Intel is driven by engineering and technology. NOT

Lowlypawn · Feb 13, 2002

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1584" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1584</A>
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1584&p=13" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1584&p=13</A>
3rd paragraph, “ Intel is driven by engineering and technology and not by marketing”

Who the hell are they kidding? So now Anand Tech has become a mouthpiece for Intel?

Rambus was technology driven? Intell wasn’t trying to corner the market? No, of course not. And I’m sure the late adoption of DDR was the engineer’s idea also. Not because they were trying so sell P4s with RDRAM and didn’t want people to be able to directly compare the DDR vs. RDRAM. Not until it was apparent that DDR was going to become the new standard did Intel finally make a DDR chipset for the P4. Hell Tom even talked about it.

Of course Intel is market driven, and so is AMD and that’s ok! Just the way it is.

Thx & Cya

 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6??

eden · Feb 13, 2002

I could agree partially on it, but not for AMD.
Sorry man but AMD is working on some real needed technology, Hammer. That itself proves AMD wants to give us more and discover more ways to make the ultimate computing experience.
If Intel wants to make us pay alot for low performance, that's their problem but I don't agree that AMD is for the market only.

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...

juin · Feb 13, 2002

RAMBUS design is more advance that DDR and RDRAM run faster that DDR.

http://service.madonion.com/servlet/Index?pageid=/orb/projectcompare&projectType=6&projectId=2310900

FatBurger · Feb 13, 2002

Hell Tom even talked about it.

You make it sound like Tom is the all-knowing voice of reason in the tech sector. Although I of course have nothing against Tom, Anand has proven himself to (generally) know what he's talking about.

Quarter Pounder Inside

Matisaro · Feb 13, 2002

Rambus was technology driven? Intell wasn’t trying to corner the market? No, of course not. And I’m sure the late adoption of DDR was the engineer’s idea also. Not because they were trying so sell P4s with RDRAM and didn’t want people to be able to directly compare the DDR vs. RDRAM. Not until it was apparent that DDR was going to become the new standard did Intel finally make a DDR chipset for the P4. Hell Tom even talked about it.

As anyone who can read a review can plainly see, a p4 on rambus 0WNZ the p4 on ddr. Thus rambus was an engineering decision.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!

Matisaro · Feb 13, 2002

RAMBUS design is more advance that DDR and RDRAM run faster that DDR.

Neither is more advanced than the other, they just take different routes to get there.

Also, rambus is good for data streaming, ddrram is good for random access. Each system has its strengths.

Too many people confuse rambus the company with rambus the memory.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!

texas_techie · Feb 13, 2002

It was clear the article on Anand was a 'fluff' piece. Anand can only report what they are seen and told. Its the old adage: Garbage in, garbage out.
It was an interesting article but to say ANY company isnt market driven is a joke. Pure research almost doesnt exist anymore. So to say Intel's R&D division exists outside the framework of Intel's ultimate goals is wrong. Intel pumps some serious cash into R&D, so im sure they have a plan from the outset.

Benchmarks are like sex, everybody loves doing it, everybody thinks they are good at it.

Grifter · Feb 13, 2002

i thought the point of the statement "driven by engineering and technology" was to say that the R&D section plays a more important role and that they (R&D) dont give a rats about marketing. Anand just reported what he saw and it seems a fairly well done piece to me.

Trying is the first step to failure

tlaughrey · Feb 13, 2002

Too many people confuse rambus the company with rambus the memory.

True. Unfortunately buying Rambus the memory benefits Rambus the company. Maybe when Rambus the company is gone I'll get a little more excited about Rambus the memory.

I made you look. But I can't make you see.

tlaughrey · Feb 13, 2002

It was an interesting article but to say ANY company isnt market driven is a joke. Pure research almost doesnt exist anymore. So to say Intel's R&D division exists outside the framework of Intel's ultimate goals is wrong. Intel pumps some serious cash into R&D, so im sure they have a plan from the outset.

I think you're probably right. I don't think any company in the computer industry these days does research for research's sake. The only exception I can think of, and it's an old one, was the old Xerox PARC, where they invented the mouse and a lot of the other stuff that Macs and Windows ended up using. I think Xerox was too stupid to realize what a gold mine they had with that thing.

I made you look. But I can't make you see.

HeavyMetal · Feb 13, 2002

if it wasnt for intel there wouldnt be an AMD. they put the pc industry where it is today, their research and developement department is gigantic compared to AMD. why do all of you hate intel anyways? im not pro intel or AMD but facts are facts...btw if your curious im running a p3@600MHz and my next upgrade is going to be the hammer

Guest · Feb 13, 2002

Why do people want to make AMD holy. Like they aren't looking for a profit. Both Intel and AMD exist to make a profit. AMD would be chargeing the same proces if they were in the same spot and then intel being the under dog would then be the holy and pure company. Forget it, they are both the opressive bourgeoise. I like them both, but don't put either of them on a pedistal, because they will disappoint. Both are pushing great technology and we should respect the technology

tnadrev · Feb 13, 2002

Poor Doug Engelbart... HE invented the mouse, not Xerox (while they did market it first, with the Alto.. the 50,000$ machine that changed the minds of xerox about building PCs, because no one bought it... Mac "stole" the operating system from the alto...but i digress)
you can read some more Doug's mouse, etc,<A HREF="http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9704/09/mouse.inventor/" target="_new">here</A>

Engineering is the science of making life simple, by making it more complicated.

juin · Feb 13, 2002

Neither is more advanced than the other, they just take different routes to get there.

Also, rambus is good for data streaming, ddrram is good for random access. Each system has its strengths.

Still P4 go faster with RDRAM with the help of I850 with less pin

Too many people confuse rambus the company with rambus the memory

More explaination

http://service.madonion.com/servlet/Index?pageid=/orb/projectcompare&projectType=6&projectId=2310900

AmdMELTDOWN · Feb 13, 2002

"AMD/VIA!...you are still the weakest link, good bye!"

khha4113 · Feb 13, 2002

Still P4 go faster with RDRAM with the help of I850 with less pin

Umm..., I thought both of DDR-SDRAM and Rambus have 184 pins, don't they?

Too many people confuse rambus the company with rambus the memory

More explaination

RAMBUS company doesn't manufacure its product rather than collecting its royalty.

Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.

kief · Feb 13, 2002

How about on a PIII when they originally tried to ram it on customers? Was that for performace? I think not!! It was to make rdram available for thier next launch of P4.... Very selfish to screw people like that in order to prepare for a later transition!

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!

kief · Feb 13, 2002

RDRAM is faster then DDR for alot of reasons, not simply cuz of the ram itself. The dual channel memory chipset has alot to do with it. Id like to see dual channel DDR on a P4 and see how that compares =)

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!

FatBurger · Feb 13, 2002

Umm..., I thought both of DDR-SDRAM and Rambus have 184 pins, don't they?

Pins on the actual memory chips, or wires on the motherboard. RDRAM is 16-bit, SDRAM is 64-bit. RDRAM is using 1/4 the real estate on any given motherboard (not counting things like the size of the slots, etc).

Quarter Pounder Inside

bdaley · Feb 13, 2002

Gee MELTDOWN, that was a really insightful post. It certainly adds a lot to the discussion

"There's no such thing as gravity, the Earth just sucks"

eden · Feb 13, 2002

Indeed, I mean if RDRAM wasn't 16 bit, and instead was 64bit, there's be much more performance, but right now with Dual-Channel and PC800MHZ, you'd expect it to do much more than that for the P4. DDR at PC 333 single-channel is competing high and sometimes above the RDRAM, which is rather disappointing IMO. They should use more data bits than just 16bits and expect latency to improve by higher speeds.

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...

Lowlypawn · Feb 14, 2002

Sorry man but AMD is working on some real needed technology, Hammer.
Do we really need the Hammer? I don’t think so, We need air! Not 900 FPS in Quake. AMD is researching new processors for the same reason everybody else dose, To make money!

“Why do people want to make AMD holy.”
I don’t believe I was making AMD holy, in fact I said that AMD was market driven too.

“RAMBUS design is more advance that DDR and RDRAM run faster that DDR.”
Not necessarily! Kief makes a good point that the dual channel has a lot to do with the good performance achieved on the P4 with RDRAM. Just how well did RDRAM perform on the P3? If you remember it performed worse then SDRAM!

”You make it sound like Tom is the all-knowing voice of reason in the tech sector.”
Haven’t you hear? Tom is God!

“p4 on rambus 0WNZ the p4 on ddr.”
True but dose it “OWNZ” in price? Try buying a couple gigs of RDRAM for a few more % of performance. Also see Kief’s answer.

I do know the difference between Rambus and RDRAM but sometimes I accidentally call RDRAM Rambus. It’s not that I’m attacking Intel in this post. Hell if I was the Intel PR guy I might come up with the same saying “Intel is driven by engineering and technology. NOT marketing”. It just sounds good to the average Joe. My criticism is Anand Tech turning off their brains and just mindlessly writing what Intel tells them.

Thx & Cya

 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6??

eden · Feb 14, 2002

Alright you can say what you want about AMD being market-driven, but it's you not me...
AMD has been the undergod for so many years, yet they did not attack Intel with any commercial or any form of publicity, they simply kept their products for the enthusiasts. THEY DO have the necessary amount to make some kind of advertising and make the money you think they want to have, but after 20 years being in the market, you'd expect them to have made a move to get some cash. No, AMD is not for the money only, they are indeed finding ways to make any PC work done in seconds, and that is what we want. It's true they want to be more popular and remove the fame crown off Intel, because Intel is putting mindless drivel to Joes' minds. AMD is right about proving that MHZ isn't everything, and I do agree.
As for Rambus or RDRAM I still expected more, and if DDR was already primarily for P4, and it was dual-channeled, it'd have beaten the RDRAM a long time ago, and had 4.2GB of bandwidth instead of 3.2GB which is ridiculous for such expensive technology (that finally lowered its price). I am sure that Intel did this to please Rambus and get also some royalties.

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...

Lowlypawn · Feb 14, 2002

I have never noticed Intel attacking AMD. Intel just seems to ignore AMD hoping they will go away.
Hey, don’t get me wrong. I love AMD and would not even consider buying a P4 at this time. AMD is the best thing that ever happened to the CPU market bar none! Without AMD we would be paying $500 for a PIII 800 right now! And we would be amazed at how fast is it. My current system is an AMD 1 gig and have helped friends build/buy several other AMD systems.

I do agree with the “Intel is putting mindless drivel to Joes' minds”. I hate Intel’s advertising but it dose seem to work so you can’t really blame em. I’m just down on Intel at this moment. The whole Rambus thing really hurt my opinion of Intel (like they care).

I’m just not so sure that if AMD was in the same position as Intel that they would act any differently.

Thx & Cya

 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6??

eden · Feb 14, 2002

Yeah I get ya.
Even though Intel did not attack, they are driven by their own greed, while AMD "currently" isn't because they have no big fame and control of market. IF they did, I'd think they would be lost. But I beleive AMD can make significant approaches to the future without only thinking about money. Intel is overcharging because they want it so and know they got backup to buy such. Dunno if AMD would dot that!

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...

Intel is driven by engineering and technology. NOT

Distinguished

Champion

Distinguished

Illustrious

Splendid

Splendid

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Guest

Guest

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Illustrious

Distinguished

Champion

Distinguished

Champion

Distinguished

Champion

Share this page