IS AMD PLAYING GAMES?

AmdMELTDOWN

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,000
0
19,780
man, everybody keeps saying how cool AMD is, I don't see it.

<A HREF="http://www.overclockers.com/tips881/" target="_new">check this out!</A>


"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
 

Harisahmed

Distinguished
Feb 21, 2002
203
0
18,680
Do you work for Intel or invest heavily in their stock? Or do you just dislike everything with AMD in it? Almost every company has problems getting products shipped according to schedules at some point. What is the big deal about ship dates that were probably only rumors to begin with.
 

slvr_phoenix

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
6,223
1
25,780
You know, usually I laugh at AmdMELTDOWN just like the rest of you. This time though, the posted article actually has some good points. AMD really could be a little clearer. It is rather unprofessional.

Still, I won't hold it against them as long as they continue to force the CPU improvement game along so that we don't have another monolithic Intel-esk stagnation in CPU performance.

<pre>If you let others think for you, you're the
only one to blame when things go wrong.</pre><p>
 

AmdMELTDOWN

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,000
0
19,780
"this place would be a whole lot better without you a$$ holes (aka intel trolls)"

so that you a$$ holes (aka AMD trolls) can take over?


"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
 

jihiggs

Splendid
Oct 11, 2001
5,821
2
25,780
that explains a lot, you cant let amd win, are you using intel to compensate for somthing? then when amd "takes over" you will be small again. your pathetic, get a freaking girl freind, go outside and stop pissing people off. and who are these amd trolls you speak of? i dont know of any one here that spends all their time finding articles that prove amd is better, and find articles that are nothing but opinion that loosly prove a point. i find it very interesting that you think you are so important that if you were no longer here amd would rule this board, does that tell you somthing? your the only one that cares about intel that much. let it go! intel aint the best in the game any more, how the hell can you deny that?

i went to the tomshardware forums and all i got was this lousy signature.
 

AmdMELTDOWN

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,000
0
19,780
jihiggs, if you don't like the AMD news I post then ignore it! or better yet, find some that directly contradicts mine!

looks like you need to go to AMDzone.com so you can feel safe surrounded by AMDfans talking about how great AMD is and how evil *ntel is.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
 

jihiggs

Splendid
Oct 11, 2001
5,821
2
25,780
dont even try to turn this around, its very hard to ignore things that piss me off, and you piss me off more than any thing on this board. you really think i have time to go hunting around to disprove you? thats exactly what you want, attention. and who the hell said intel was evil? not me, i dont care either way, but for the moment amd is superior. your the only one that thinks there is some battle going on, intel fans and amd fans. its a preference not a religion.

i went to the tomshardware forums and all i got was this lousy signature.
 

AMD_Man

Splendid
Jul 3, 2001
7,376
2
25,780
I don't see anything bad about this AMD news. Intel does it all the time.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
 

lhgpoobaa

Illustrious
Dec 31, 2007
14,462
1
40,780
*reads article*
hmmm

1. amd has never specifically said "we will release the tbred on the XXth of March". if i remember correctly press releases say 'scheduled to be released' meaning that they can change it.

2. they can do what they like, releasing it when they are ready

3. amdmeltdufus is just doing his usual thing... getting his rock off on finding bad amd info. sad really.


I love helping people in Toms Forums... It reinforces my intellectual superiority! :smile:
 

kief

Distinguished
Aug 27, 2001
709
0
18,980
Meltdown is a lamer, but this sort of attack on him is exactly what he is looking for. Your reply will only encourage him to do annoying things in the future to get a rise ut of you and others....

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!
 

zengeos

Distinguished
Jul 3, 2001
921
0
18,980
Yup LH and to continue this...

AMD also said that they would maintain socket A/462 compatibility for the remaining life of the Athlon CPU. But people keep questioning whether their existing motherboards will continue to support the next generation Athlon. If I recall correctly, people asked the same thing when the AXP came out.

What was the answer?

BIOS upgrades to recognize the new CPU, but so long as the board was manufactured to AMD specs, they generally seem to have worked fine. I expect the same for the Thoroughbred and later Barton.

AMD already answered the question...yet people keep asking anyways. I have to wonder why...

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
 

FUGGER

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,490
0
19,780
Some people are clueless to what "shipping working samples" means.

I laughed when I saw the post reguarding Tbred this month.

AMD is pushing very hard on production dates, and for good reason.

Proving once again that <A HREF="http://www.zombo.com" target="_new">anything is possible</A>.
 

slvr_phoenix

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
6,223
1
25,780
AMD also said that they would maintain socket A/462 compatibility for the remaining life of the Athlon CPU. But people keep questioning whether their existing motherboards will continue to support the next generation Athlon. If I recall correctly, people asked the same thing when the AXP came out.
The question has been kicked around even before then. When AMD released the AthlonC, there were plenty of people with SocketA motherboards who couldn't use the new 133MHz FSB chips. That question has been around almost as long as the SocketA standard. The answer has always gone: Sure, the socket won't change. However, the specifications for running the CPU in the socket will.

What was the answer?

BIOS upgrades to recognize the new CPU, but so long as the board was manufactured to AMD specs, they generally seem to have worked fine. I expect the same for the Thoroughbred and later Barton.
I think the key phrase there is "<font color=green>so long as the board was manufactured to AMD specs</font color=green>". AMD has often in the past been <i>very</i> unclear on just what those specs are until there have already been chipsets and motherboards developed and sold which do not meet those specs. Case in point: AMD's thermal 'protection'. Sure, the chip now tells you when it is overheating. But did AMD actually write up any specs on how to develop a motherboard that properly protected the CPU using this until <i>after</i> numerous chip burnings? Case in point: The change from a 100MHz FSB to a 133MHz FSB. Case in point: The change in the CPU core voltage.

And once again, we are going to see AMD change the CPU core voltage a second time. While this in and of itself is good, I can <i>guarantee</i> that there will be SocketA motherboards which met AMD's 'specifications' when the motherboards were developed that will not be capable of running a Thoroughbred or Barton. How can I guarantee this? Because there are people out there using such SocketA motherboards right now that are unable to support even an Athlon XP because of AMD's lack of consideration for the future when they write their 'specifications'.

And I can guarantee that there will also be an extremely vocal minority of people too stupid to know their own system specs which will whine and moan about how their new Socket A processor (Thoroughbred) won't run in their SocketA motherboard.

AMD has proven that they are incapable of writing 'specifications' which include consideration for any real future changes. Instead they just update those 'specifications' whenever they release something new, and those who used products based on their previous 'specifications' are SOL.

While AMD might be very skilled at designing low-cost high-performance CPUs, they are very unskilled at writing specifications with as much consideration towards the future as to the present.

<pre>If you let others think for you, you're the
only one to blame when things go wrong.</pre><p>
 

Matisaro

Splendid
Mar 23, 2001
6,737
0
25,780
The question has been kicked around even before then. When AMD released the AthlonC, there were plenty of people with SocketA motherboards who couldn't use the new 133MHz FSB chips. That question has been around almost as long as the SocketA standard. The answer has always gone: Sure, the socket won't change. However, the specifications for running the CPU in the socket will.


This is incorrect, any athlon c can run in an athlon b motherboard, albeit at a lower speed due to the multiplier, but unlocked you can run the chip at the same speed.


think the key phrase there is "so long as the board was manufactured to AMD specs". AMD has often in the past been very unclear on just what those specs are until there have already been chipsets and motherboards developed and sold which do not meet those specs. Case in point: AMD's thermal 'protection'. Sure, the chip now tells you when it is overheating. But did AMD actually write up any specs on how to develop a motherboard that properly protected the CPU using this until after numerous chip burnings? Case in point: The change from a 100MHz FSB to a 133MHz FSB. Case in point: The change in the CPU core voltage.

AMD wrote the speccs when the tbred was released, they did NOT rewrite the specs after toms video, the speccs were NOT followed by fujitsu, this has been discussed ad naseum, but your information is wrong.

The specs are clear and in the axps technical doccuments.

As for socket a not following amds specs, if abit released a motherboard which did not folow amds spec and ran 2.5 volts to the processor, and it fried your amd, whos fault is it?

Abits of course.

AMD has proven that they are incapable of writing 'specifications' which include consideration for any real future changes. Instead they just update those 'specifications' whenever they release something new, and those who used products based on their previous 'specifications' are SOL.

A bad conclusion drawn from incomplete facts, have you even looked up amds specfications, or do you just swallow whatever frank vokkel spoon feeds you?


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

FatBurger

Illustrious
THEN GO TO ANANDTECH AND STAY THERE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO LISTEN TO YOUR IMMATURE BITCHING ABOUT HOW GREAT ANANDTECH IS!

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
Don't step in the sarcasm!
 

lagger

Distinguished
Jan 19, 2001
1,922
0
19,780
change my sig ??

lagger

<b><font color=blue>Checking under my North<font color=red> AND</font color=red> South bridges for <font color=green>Bitches</font color=green></font color=blue>
 

mr_gobbledegook

Distinguished
Sep 3, 2001
468
0
18,780
Calm down mate ! You'll give yourself a hearattack especially with all those burgers you've been eating recently. :wink:

<font color=purple>~* K6-2 @ 333MHz *~
I don't need a 'Gigahertz' chip to surf the web just yet ;-)</font color=purple>
 

FatBurger

Illustrious
Hehehe
There's the pot calling the kettle black again.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
Don't step in the sarcasm!
 

Latest posts