Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Very disappointed in AMD

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Performance
  • AMD
Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2002 3:26:05 PM

They've had all this time to upgrade their die process to .13 micron. Their new numbering system is a sham, AMD's are supposed to be superior performers. If AMD would have gone to .13 microns they wouldn't have to lie about their speeds, they could have already been to 2.2 REAL GHz, and they could have shut up the naysayers by slapping Intel to the tune of about 20% performance wins in most apps. Who runs AMD anyway, bean counters? Bean counters have no idea about promoting a product by showing superior performance. Then again, AMD has not a clue how to promote their product anyway. Glad I'm waiting a bit longer to put together that new system, because this sucks!

A couple years ago the head of AMD went AGAINST the beancounters and produced a new chip, the Athlon, at a huge cost to the company. That chip put them back on the map. He then went against investors and built a HUGE production facility in Germany, at ENORMOUS cost to the company. Without that facility, AMD could not have increased their market share as they have and would have eventually had to leave the chip business. Investors sued. AMD got the production capacity and market share they needed anyway, and their stock values soared. Stupid investors. Stupid bean counters. Smart CEO. He was forced to resign, proving that those with perfect vision are not acceptable to AMD Corporate's looser mentality.

Another perfect example: AMD's bullet train commercial. A huge success for AMD sales. That promotion alone put AMD's sales beyond their production capacity. AMD dropped that commercial. That commercial no longer holds merrit due to their looser XP+ numbering scheme. They have the technology to be a market leader, but they don't want the crown. AMD's next adventure, figuring out how to turn diamonds to coal.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

More about : disappointed amd

January 7, 2002 3:34:22 PM

Well, they're still competing very well with Intel with the .18 process, and they are going to .13 soon. So what's the big deal?

I do agree with you though, AMD needs to learn to friggin' market themselves a little bit. Every time I see an Intel Alien commercial, it makes me want to puke! Even my 65 year old mother knows what a Pentium 4 is because of those commercials.

"There's no such thing as gravity, the Earth just sucks"
January 7, 2002 3:38:06 PM

you got an arguement. Not to mention a point.

we'll see if AMD nails their own coffin. Only time will tell. Intel is there. They will not go away. The pride is strong with Intel unlike AMD.

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=9933" target="_new"> My Rig </A>
Related resources
January 7, 2002 3:44:55 PM

I'm sorry, but the rating system seems to be doing just what they intended... It's working much better than I expected, and I find myself referring to their model numbers rather than ghz number these days anyway. It would be nice to see more advertising however, and *effective* advertising.

As for being disappointed in AMD, I'm sure everybody is just as disappointed in Intel for reasons that some people care about and others don't. Quit being disappointed! AMD may not be perfect, which seems to be what you're complaining about, but it's pretty damned hard to even be close to exceptional, which is how I would consider their performance over the past years.

Why should AMD be the superior performer? Intel has been in the biz longer and has more money, experience and branding on their side... why haven't they blown AMD out of the water by now? Have they failed so miserably with all their resources that they can barely produce a chip every few months that merely equals the performance of AMD's top of the line?

AMD has been in delicate shoes for a long time now... you don't just make a go for the throne when your rival has the financial power to bend you to your knees... you take it slow - gain market share where you had none before, let brand recognition seep in... I don't think AMD is depending on their XP line to take them to the seat of power - that's what they're relying on the hammer line for. I not only hope but expect a marketing blitz later this year when the hammers are out.

"Laziness is a talent to be cultivated like any other" - Walter Slovotsky
January 7, 2002 3:50:24 PM

Amd needs to work on their thermal protection first and foremost, be a little strict on their chipset licensing then get rid of those stupid PR #'s and maybe in 10 to 20 years I'll look up at them(no matter how slow they are by that time) like I do with Intel, Motorola, IBM, Sgi, Mips, Alpha, etc.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
January 7, 2002 4:01:11 PM

I'm happy with my AMD system. Used high quality components throughtout (I build my own). My system is fast, and stable and seems to be near the top-end in the benchmark scores in 3D Marks (for non-overclocked processors). Also pleased with my choice of video card. The Athlon model numbers don't bother me. I think AMD has a bright future.

All my games plays smoothly under Windows XP/nForce/Athlon 1800+ (with the exception of DukeNukem 3D, DOS compatibility problems with sound and video resolution).

Way to go AMD!

System: K7N420 nForce, 2x Crucial 256 MB PC2100 DDR RAM, GeForce3 @ 240/500 (Ti500 reference speeds)

<A HREF="http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?2223010" target="_new">Windows ME 3DMarks 2000 = 11,490</A>
<A HREF="http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare2k1.shtml?2401107" target="_new">Windows ME 3DMarks 2001 = 7,995</A>

<A HREF="http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?2221836" target="_new">Windows XP 3DMarks 2000 = 11,101</A>
<A HREF="http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare2k1.shtml?2322002" target="_new">Windows XP 3DMarks 2001 = 8,137</A>

SiSofts Sandra 2001te memory benchmark:
Int ALU/RAM Bandwidth 917 MB/s
Float FPU/RAM Bandwidth 1002 MB/s

SiSofts Sandra 2001te CPU benchmark:
Dhrystone ALU 4280 MIPS
Whetstone FPU 2113 MFLOPS
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2002 4:15:24 PM

AMD made a GIGANTIC LEAP in technology with the Athlon. Why waste that lead? They have the means to maintain that lead, due to a major stumble by Intel on the P4.

You see, AMD is no longer simply a budget class CPU. Most people who buy the cheapest computer available (such as E-Machines) know nothing about hardware. So they go for Intel when it only a few dollars more, mainly because Intel has made a better name for itself. AMD's are mostly sold to techno-geeks looking for a good price on a bleeding edge processor.

For AMD to continue gaining market share, the smartest thing to do is maintain that bleeding edge performance mentality. And spread the word to potential customers. That's why AMD's are supposed to be superior performers-they have to use performance against Intel's big name in marketing. Performance IS their path to brand recognition.

AMD has been playing around with .13 micron pricess technology for many long months now. They equiped their Dresden facility with the proper tools to implement .13 micron die size when they built the thing. But they refuse to use it. Liken that to having Nitrous in your car and refusing to use it at the track.

I understand where AMD is going-they want to return to the K6 days, when they sold their CPU's based on price alone with no regard for performance. This won't work any longer, VIA can do a better job at that.

Tying simply isn't enough. With both performance AND price of the XP2000+ comparable to the P4 2000A, AMD gets no lead at their top. They could easily gain market share by making a .13 micron 2.0GHz CPU, it would cost them very little and return them their performance crown.

The best method for gaining market share is too show better performance at similar money for your product, and ADVERTISE those facts.

Maybe they are holding back so as not to steal the thunder from the HAMMER launch, but it's putting them in a very bad marketting position.

I would still assemble an XP333/XP1600+ systems given the current price of the XP1600+, if I were to assemble right now. But I'm not assembling right now because of the current static state of technology.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2002 4:17:18 PM

AMD can only stick the nail in the coffin by forgetting performance completely and trying to compete on price alone. They would have to drop the release of new processors for that to happen.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 7, 2002 5:11:39 PM

You mentionned VIA.
VIA with the Cyrix pool of engineers, will come from behind to rip away Duron and Celeron market share with more powerfull integrated products!
Just guessing :-)
Cyrix cpus where "hot" stuff way back hi hi

Danny

Nostradamus: "In the year 2002 naked alien women will descend to earth"
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2002 5:44:28 PM

Yes, in many ways! The Cyrix 486, with it's faster write back cache, SCORCHED the Intel 486. Later, the Cyrix 6x86 could easily scorch itself, the heatsink, fan, and motherboard!

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 7, 2002 7:59:58 PM

Maybe AMD should hire you, since you have all the answers. Have you talked to them?

<i>Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance.</i>
January 7, 2002 8:23:24 PM

You know, the before last post of you in this topic really is strong and I have to agree strongly to it.
And you are a really respected person here, I know so, and I totally agree with you. It is true AMD has the power to go further, and I am also disappointed in how they let Intel get the lead just by an increase of cache and micron reduction, and higher speeds to feed the mass!
They should hurry up, or do something. They CAN advertise, just ONE simple add, with benchmarks to prove it, can make them top. Joes need proof on TV to believe other than Aliens!
If they make a single international add, that can seize the crowd, Intel has it coming for sure...
Then again maybe they ARE doing something hidden, we may never know... but I hope they do something as I cannot stand seeing Intel so happy about having a higher market share due to fake performance and Aliens and blue men on screen...

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
January 7, 2002 9:07:59 PM

as [-peep-] up as you make them sound they are not doing bad. well their marketing does suck, but cannot say any thing about their performance. they usually come out after Intel with their new product, but always better. for the people who look at performance AMD is the choice. yes yes i know about people who look at clock speed, but most AMD fans know better. as far as them not doing too well in the market right now, it'll be ok. AMD always pulls it off with something new. for now Intel is better by a bit, but don't give up on them. its like being a fan of a football team and when they fuc* up you cheer for another team.

<font color=purple><b>I have a pc with a built-in house.</b> :wink: </font color=purple>
January 7, 2002 9:21:58 PM

you seem a bit bothered crashie?
everything ok?

and u make it sound like establishing a 0.13 micron process could be done by a preschool class.
doing a dieshift takes alot of moolah and time. also remember that intel has something like 10 times the budget to play with... in marketing, sales, tech setup and research.

i think its amazing that AMD has achieved what it has (regarding market share & performace) with a comparitively tiny budget.

while intel has the lead currently with northie, i can see things seesawing about with the introduction of amd's 0.13 process & SIO later on on one hand, and intels 533fsb on the other.

relax... take a chill pill my man



- Know thyself
- Seek
- Love
- Cherish Life
- And do not Yield!
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2002 9:53:09 PM

Yes, their response is several public publishings which point out that they are not seeking the high end of the market but instead seek to woo the masses as a value processor. In other words they thing releasing the Athlon as such a powerfull processor was a mistake, because they are trying to move downscale. Check out all the press releases they've published. Even though the Athlon proooved to be a worthy investment, they still consider the risk were too high and don't want to take such risk anymore, being scared by their last lawsuit from investors.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2002 9:55:14 PM

That's my whole point, they had the power to maintain their lead and let it slip on purpose. Their marketing strategy is kuput, their available technology is state of the art!

The easiest way to win over customers is to honestly advertise a superior product. When their product superiority is gone, advertisements resort to gimmics, such as blue men.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2002 10:05:59 PM

The problem is that they have the technology and refuse to use it. The XP is much faster than the P4, clock for clock, yet AMD won't use the technology they have to make a processor at equal clock rate. If they did they could stomp Intel in the performance ring. AMD fans and technofiles are AMD's core business, they win more technofiles every day. But if they let Intel pass them, how do they get more technofiles to convert?

I know they will take action eventually. But this two month stall is going to bite them in the arse. Their market growth will stall. Maybe that's what they want?

Watch, in about a month AMD will probably drop their prices dramatically in order to compete with Intel and start their market growth again. Cheaper chips=less profit. Unless they pull a rabit out of their hat NOW, the entire line will move downscale as Intel continues to release faster chips. What I'm saying is that AMD needs to move to .13 micron NOW to maintain growth in market share, and release an XP2200+ TOMARROW.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2002 10:08:35 PM

When they built the Dresden facility, they said the new equipement would handle an easy change to the .13 micron die process. I don't think they lied, I think they're holding out on us.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 8, 2002 1:12:05 AM

probably... i guess they would want everything perfect before a release, and the economic downturn would have slowed the technological pace somewhat.

The only loyalties i have is to Performance, Cost
Reliability and the Truth.
January 8, 2002 2:01:44 AM

Crashman -- You missed one crucial thing: Intel always had the manufacturing technology lead over AMD. In terms of IC technology Intel and IBM have probably been the most leading edge for the last 15 years. In fact, if not for that technology edge (which enabled Intel make L2 cache on die for PIII), AMD Athlon would not just lead but totally dominate over PIII two years ago. If AMD can ramp up its own 130 nm technology in next three months, it actually narrows the technology gap compared to the 250 nm to 180 nm transition.

xxsk8er101xx -- Intel may have the manufacturing technology lead, but it has NO pride. Otherwise, it would never put forth a crappy product like P4. It's just marketing and making money; nothing wrong with that, but Intel has NO pride.

**Spin all you want, but we the paying consumers will have the final word**
a b à CPUs
January 8, 2002 2:16:40 AM

Intel HAS had a lead, but AMD got a whole bunch of state of the art manufacturing technology through a manufacturing agreement with Motorola BEFORE building the Dresden plant, and integrated the necessary equipment.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 8, 2002 3:00:54 AM

In part thanks to Motorola (180 nm/Cu metalization) and IBM (130 nm/SOI) AMD has been narrowing the gap. However, as long as Intel has the technology lead, AMD cannot really dominate, performance-wise. The ultimate PC CPU right now would be Athlon core fabricated by Intel manufacturing technology -- something unfortunately existed only in our dreams.

**Spin all you want, but we the paying consumers will have the final word**
January 8, 2002 7:21:56 AM

Some things to remember Crash:

1- "they have the the technology but refuse to use it" - NOT TRUE. THey have experimented with the new wafer size for some time and ran into all kinds of problems. The .13 micron process is extremely difficult to get right. But they can only devote a small team of people to perfect it. One of the rooms they experimented in was the size of a one bedroom apartment. (used to work there, long story). In short they have less money and people to initiate new technology with
2. yes their marketing sucks. THey never have and probably never will make that a priority. Simply put, they cant keep up with demand anyway. Cant afford a new Fab. So why create more demand you cant fullfill anyway.
3. AMD processors do more per clock cycle than Intel. Hence at slower clock speeds they can match performance of faster intel chips. They architecture is different. So AMD would have to radically alter their architecture in order to beat Intel is the absolute numbers game. But we all know that doesnt matter, So why spend the money and risk patent infringement just to say "we are faster" when they can always say " we are better"

To reiterate someone else's point. AMD always has something in the works. The reason something isnt out in time is likely a technical one, not a marketing one. I was shocked to see how much BS is involved in getting a new chip going. Not to mention chipset. THey know EXACTLY what they are doing. But they lack the finances, resources and backing to gain more marketshare. The fact AMD is still in the game is impressive.
PS: They have an INCREDIBLE amount of pride. I have met quite a few of the folks at AMD. They believe in their products, and they are proud of them.
So cut them some slack. If the day comes AMD goes out of business, we will ALL pay twice as much for the inferior Intel chip -- dont think for a second Intel wouldnt gouge prices if they are the only game in town.
January 8, 2002 8:50:48 AM

AMD will be on .13 by march, intel has a massive shortage of all p4's, by the time intel can supply its demand amd will be right there with them.

Like kelledin said, you try and find a northwood2.2 they are extremely rare, its almost like one of intels famous paper launches.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 8, 2002 8:55:55 AM

Quote:
The problem is that they have the technology and refuse to use it. The XP is much faster than the P4, clock for clock, yet AMD won't use the technology they have to make a processor at equal clock rate. If they did they could stomp Intel in the performance ring. AMD fans and technofiles are AMD's core business, they win more technofiles every day. But if they let Intel pass them, how do they get more technofiles to convert?


ok crash, I grant you your rant because you are very respected. BUT AMD CANNOT CRANK UP ITS CLOCK SPEED TO P4 LEVELS, EVER.

The p4 has more pipeline stages, and thusly can increase clockspeed, the amd chip CANNOT, if all the transistors are even, it both are fabbed in the same place, the amd chip will ALWAYS have a lower top mhz and a HIGHER ipc. THAT IS HOW THE CHIP IS DESIGNED.


Frankly, if you take overclocking out of the mix, the xp2000+ is about even to the nw2200, and when the tbred is released in a few months YOU CAN ADD OVERCLOCKING RIGHT BACK IN!


There is NO reason for you to be dissapointed with amd, they have .13 micron tech, but I am sure they have their reasons for not releasing early, most likely, they want to use up the .18 micron, then use up the athlons .13 micron then hit intel with their hammer. Calm down, and give amd the time they deserve, they have served ALL OF US, very well this last year.


Of course northwood on the .13 would be able to clock higher and regain the performance crown, for the next 3 months(if intel can get their act together and actually fill their demand) they will do fine, but then amd will make the same leap, and I assure you they will keep their value.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 8, 2002 8:59:02 AM

Quote:
The ultimate PC CPU right now would be Athlon core fabricated by Intel manufacturing technology -- something unfortunately existed only in our dreams.



Dresden is a far better fab than most intel fabs, if you forgive the .13 micron tech(which they probably are running right now to make tbreds for release this quarter) they have a much tighter and more refined process, as evidenced by their EXCELLENT gate widths, which intel claimed they were producing on .13 micron equipmenT MONTHS AGO.)


Intel may have the research lead, but their production capacity is spread out over many fabs, which take alot of time and money to convert to new processes, where amd has dresden, which can and does produce all the athlons they need.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 8, 2002 9:01:35 AM

Quote:
2. yes their marketing sucks. THey never have and probably never will make that a priority. Simply put, they cant keep up with demand anyway. Cant afford a new Fab. So why create more demand you cant fullfill anyway.


This is not true, dresden is not at capacity yet, and they were in negotiations with fujitsu(untill fujitsu [-peep-] them) to buy my fab, which fujipsu closed instead of selling. AMD has alot of cash on hand, and is planning a new fab soon, with a partner(which is the safest way to go).

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 8, 2002 11:40:58 AM

I reckon... someone should for a 'Friends of AMD' or something like that... everyone pitches in, they buy some TV time, and make some adverts for AMD. Maybe overwrite some billboards with some home-made AMD adverts.

Maybe old Bill will even make a contribution.

Just a thought :) 

-

I plugged my ram into my motherboard, but unplugged it when I smelled cooked mutton.
a b à CPUs
January 8, 2002 3:46:24 PM

OK, simply changing to 130nm gives the Pally what, 2400-2500MHz top speed under normal voltage levels? I could live with that, I would apreciate that, because I'M AN OVERCLOCKER. I hate being pinned in at ~1800MHz max overclocking for months at a time when the NW 2000 will probably overclock to 3GHz.

Hey, I didn't plan on a complete new system for at least another 1-2 months, maybe something will happen during that time. In the meantime I can try playing with the Cel 1200, since I wanted another BX platform for parts testing anyway.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 9, 2002 12:11:24 PM

Yeah, the best buy will be the first tbred, which will have a high oc potential like the nw, its all about the new process man.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 9, 2002 3:15:38 PM

Crashman, I've been wondering what the specs are on your system. Why does it "suck"? I'm sure it doesn't suck that bad.

Now here is my response to your original post:

If you look at it one way, your absolutely right about AMD "lying about clock speeds" with its new the model number system. They obviously are covering up their MHz gap. Most customers won't know that an Athlon XP 2000+ is really only 1.67 GHz

From the other prospective, AMD is finally telling the truth about comparable Intel performance now that Northwood is released. In fact THG and Anandtech both seem to indicate that AMD at least has been very modest with their rating system and trying their best not overrate Athlon CPUs.

Honestly, both views indicate elements of the "real truth."

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!
January 9, 2002 3:27:28 PM

Where the heck did you find an nForce? I haven't been looking for them at all, but I've heard their extremely rare to find. How much does one cost? Do any of them feature integrated sound and video?

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!
January 9, 2002 3:30:56 PM

Slap me in the face HARD!!!!!!! I meant Do any of them have integrated sound and LAN? That was so stupid. I'm glad I cought myself before I looked like an idiot though. :-)

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!
January 9, 2002 3:35:11 PM

Too late. All of them have integrated video, and they're very easy to find :lol: 
The most common at the moment is the MSI version, which comes in at $150 or a little more.
$152 at <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?submit=manufa..." target="_new">Newegg</A> (scroll down the page). And yes, they are in stock.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
a b à CPUs
January 9, 2002 3:35:31 PM

OK, I have a CUSL2. Everything was fine, perfectly stable under Win98SE, etc. That was when I had the PIII 700@933, a GeForce2 GTS, and an STB TVPCI-FM (allong with SCSI card, modem, NIC, etc).
Then someone wanted my old test system, but INSISTED on a PIII. So I sold him my processor and put in a Celeron 566@850. Now it sucks.
Someone else wanted a good video card, so I sold him my GeForce2 GTS and put in my Radeon LE (modified).
I thought maybe my ATI TV-Wonder would be a better match for that video card, but no, it wasn't, so I sold that and put back my TVPCI-FM. No go, it uses the same decoder chip as the TV-Wonder, get a driver conflict, try to delete drivers, get a hundred more problems.
The Celeron always had a problem with extended use. It crashes every two weeks. Never had this problem with the PIII.
Basically I need to reformat and do a fresh install. But with the best part gone (the PIII), I really don't fell like going through the work.
I've noticed that BX platforms seem to be more tolerant to hardware swaps, so I'm building another one soon with the Tually Celly and overclocking to 1.6GHz. That one gets demoted to my bench system when I finally get around to building something newer.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 9, 2002 3:46:14 PM

Very well said Crashman! I agree completely with you on this! This describes me and my Techno friends at College/High School. All of us are AMD users and are very pleased with are CPUs because we did not have to pay a whole lot to get high end performance. Intel makes good stuff too, but their PC1066 RDRAM and newest $550 CPUs are DISGUSTINGLY OVERPRICED though. I doubt Raystonne will agree with this.

However, in your original thread you were "dissapointed with AMD." In this thread you are praising AMD. Why the change of heart?

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!
January 9, 2002 4:01:09 PM

As AMD_Man would say something like, "Athlon + Pentium IV = PentaAthlon IV, the ULTIMATE PC Processor" However , as you said, this cannot ever possilby exist.

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!
a b à CPUs
January 9, 2002 6:15:09 PM

No change of heart. I'm dissapointed in AMD for their lack of effort to stay on top of technology. They have a really great processor, but it's loosing it's lead because of this lack of effort. Worse yet, AMD is no longer such a value at the top-the XP2000+ cost almost as much as the P4 2000A, but the P4 has pleanty of room for overclocking while the XP2000+ is close to it's limit. Unlike a lot of people in this forum, I'm not so impressed with the Hammer, I just wanted a more overclockable, faster XP!

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 10, 2002 12:26:28 AM

Haha! My sig is getting some popularity! Vote for me for sig of the week! :wink:

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
January 10, 2002 12:37:20 AM

I'm afraid we're back to step 1: Sig of the year!!
They haven't switched it yet...
By the way remember my Athlon and Pentium merge name?
AMD/Intel AthloniumXP!!!

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
January 10, 2002 1:04:27 AM

<<No change of heart. I'm dissapointed in AMD for their lack of effort to stay on top of technology>>

The Athlon XP beats the NORTHWOOD 2.2 GHZ in a slew of benches? How are they not staying at the top?

<<Worse yet, AMD is no longer such a value at the top-the XP2000+ cost almost as much as the P4 2000A>>

the AxP is selling so well that the price is staying firm...and AMD needs to higher ASP to prosper

<<but the P4 has pleanty of room for overclocking while the XP2000+ is close to it's limit>>>

Uhhh thats why AMD is releasing the ThouroughBred at .13 shortly....

<<Unlike a lot of people in this forum, I'm not so impressed with the Hammer>>

And you seen reviews of this chip where?

Your points really make zero sense..... If you wanna bitch about AMD's PR Rating.... what about INTEL's HOLLOW HERTZ.... if a 2.2 GHZ CPU loses to a 1.67 GHz CPU in alot of marks... is that 2.2 GHZ CPU really a 2.2 GHZ CPU?
January 10, 2002 1:08:15 AM

hmm, I thought about it again and it doesn't equally share the two names. Anyway, do you pronounce it Athlon-ium XP or Ath-lone-ium XP? Ath-lone-ium XP sounds like an element that would be on the periodic table, lol.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
January 10, 2002 1:34:59 AM

Yeah I didn't pay attention to pronouncing, as both sound good! But that's also like some dimwits who write Athalon instead of Athlon, and god knows how their slipped to the other side of the keyboard to add an A!
It does share it though: Athlon-Pentium, remove Pent and merge! If not, AthliumXP but that is even closer to Alcalin family elements!

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
January 10, 2002 2:00:43 AM

Crashman -- Like it or not, there is no free lunch. As someone knowing silicon IC technology R&D intimately, I can tell you Intel has about 10x R&D resources over AMD. THAT IS WHY Intel is in the lead. I would give AMD credit that it is actually ahead in terms of CPU design and by partnering with Motorola and IBM it is not far behind in terms of manufacturing technology.

**Spin all you want, but we the paying consumers will have the final word**
a b à CPUs
January 10, 2002 2:15:28 AM

If you can't understand my arguments, your dense.

Intel has a faster processor now. That should not be the case.

For us overclockers, Intel has a more viable overclocking chip. This should not be so.

AMD is loosing it's value, selling their 2000+ at the same price as the 2000A. This should not be so.

I've prooven why I'm dissapointed. If you can't understand it, get help.

I was saying that I'm not so impressed with the hammer as other people in this forum. That is a technolgical discussion, based on the fact that 64-bit processing will not help me this year. As such, the fact that it will be 64-bit fails to excite me. A move to 130nm fo ran inexpensive processor would.

I was already dissapointed with Intel.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 10, 2002 7:07:30 AM

>Intel has a faster processor now. That should not be the
>case.

Even that is debatable if gaming is your thing. While on average, a 2.2 NW is faster than a XP2000+, for the games I play, Athlon is still king. Now THAT should not be the case.

>For us overclockers, Intel has a more viable overclocking
>chip

Since how long ? Two weeks ? I mean, of course ! they just migrated to .13, how could you expect AMD to offer better overclockability ?? Or why would you expect an underdog; not even 1/10th the size of intel to offer better performance, at lower prices, with better overclockability on the most advanced process ? Thats just not realistic. At least not on a permanent base. AMD is competing very, very well with intel, and I congratulate them for it. I do not expect them to be on top of every chart all of the time. I am happy if its competitive (performance and price/performance wise). This really is quite a change from the K5/K6 days where AMD could only compete with the Celeron line..

>AMD is loosing it's value, selling their 2000+ at the same
>price as the 2000A.

IT performs as good as a NW 2000A. In some apps even quite a bit better (and of course worse in other). They have cheaper platforms, and offer more flexibility. I dont see why it should be priced at 50% of intels prices.. surely not for the lack thermal protection ? Although, I agree, if you're into overclocking, a NW would make more sense if it costs as much as the XP2000+. I expect AMD to drop its prices real soon.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
January 10, 2002 11:01:39 AM

That is important.
Currently the AXP2000 which is priced near the NW 2GHZA, means that at 1.67GHZ, it costs that compared to NW. In a way this is overpriced, and they should start back on the price drops, to make it have a reign.
BTW, Anandtech had a Hammer preview. It will support both 32-64bit and has a longer pipeline but they worked to make an extremly powerful IPC such as 2GHZ performing like 3.4GHZ!! It should have higher speeds now and is OCable.

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 10, 2002 12:18:19 PM

>BTW, Anandtech had a Hammer preview. It will support both
>32-64bit

Oh really ?

>and has a longer pipeline but they worked to make an
>extremly powerful IPC such as 2GHZ performing like
>3.4GHZ!!

Oh REALLY ??

>It should have higher speeds now and is OCable

Naaaaaaaah... ! too bad there are no entries yet on madonions website then.. Seems they are not listed on pricewatch yet either.. and guess what.. seems likely even AMD hasnt seen Hammer silicon yet ! Yet you state its available in higher clockspeeds, AND its more overclockable ! You have some pretty impressive sources, it seems. Could it be all anand did was speculate based upon AMDs white papers ? Could it be none of us really knows what hammer will perform like (though most of us have pretty high hopes, including myself) ? Could it be you have no idea what you are talking about ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
a b à CPUs
January 10, 2002 1:44:58 PM

You forgot Intel's other CPU, the Tualatin, has been at 130nm for months now, and AMD said they had 130nm technology months before that. I don't think they have an adequate reason for draging their feet.
The best path for increased market share is better performance at a lower cost than competitors.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 10, 2002 4:13:18 PM

Eating their own future is not the best path to their success as a company.


If amd released a .13micron tbred at 1600mhz, everyone would buy it and oc it to 2300mhz, and since amd dosent sell to the oem crowd like intel, if all the amd fan tweakers bought that chip and massivly oced, then they would not buy more amd chips in 6 months.



Intels mistake is pretending that they are they only player in the cpu market, and setting prices and release dates as if no amd existed.

Amds biggest mistake would be to pretend that the entire market revolves on defeating intel.

You follow my logic crash?

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!