Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

The reason for the second hand smoke article

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 6, 2002 5:11:36 AM

I'm an AMD fanboy. Got a problem with that? :p 

Ok, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the article "Second hand smoke" was very poorly written in terms of readability, however I'm quite sure I know the answer to why it was written.

I'm quite glad that the article was written being an AMD fanboy myself. You'd probably think that I'm not making much sense, but lets get down to it already. Omid wrote the article to stir up controversy. As some of you may know, THG is good at making an impact in the market. They caused a $150 per share price drop in RDRAM in a single day due to one of their articles. Don't believe me? Just read the following article.

http://www.vanshardware.com/articles/2002/03/020317_THG...

I would obviously see that what Omid is trying to do is get AMD's asses in gear and actually start competing with Intel. Don't wait 6 months, do it now!! Be more agressive in their marketing, and ramp up the performance in their processors. I'm pretty sure that this is what the article was trying to do. With the release of the video where THG shows AMD processors catching on fire, AMD decides to better the thermal protection, and as of June I think it was.. can't remember, all motherboards with AMD processors must have proper thermal protection. I think this article needs to be viewed from a business oriented perspective.

I've read every post in the topic entitled "Stop smothering AMD?" on this forum, and I thought it'd be best to start a new thread to possibly clear a few things up, and to let the people know that don't feel like reading the 100 or so threads started in that topic.

Now that that is cleared up I'd like to respond to LED's comment on SSE2 which is laughable itself as it provides no advantage when you take AMD's powerful FPU into account. I'm into video editing myself, and this can be a very CPU intensive task especially when encoding MPEG2. TMPGenc is a very popular MPEG2 encoder and it is optimized for P4's as it includes SSE2 optimizations. When put to the test an xp 2000+ outperforms a P4 2.2 in encoding time. Hmm, stronger FPU vs SSE2, I think I'll stick with a stronger FPU thanks.

Go here for the benchmark
http://www.vr-zone.com/reviews/Intel/P4-Northwood/page7...

On another note, I'm disappointed that THG doesn't use TMPGenc in their reviews instead of that crappy pinnacle software which no one uses. TMPGenc is by far more popular!

On to stability? Ok, I'll be honest, in all the AMD systems I've used, I've never had instability issues. Can't say I've had any issues with Intel systems either. If you use the right hardware with each system you shouldn't have problems. Ok sure, sometimes you get duds with motherboards, but it's the same thing with with any hardware. Just take a look at IBM's 60GXP/75GXP line of hard drives or WD's 800BB through 1200BB line of drives which are built on IBM's technology mind you. What I'm getting at here is that every company has problems with their products. Take a look at Intel and their lame ass USB technology which sometimes causes systems to lock up when unplugging devices or causes power surges in devices and it's supposed to be HOT PLUGGALBE! I'm not putting down Intel, and I'm not sticking up for AMD in this regard but everybody makes screwups so deal with it!

Ok, so why am I an AMD fanatic?

Price kthx

Video editing requires a lot of horse power, and I mean a lot! Sure, a P4 2.53 CPU will encode my video faster than an XP 2200+, but in reality the time saved just isn't worth it to me. I'm a Canadian and I've read that many others in this forum are. I would have to shell out $1143CAD for the latest P4 as opposed to $327 for an XP 2100+ (note. the site that I shop at doesn't have pricing on the XP2200+ yet). Source http://www.ncix.com/canada/productlist.php?majorcatid=1...

Oh well, that's enough of my ranting for 1 night. Oh and by the way, I joined this forum too in light of the article posted by Omid. Cheers to him, because I think that this just might be something that will light a match under their asses over at AMD. Pull up your damn pants already and compete on a competitive level at least!!!
July 6, 2002 2:35:57 PM

You do make a point in how this might affect AMD. They have in the past reacted to THG's stirring moments.

What I do want to comment on, is again the SSE2 comment. It is laughable also because it's the overall performance that counts here not the feature. If the feature is not helping much, you can't say "Oh yeah it has SSE2, wow!". Besides you CAN'T SEE SSE2 in front of you, it's not a visual effect, it's some instructions inside a CPU. I wouldn't buy a P4 just cuz I heard it now has 64KB L1 cache now would I? It makes no sense, unless the performance is highly affected and tremedously boosts it above the Athlon, I would. But SSE2 itself is not doing a lot except with those companies that optimize the right way. Go look at Adobe After Effects benchmarks, the 1.6A beats the XP2100! Obvious, not only the bandwidth helps, but the SSE2 has been pushed so far to help encoding, and there it shows one of the few places where we can say "Yeah it has SSE 2, which is nice", but otherwise please, stop including SSE2 as a point to why buy the P4, because if you buy a 1.6A and it royally sucked with SSE2 and that AthlonXPs beat it, except in a movie encoding program I mentioned, it makes no sense to even think about it.


--
:smile: Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G! :smile: <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 07/06/02 10:48 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
July 6, 2002 8:42:58 PM

It is a point to be made. It's something that AMD's will incorporate into future processors. If it wasnt a selling point, why would AMD impliment it? Although you're not seeing optimizations in all apps, you will soon. There are people out here that have systems for over a year, sometimes 3 years. By then I would assume that SSE2 is bringing you some performance gains. In a hardware forum where we OC everything, and inch every bit of performance out of everything, you would think that SSE2 would factor in somewhere. It's the evolution of MMX, it has to evolve along w/ other technology......I don't understand why NOT to have it.

I sold my sig for $50.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
July 6, 2002 8:46:41 PM

I am not implying about its availability in processors, but I am implying that it should not be a reason just to get a P4. Especially with the lower clocked ones, sucking even with SSE2 unless in extremly well optimized apps.
AMD will implement it, but it will be much more effective for sure, given it has already a head jump in FPU strengh, SSE2 should make it so that the P4 no longer has that advantage. Then comes Hyper Threading which better be well supported...

BTW it has been 2 years since SSE2, so I don't see why we are not getting more frequent apps. WinXP has SSE2 support, so where is it? I want to see more apps, and not in 2 years. Hell they could make DX8 games in less than a year since the GF3 was released.

--
:smile: Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G! :smile:
July 6, 2002 9:06:25 PM

In my original post, which is where the argument is stemming from, I was listing it as a "weakness" of current athlons. Not as the only reason not to buy one, but collectively w/ other "weaknesses". I, personally, wouldnt short change myself in any dept. That's just personal preference. If you dont think you will ever use SSE2, or have yourself sold that it's insignificant, then by all means opt for AMDs solution....Even if I get boosts out of 3-4 apps that I use, I'll be happier having it, than not.

I sold my sig for $50.
July 7, 2002 2:02:00 AM

You would be, if it actually did boost compared to a similar clocked Athlon, or in the price range. A 1.6A's price, being the same as an XP2000, will have to appeal to After Effects users if they wanna buy it for SSE2's helping, otherwise it would not have any value at stock speed. If you OC it to 2.4 and use AE, then it sure as hell would kill the XP2000, as SSE2 is what has made it better per clock (debatable but Anandtech said it was), so Athlons would need some pure FPU optimization of the sort, otherwise they can't compete until CH. Maybe Barton will have SSE2?...

--
:smile: Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G! :smile:
July 9, 2002 4:31:26 AM

that would be sweet. barton running at a PR of 3500+ would be nice too :) 
July 9, 2002 5:02:37 AM

I guess all of you have miss read the article but i will not write a 10 page post so bye.

cheap, cheap. Think cheap, and you'll always be cheap.AMD version of semi conducteur industrie
July 9, 2002 6:03:10 AM

I agree that the article has more of a hidden point. I just hope it isn't hidden so far that AMD misses it :-/ As for the SSE2 deal, I like any optimizations that are incorperated. They allow for more performance optimizations to be made which helps us. SO if you have it the yeaaaa, if not oh well it isn't going to hurt you much.

Crap, all the good ones are already taken.
July 9, 2002 7:07:49 AM

dont worry Juin... i still love you! :lol: 

Proud owner of the <b>Beige Beast</b> :lol: 
July 9, 2002 11:11:17 AM

LOL right to my heart

cheap, cheap. Think cheap, and you'll always be cheap.AMD version of semi conducteur industrie
July 10, 2002 12:09:17 AM

my hamster finds you sexy too! :cool:

Proud owner of the <b>Beige Beast</b> :lol: 
July 10, 2002 2:37:46 AM

My cat also found you hamster sexy but can be fatal for itself

cheap, cheap. Think cheap, and you'll always be cheap.AMD version of semi conducteur industrie
!