1.8-1.9 GHz. At .13 micron the Athlon will probably make it well beyond 2.5 GHz.
January 20, 2001 1:38:53 PM

You wouldn't touch it if it was God's gift to hardware. You have no rational thoughts; you can't get out of the way of your bias. Why do you have enough energy to hate a computer component? It would be pretty funny actually if we all didn't have to wade through your inane posts.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by tfbww on 01/20/01 10:40 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
January 20, 2001 2:40:46 PM

*sigh*

Another person has fallen for the Intel propaganda. Oh well.
January 20, 2001 2:55:16 PM

I just have a question that maybe someone can answer for me: did the 1.13ghz P3 EVER come out? Or did they finally give up on it?
Also, have they fixed the P4 bug yet?

If at first you don't succede, skydiving isn't for you.
<font color=blue>Intel Inside</font color=blue> = Idiot Outside
January 20, 2001 3:34:45 PM

Yeah it was out for a couple weeks then they recalled it.
January 20, 2001 11:52:14 PM

>>, but if it is still sitting on a pile of horse sh*t a/k/a via then let all the gamers and slackers buy them.<<
There are some AMD760 chipset mobos out there, you don't know?
Asus A7M266, Gigabyte GA-7DXC, Biostar M7MIA.
January 21, 2001 5:21:06 AM

You wouldn't touch it anyway. You sold your soul, and oppinions... and mind, to intel and now you're like a walking mud slinging comercial.

HACK THE PLANET!!!
January 21, 2001 5:52:38 AM

This thread reads like a transcript of a republican walking into a democrat bar. You people are funny. I own an amd and am quite happy with it. For the cost of a similar clock intel chip I got a cpu, mobo and a 128meg stick of pc100. It runs Win2000 like a bat outta hell. It'll take anything I throw at it and ask for more, even with a "pile of horse s$#&" VIA chipset :) . That is why intel pushed a crappy version of the p4 out early. I can't really down the p4 because it has some really intrigueing features, like the trace cache. But intel seems more interested in continuing the clock war and keeping their ASP up than putting out a good product that peeps can afford. AMD may not care more than intel for their customers, but they know what we want. People want a product that performs but doesn't cost 2 weeks salary for an average joe. AMD delivers, pure and simple. Laterz
January 21, 2001 6:34:12 AM

dude, you're so biased...you walk like this /



- Amd Helpdesk -
January 21, 2001 12:59:13 PM

ROFLMAO "Hello, Mr. Pot? Mr. Kettle here." What a cluebag...
January 21, 2001 2:12:41 PM

LOL!
January 21, 2001 3:28:08 PM

hehehe....



- Amd Helpdesk -
January 21, 2001 8:09:11 PM

First of all, meltdown needs to look up the word "bias" because he obviously has no idea what it means. It means to have an opinion about something with no basis. Secondly, I do walk like that becuse I have this big chunk o change pulling me off kilter. Rant all you want meltdown, it'll never be more than ranting :p 
January 22, 2001 6:05:59 PM

>>did the 1.13ghz P3 EVER come out?
My bet: NO. Intel once sell p3's overclocked to 1133 MHZ, but they did'nt work, so they had been recalled. Now intel released P4 .
>>have they fixed the P4 bug yet?
P4 can't be fixed, because it don't have a bug. Whole design is bad/unfinished. When they (someday) finish it they will give it new name and new socket.





All i can offer you is the truth. Nothing more.
!