Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

The Circus act between Microsoft AMD and Intel

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • AMD
  • Intel
  • Microsoft
  • Product
Last response: in CPUs
April 21, 2002 2:44:37 PM

Dont you just love the polictics of the software and semiconductor industry ?! This new court case against Microsoft is bringing out the worms from the wood work.
<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/22040203.htm" target="_new">Source</A>

Soap Opera feat. Big Bad-Microsoft, New Kid on the Block-AMD and the Dastardly-Intel. All being as bad and guilty as each other.

With Jerry Sanders supporting Microsoft so he can get x86-64 supported and Microsoft wanting Intel not to support Java and Intel wanting Microsoft to exlusively support the new Yamhill and Prescott instructions it seems each company wants its own cake and eat it.

Microsoft holds the key to this one and there are gonna be some unhappy people in the AMD and Intel camps. Hey why dont we just chuck em all in a ring and see what happens. I reckon Intel are making their situation even worse by introdcing its own x86-64 instructions (Yamhill) however I think these new 'Prescott instructions' are supposed to help implement Hyperthreading on the desktop.

Jeez everything is up in the air....<i>I eat confusion and spit it out slow.</i> :smile:

<font color=purple>Ladies and Gentlemen, its...Hammer Time !</font color=purple>

More about : circus act microsoft amd intel

April 21, 2002 4:55:17 PM

the sad thing is, if someone is going to "lose" it will be amd...

(bb || !bb) - Shakespeare
April 21, 2002 8:00:01 PM

Now I understand why you said that...
Who knows if Yamhill really is another instruction set. Problem is, if it is, then we have major troubles on OS handling. Personally, AMD has the upper hand on the new CPU technology coming out, not Intel who is far from Yamhill's first functioning silicon. So if AMD and MS get the contract right, and a Win x86-64 comes out, Intel is outrunned, and probably that OEMs would want to use it, regardless of its usage, just to attract more customers. With that, big server companies like SUN are also helping AMD, so it is indeed a very confusing story. Personally on this one, I'd rather AMD gets its prize from MS, than Intel for now, who always gets what it wants.

--
Thunderbirds in wintertime, Northwoods in summertime! :lol: 
Related resources
April 21, 2002 8:33:11 PM

small companies just don't get "their" way very often, their biggest hope it to hype "64-bit" to the average end consumer, who thinks that this means amazing performance, unfortunatly this doesn't please many enthusiasts... who amd have had a pretty good following from the past... basically, to get ahead with this x86-64 amd is going to have to go into the red a bit on the marketing side...

(bb || !bb) - Shakespeare
April 21, 2002 9:33:56 PM

What do you mean by RED?

You have to admit though, AT LEAST, AMD has begun taking steps to ensuring the future's computing. I mean what do you expect, that we go buy Itanium-like CPUs in the future, or maybe server 64-bit CPUs?
AMD's approach is not only easy, but smooth and much less hassle on cost. I do hope it goes well with them and MS. Maybe that will also get them for the Xbox 2!

--
Thunderbirds in wintertime, Northwoods in summertime! :lol: 
April 21, 2002 10:35:47 PM

Yeah, that would be cool! A Hammer in an XBox2!

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
April 21, 2002 10:38:07 PM

well, in the red means "debt" but i really just meant they will have to spend a lot of money in marketing. It is obvious that they ARE working really hard, with rumours of deals and co-ops all over the place... wether this is costing them or not, it would be strategic to get OEMs and such to do the marketing for them...



(bb || !bb) - Shakespeare
April 21, 2002 10:50:34 PM

Well that is what MS is there for, to make for them the job. I doubt AMD was planning otherwise, or else they would walk the streets asking for money raising!

--
Thunderbirds in wintertime, Northwoods in summertime! :lol: 
April 21, 2002 10:51:28 PM

Wow, AMD_Man, you switched your sig! This calls for a celebration!

j/k... :wink:

--
Thunderbirds in wintertime, Northwoods in summertime! :lol: 
April 21, 2002 10:55:23 PM

Yeah, hehe. I like your sig too! :smile:

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
April 21, 2002 10:58:01 PM

i really hope the hammer is a success as well, especially since memory requirements will go up for the end user, and 64 bit will be required, (if not in the immediate future) it gives me the feeling that AMD is looking ahead...

as long as there is at least 2 companies, i would hate to see intel be the solo chipmaker, development would come to a crawl.

(bb || !bb) - Shakespeare
April 21, 2002 11:39:05 PM

I dont think Intel will develop x86-64, the technology has too many flaws in the route that AMD is taking. If Intel does not develop x86-64 then Microsft will most likely not develop the OS.

To my understanding, there are physical limitations to overcome in the OS to even make x86-64 even possible on the windows platform.

If there is no windows platform for x86-64 then it will flop since it will be limited to the Linux crowd.

FOr most of you, it seems like a great idea but in reality it was a very stupid move on AMD in the first place. AMD should have stayed focused on the XP and actually making changes that people wanted like thermal diode that works and ramping up for higher clock speeds.

The current Tbred is sucking wind and it shows. The current die shrink has done nothing to the architecture and nothing to increase clock speeds. AMD is stuggling to get these up to speed currently. hence the release of very low Mhz versions for laptops.

As far as overclocking the Tbred its gonna be a joke. The XP core is at the end of its rope and AMD will suck wind for the next few month as they lose money. I hope they throw more funds and talent at the Hammer.

Some dipship on this forum thinks that the Tbred will overclock hardcore, yet all the current data shows otherwise. That dipship cannot take into accunt that the L2 and L2 caches are weak and cannot handle the increase in speed. AMD did not increase the pipleine as this will not effect the performance of the L1 and L2. AMD did not address this and AMD owners will pay the price.

Without the increase in Mhz, AMD will not be able to compete for much longer. So it goes back to how much funds AMD has to throw at the current ploblem.

The above is my opinion, based on current stadings in technology and knowledge of the limitations involved.

Go ahead and flame because you do not agree with what I post.

You are limited to what your mind can perceive.
April 21, 2002 11:49:36 PM

You say that there are flaws in the x86-64, and yet you don't state them? That's a pretty weak argument. The fact that we haven't seen a T-Bred overclock yet also weakens your argument. There is no available data on overclocking the T-bred. All in all, you had a long post that said nothing. Blah. Blah. :smile:

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
April 22, 2002 12:18:51 AM

AH, yes we have seen the Tbred overclock. by more than one site already. I posted links to both. go figure how you conviently missed them and now calling me out on it.

www.muropaketti.com

A few of these guys let loose on the Tbred, find a translator it is finish.

I need to find the link to the japan overclock site who let loose on one. most of you saw the pictures of the tbred with jpoc or something close. Im digging up link.

Also, check the "hammer bandwidth" thread for more info I posted.

Enjoy.

Both came up with same findings.

You are limited to what your mind can perceive.
April 22, 2002 12:28:06 AM

What language is that?

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
April 22, 2002 12:32:39 AM

finnish

You are limited to what your mind can perceive.
April 22, 2002 12:37:54 AM

Quote:
I dont think Intel will develop x86-64, the technology has too many flaws in the route that AMD is taking. If Intel does not develop x86-64 then Microsft will most likely not develop the OS.

To my understanding, there are physical limitations to overcome in the OS to even make x86-64 even possible on the windows platform.

If there is no windows platform for x86-64 then it will flop since it will be limited to the Linux crowd.

FOr most of you, it seems like a great idea but in reality it was a very stupid move on AMD in the first place. AMD should have stayed focused on the XP and actually making changes that people wanted like thermal diode that works and ramping up for higher clock speeds.

You dont know a damn thing about x86-64 fugger, spread the fff's someplace else.

Quote:
The current Tbred is sucking wind and it shows. The current die shrink has done nothing to the architecture and nothing to increase clock speeds. AMD is stuggling to get these up to speed currently. hence the release of very low Mhz versions for laptops.

THe tbred isnt even out yet, and laptops always are slow speeds, again you know nothing of what you speak of.

Quote:
As far as overclocking the Tbred its gonna be a joke. The XP core is at the end of its rope and AMD will suck wind for the next few month as they lose money. I hope they throw more funds and talent at the Hammer.


Completely wrong, the axp .18 core limitation(which it is near) does not mean the tbreds .13 core will be at its limit, by your logic the northwood would have sucked because the willamette topped out at ~2ghz, run along fugger.


Quote:
Some dipship on this forum thinks that the Tbred will overclock hardcore, yet all the current data shows otherwise. That dipship cannot take into accunt that the L2 and L2 caches are weak and cannot handle the increase in speed. AMD did not increase the pipleine as this will not effect the performance of the L1 and L2. AMD did not address this and AMD owners will pay the price.

What evidence besides what your imaginary friend told you says the tbred wont overclock well?


And the cache does not hold back overclocks, and it hasnt since they put it on die simpleton. Then again, you wouldnt know that, because you obviously dont know a damn thing about semiconductors, die shrinks, and telling the truth.


Again by your logic the northwood would overclock poorer than the willamette because it has 2x l2 cache, again you show you know nothing about what you talk about.


Stick with the refridgerated p4's fugger, you dont know anything about semiconductor process or cpu mechanics.

Quote:
Go ahead and flame because you do not agree with what I post.

Dont mind if I do, and I flame you because you post fff(fugger fabricated facts) and mindless drivel which has no substanciation, run along and spread your mindless ideas elsewhere fugger.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 22, 2002 1:44:53 AM

LOL, whaaaaa

loser =)

Nice ranting.

P4 is designed for high clock speeds, the XP is not. didnt you learn that already?

Seems someone needs to school you on the P4 pipeline and its design for high clock speeds.

Tbred will hopefull be out the end of next month and maybe you can afford one by the end of the year. Then you can show us that 50%+ Mhz overclock you claim exists just because the P4 can do it too.

You have just been bitch slapped!

You are limited to what your mind can perceive.
April 22, 2002 1:48:34 AM

Hmm, we're looking at relative overclocking!

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
April 22, 2002 11:09:31 AM

"on the XP and actually making changes that people wanted like thermal diode that works and.."

Errr.. AMD has had thermal diode protection for a while. The mobo makers never bothered to implement a means to use it. Point the finger somewhere else FUD boy. As for x86-64 being a mistake, dont think so. AMD doesnt have the fab space or people to develop two different architectures at once. (like itanium and northwood). So they came up a way to kill several birds with one stone:
1. by combining x86 and 64 bit they can now sell the same chip to two completely different markets. No need to double fab space making two different chips
2. For those not interested in 64 bit computing ( 90% of us) we still have a better architecture in the Hammer with a few more stages for ramping up the speed, on-board memory controller etc etc
3. By partnering with TSM (or whoever the hell it was) they dont have to eat the HUGE cost of a new fab right away. Hence they can concentrate their money into better chips.

In short, for an underdog company like AMD.. it makes perfect sense to go this route. Im not sure 64 bit is the way to differentiate themselves. But i like that better than a 20 stage pipe that makes the branch predicter want to commit suicide :) 
Start thinking about economics and stop talking out your bung-hole fugger.


Benchmarks are like sex, everybody loves doing it, everybody thinks they are good at it.
April 22, 2002 3:22:23 PM

Quote:
P4 is designed for high clock speeds, the XP is not. didnt you learn that already?



The core design does not affect the gain from a process shrink % wise in any major fasion, of course you dont know that cause you dont know anything about semiconductors.


Quote:
Tbred will hopefull be out the end of next month and maybe you can afford one by the end of the year. Then you can show us that 50%+ Mhz overclock you claim exists just because the P4 can do it too.


We will see then.


Quote:
You have just been bitch slapped!



Well, I schooled you on the first comment, and the second comment requires a month before one of us is proven right, sounds like you got bitch slapped troll.



PS: stop posting what your imaginary friend tells you, it only makes you look like an idiot.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink: