Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

2600 released?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 6, 2002 7:34:49 PM

I thought I read a story about these so called "2400" and "2600" processors being released, but it must have just been my imagination, since you can't actually seem to *BUY* them anywhere. I think I need to get out more if I'm dreaming about fictitious hardware releases :) 

Anyone know when AMD is going to release something faster than the 2200+?

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway

More about : 2600 released

September 6, 2002 7:37:25 PM

Whats even stranger is that I thought this dream happened *before* the 2.8Ghz Pentium 4 was released, yet I can go buy a 2.8Ghz right now at googlegear. Man, my dreams just make no sense anymore.

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway
September 6, 2002 7:45:32 PM

Quote:
Anyone know when AMD is going to release something faster than the 2200+?

Sometime before Christmas, give or take a quarter. ;) 

Seriously though, I expect AMD would practically <i>have</i> to start offering them retail by the end of September or else even the most die-hard AMD lemming will have difficulty defending AMD's honour from the ranks of laughing Intel fans.

But hey, get out more anyway. A little fresh air never hurt anybody. (Though massive gusts of fresh air and/or blinding sunlight are completely different subjects.)

<pre><A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/186.htm" target="_new"><font color=red>It's all relative...</font color=red></A></pre><p>
Related resources
September 6, 2002 7:50:12 PM

"No fresh air or sunlight for you until graduation, silly boy! MUWAHAHAHAHAHA! FEEL MY WRATH!"

--Impression of my professors

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway
September 6, 2002 8:09:18 PM

Naw, once somebody is all gung-ho behind a company, they will literally go down with the ship. This applies to AMD, Microsoft, Linux, Apple, Ford, Pepsi, whatever... They become so blind to any flaws and accept the corporate marketing machine so completely that any other mode of thought becomes impossible. I used to be one of these folks in the Transmeta camp... *shudder*

The best comparison is to "doublethink" in 1984, the ability to convince a group of people that two things which contradict eachother are both true, or to ignore the past if it doesn't fit in with the current definitions of reality.

A good example of this concept is illustrated with Apple's hardware. Steve Jobs is the master of doublethink. I remember quite clearly in '98 or so (a bit before the pentium III was released), Jobs giving a speech in which he claimed the PowerPC processor was going to speed away from anything else, and that Apple's would have CPUs measured by "Giagahertz" (the first time I remember hearing that word used in the media) in just a few months. I remember him saying something like: "Intel will never be able to keep up in the measure of a CPUs speed. We will be reaching Gigahertz while everyone else still talks about Megahertz. Forget the Pentium III, the G4 (4 emphasized)will be king"

But of course now the party line is: "Clock speed has absolutely nothing to do with a computer's performance. How dare you bring up clock speed and act like it has any meaning, you must be a fool who doesn't understand computers. Were you a crack baby or something?"

Because of this uncanny ability of the marketing machines to convince people to doublethink, there will always be folks finding a way to defend company X.

I'm sure someone will come up with an explanation saying that AMD's inability to meet demand will prove that they are superior to Intel.

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway
September 6, 2002 10:04:51 PM

first of all new Athlon's are slated for 'en masse' purchase on 10/1.

I just can't believe how much AMD is getting ridden for this. So I guess none of you people buy any products that are announced but can't be bought at the same moment. So none of you can own a Geforce 4, since they were announced before anyone could buy them. Come to think of it, many new technologies are announced and released for production long before they hit retail channels. So none of you should have CD-RW's, 1066 RDRAM, PS2 or Xbox, hell not even a flavor of Windows since we all know about the products well before they hit shelves.

What's even funnier is that just a short while ago, Intel had their 1 Ghz CPU come out and at first it was no where to be found, so I guess none of you are running Intel CPU's and they also had to recall their 1.13's because they rushed them out with adequate testing. In all honesty I probably won't be upgrading since my current CPU handles more tasks than I can push at it anyhow. Although it is tempting.

Bottom line, yes I want to be aware of what's coming, and yes I'd rather have the production streamlined and debugged as much as possible, rather than having to send back because they are defective.

Anyhow I'm sure I'll get a new hole ripped on this message, but hey, it's all a matter of opinion and from what your perspective is towards 'X' product.

That's also what these forums are for, discussion and a place to air you likes, dislikes and opinions.

:cool: Save heating costs on your home, overclock your PC!!! :cool:
September 7, 2002 12:55:41 AM

i wouldn't be surprise if amd annouce an ATHLON XP 3000+ at 2.131GHz tomorrow, or when intel announes their p4 3.0GHz. (that's 1MHz more than the 2600+ for the thickheaded)

hey, why not?

let's be extra harsh on companies that do paper launches, no matter how much we like/dislike them. marketing monkeys think we're all dumb and won't notice!

p4 @1.525V, athlon @1.65V....

<font color=green> there's more to life than increasing its speed -Ghandi</font color=green>
September 7, 2002 1:59:35 AM

Quote:

(that's 1MHz more than the 2600+ for the thickheaded)

Actually, it's 2.33333333333333333333333333333333MHz slower.

Intelligence is not merely the wealth of knowledge but the sum of perception, wisdom, and knowledge.
September 7, 2002 2:52:33 AM

lol :) 

Just because you're not paranoid, doesn't mean they're not watching you.
September 7, 2002 6:39:46 AM

Quote:
Whats even stranger is that I thought this dream happened *before* the 2.8Ghz Pentium 4 was released, yet I can go buy a 2.8Ghz right now at googlegear. Man, my dreams just make no sense anymore.


I wonder where all these trolls were when intel paper launched the 2ghz p4, oh, and the 1.13ghz p3, ::yawn::

:wink: Heatsinks, if you dont overclock, use the <b>STOCK!</b> :wink:
September 7, 2002 11:54:26 AM

Why is it hard to imagine? There's a double standard w/ AMD supporters. There's no problem w/ announcing a release. Do you know why they did? It was too knock the wind outta the sails of Intel. I just dont understand how Intel is considered to have big evil marketing when AMD is guilty of the same marketing schemes.

Bringing up the 1ghz P3 doesnt mean its ok for AMD to do it. It was wrong then, and it's wrong now. Just in no way can some of you see AMD in a bad light. I don't get it.

Mat, calling people trolls that knock AMD for the same reasons you knock Intel? You're the troll here bud. Your post could've been made by Meltdown. People have every right to be pissed off at AMD. They're not trolling.

This sig runs too hot.
September 7, 2002 12:52:01 PM

Actually Mati, you're a little confused, the 1.13 was a recall not a paper launch, their 1 Ghz was also their paper launch :) 


:cool: Save heating costs on your home, overclock your PC!!! :cool:
September 7, 2002 12:55:39 PM

Quote:
Mat, calling people trolls that knock AMD for the same reasons you knock Intel? You're the troll here bud. Your post could've been made by Meltdown. People have every right to be pissed off at AMD. They're not trolling.


Excuse me? I didnt knock intel, I said no one trolled the intel paper launch, both companies do it and theres no reason to waste our time with a pathetic troll post cause of it.

Your mistaken in saying I knock intel for the paper launch, I did no such thing, please refrain from making false accusations in the future led.

:wink: Heatsinks, if you dont overclock, use the <b>STOCK!</b> :wink:
September 7, 2002 12:56:41 PM

Quote:
Actually Mati, you're a little confused, the 1.13 was a recall not a paper launch, their 1 Ghz was also their paper launch :) 


The 1.13 was recalled a week and a half after launch, and there were ~1000 affected cpus(all went to dell) that qualifies as a paper launch to me.



:wink: Heatsinks, if you dont overclock, use the <b>STOCK!</b> :wink:
September 7, 2002 1:02:06 PM

Quote:
Bringing up the 1ghz P3 doesnt mean its ok for AMD to do it. It was wrong then, and it's wrong now. Just in no way can some of you see AMD in a bad light. I don't get it.


Just to clarify for led, cause hes having a hard time grasping it. No one in this thread defended amd blindly, this thread was an obvious troll, no content devised to start a flame fest. defending this post is laughable.

On the topic of paper launches, both companies do it, specifically mentioning amd or intel and using this fact to deride either is pointless, much like claiming amd is bad cause their athlons use silicon, or intel is bad cause their cpus run@40C.

Both competitors do the same thing, so infact this poster is upset at the entire cpu industry not soley amd, and saying so in his origional post would give this post content. Instead he made a cheap and lame joke about the 2.8 being straight out, alluding that intel would never ever do a paper launch, to which I replied they have and did.(thus showing his assertion that intel is above reproach was grossly incorrect, and also letting him know paper launches are normal and not to be upset at amd alone for it)

Do you understand now led, or does your blinding desire to confront me override the part of your brain which deals with logic?

:wink: Heatsinks, if you dont overclock, use the <b>STOCK!</b> :wink:
September 7, 2002 2:05:41 PM

You're so quick to cry troll. Not to be upset at AMD alone? Why not? You point out Intels paper launch to say something like, "hey, Intel did it, it's the nature of the business"......You try to make it sound justified. It's not. And it HAS NOTHING to do w/ Intels paper launch. If someone was to say "my AMD splits in half after 1 day of use, and Intels new processors are unbreakable" And you bring up "well, in 1999 Intel had a processor that split in half also you troll". Irrelevant. Bringing up the other instance doesnt make the AMD one any better, or ok. Just for a second seperate the two chip makers, and take a look at what AMD did, and why you have a right to be critical. Maybe it's too hard. Maybe it might turn off that little AMD fire you got like tucks on a lit match. That Intel paper launch has helped label them amongst some enthusiasts as deceptive, and a pure marketing machine...

Quote:
specifically mentioning amd or intel and using this fact to deride either is pointless

So what's that mean? Can't say AMD did a paper launch w/o bringing up Intels? What else can't we say bad about AMD w/o a disclaimer?

As far as me understanding........You post troll this, troll that.......but you're the first one to bat for AMD, and knock down others for criticising AMD. And you do it in a demeaning fashion. Making me sound like I dont understand what you're talking about when all you post is "this is a troll....Intel did it too. yawn...." Sounds more like a troll than the other. And like you say, maybe the "newbies", and "strangers" come to bat for me....like you're better than them because your post count is higher. But they register to do so...That says a lot more than your shadow Eden that agrees w/ you even when you call people stupid.

I didn't see his post as a troll but I'll admidt Im not defending his post as much as I'm attacking yours, and the ones of "AMD Fanboys" everywhere. Double standards, and denial.......Tired of it. AMD isn't perfect...and to you that statement is a troll.

This sig runs too hot.
September 7, 2002 3:56:52 PM

From what you said it's easy to assume you are knocking intel, so if you don't want "false accusations" made in the future try wording what you're saying better. Let's get over it ppl, bitching and whining isn't going to make AMD finally offer the 2600+, hell for that matter even the 2400!

I'm sure by the time AMD even get these 2600s to the marketplace, intel will have intro'ed a 2.93 or 3.06, widening the performance gap even further.
September 7, 2002 4:31:40 PM

Victory, sure, it might be "normal" to do a paper launch, but it's a very sleazy, dishonest way of marketing something. And BTW, there's a BIG difference between an "announcement" and a "paper launch". If a certain product can't be found in stores, it doesn't <i>always</i> mean that it's a paper launch. The product could be out, but in limited quantities. I admit, the 1ghz P3 was a paper launch, and Intel released a small quantity of 1.13 P3's early, just so they could beat AMD to the punch, but Intel made the mistake of not fully doing it's famous testing on the 1.13. Thus, it had problems, and was quickly recalled. Now, Intel has learned, to never rush a product (release it)until there is an adequate volume of the product, and that it's been fully tested. The 2.8 is case in point. IT could've been released as early as May or June, but there was no market demand, and Intel fully tested it, fixed the prefetch bug, and also made a new stepping. On top of that, when they released the 2.8 recently, it was in volume production. So, if you want a 2.8 right now, there's no problem in getting one.

When a company does a paper launch, they go down to a very low level. Intel did it to compete with AMD, but Intel now knows paper launches are bad, because it not only angers retailers, and investors, but also customers. The P4 was specifically designed to ramp at record speeds, so Intel could take it nice and slow, and do proper releases with the p4. I agree, that it was a bad idea for Intel to do a paper launch, but they have learned from their mistakes.

[off-topic] AMD_Man, you should've added some extra 3's to make it more convincing. :wink: [off-topic]

Matisaro, unlike AMD fans, most Intel fans don't go "down with the ship" (except the really stubborn ones). There was once a time (a few years ago) when Intel fans laughed at AMD fans, but now it's the other way around. And these days, Intel fans are very modest. In the current state of the AMD vs. Intel debate, AMD fans right now would be laughing thier heads off and making fun of Intel fans if they were in that position right now. But, you don't see many Intel fans making fun of AMD or laughing at AMD's loyalists becuase of the paper launch. AMD fans seem to be very vocal, as well as stubborn, and loyal. AMD fans will argue about the tiniest things with all their might, whiel Intel fans barely talk, even about major Intel events. SO, if I were you, I wouldn't be pointing any fingers toward Intel fans, Mat. Mat, how the heck was the 1.13 a paper launch? FYI, they didn't all go to Dell. If you looked hard, you were able to find some OEM versions, and basically all of those OEM's went to white box computers. A paper launch is launching a product on paper, but not in any stores, retailers, etc. In other words, it's an imaginary launch, and I have no idea how you would consider a 1.13 a "paper launch". And even though you say you weren't knocking Intel it sure sounded like it, so take nja's advice, and try to word your arguments better.

And LED is right, you are one of the leading people in this forum who puts so much faith into AMD, and defends AMD so much. Even when it's obvious you're wrong, or when you're biased towards AMD, you always defend yourself as well as AMD saying you're totally fair, AMD is equal to Intel, etc. Intel learns from thier mistakes, and Intel (to my knowledge) has not made the same mistake twice, it terms of doing something wrong with their CPU's.

In conclusion, paper launches are bad, and neither AMD nor Intel should do them. AMD should know better then to do one at the curent time.

- - -
<font color=green>All good things must come to an end … so they can be replaced by better things! :wink: </font color=green>
September 7, 2002 5:02:51 PM

I really don't get the 'sleazy or dishonest' chatter right now. I've never seen an ad stating that the 2400+ or above is now available. Just that it does exist and will soon be available. Also it is available 'in limited quantities' since the major tech sites have been able to test and benchmark the new CPU's. So they do exist, just not to the general population.

Also lately I've seen many comments on how the PR is wrong. I don't see how since every AMD PC I've seen on shelves have said Athlon XP 1900+ then list the stats as a 1.6 Ghz CPU. It's just letting the less informed consumer know that clock speed is not the 'be all end all' when it comes to how quickly a CPU can perform tasks in the real world.
I will give Intel kudos for once again overtaking for having the best peforming configuration right now on the market. The real question is who as an end user really needs 2+ Ghz? Sure the extra clicks per cycle will make some things go faster(video rendering, picture rasterising) but at this point with software development I see no real need to have the latest and greatest. I'd put my money on that better than half of the CPU cycles on either processor go to waste because we just can't tax our systems enough and consistently enough to justify these latest and greatest. Yeah I'd love to have the fastest CPU on the block, but a few seconds here or there doesn't justify me spending $300-$500 on a new CPU. My XP1700+ OC'd to 1900+ does me just fine and probably will for at least 1 more year before I start feeling 'left behind'. Hell just a few months ago I trashed my Voodoo 5500 in lieu of Geforce 3 because I was starting to be limited on some of the new lighting effects of current games. I didn't buy the Ge4 because I got 3 years out of my 5500, and I expect to get 2-3 from my Ge3.

I'm still running ME vs 2000 or XP because I'd lose my Videowave 3(which I use quite a bit) and Photosuite 3. They don't run under XP and though I use the system at work and actually like some of the improvements, I don't want to have to replace those packages.

So when one of my 4 systems at home becomes to 'putzy'(prolly my 633 Celeron since it's starting to show it's age) I'll upgrade again. For now, I get everything done quick enough, pretty enough and well enough to stay with what I've got.

I got a little winded here, but the bottom line is that I don't need the new Athlon right now, nor will I October 1st when they hit the shelves, or a P4 at 2.5Ghz+. I'll probably get one or the other when they're 6-9 months old and I can get back into the upper mainstream of CPU cycles again and for a fantastic price.

:cool: Save heating costs on your home, overclock your PC!!! :cool:
September 7, 2002 5:38:48 PM

Quote:
I really don't get the 'sleazy or dishonest' chatter right now. I've never seen an ad stating that the 2400+ or above is now available. Just that it does exist and will soon be available

They let out a processor and let everyone test it. Make themselves look great in the benchmarks.....Just a little while before Intel releases the 2.8. As if to say "ok, Intel has this, but real soon we have this". Then don't make the processor available. People are waiting, just like the thread starter. it's like claiming you can run real fast in practice, and broke records, and never showing up to the race.

The PR thing is ok. Because it's unfair comparing Procs w/ ghz nowadays. But you said it wasnt deceptive, and it is. VIA did that too, except their processors didnt quite do what the PR# said it would.

I'd say get the fastest thing you could afford...You don't have to upgrade/buy for a little longer. Top of the line usually lasts 2-3 yrs on avg. Whenever my mhz was tripled, I would buy another machine. 233 then 700 then 1.8a OC'd. This one should last till at least 6ghz? hehe sounds high, so maybe that rule doesn't apply anymore. Put together every system when it was just about the newest. I believe gfx cards should be upgraded more often though. Once a every 12-18 months Idealy.

This sig runs too hot.
September 7, 2002 6:45:25 PM

Never? My, my, that's quite odd. Why don't you go and visit
<A HREF="http://www.amd.com" target="_new">http://www.amd.com&lt;/A> and see their ad that the 2400+ and 2600+ are <b> now shipping</b>. Well, where are they if they are shipping? They aren't on pricewatch or newegg, retailers don't have them, so where are they? Seriously, that's false advertising. If they are shipping, you should see at least one in a local computer shop. When a CPU is available in "limited quantities", it means that it IS available to the general public, but it's just very hard to find. If it was available in "limited quantities", the 2600+ WOULD BE LISTED on pricewatch. But, it's not. When a CPU is a limited quantity, they usually go to OEM's, or white box retailers. When the 1.13 came out in "limited quantities", it was available in white box systems, and also in small computer shops, for a premium, though. The reason that tech sites can get these prodcuts, is because they get SAMPLES. The THG 2600+ is a SAMPLE. Samples are distributed to retailers, and system builders, BEFORE they are ever released to the general public. When a paper launch is made, it usually means that samples are going around in the CPU industry. The PR is flawed. There is no logical reason at all as to why AMD would base it off the Tbird's performance. That's just a marketing gimmick. In reality, they made the PR rating so they could better compete against Intel. But comparing Athlon's with the rating to p3 tuallies, the rating fails, and as seen on THG, the 2600+ is almost EXACTLY equal in performance with the 2.4B P4. That is also flawed. And when THG OC'ed the 2600+ to "3400+" (2.8Ghz), they saw that it's performance was equal to the of the P4 2.8. That means the rating was off by 600 points, even though it's been revised already. This means that something is starting to limit the Athlon's performance, and at the same time, The p4 is just starting to stretch it's muscles in terms of performance.

- - -
<font color=green>All good things must come to an end … so they can be replaced by better things! :wink: </font color=green>
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Dark_Archonis on 09/07/02 03:41 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 7, 2002 7:17:11 PM

Also, recently when Intel announces a processor release, OEM has long had them. Usually on day of announcement complete systems are available. When the T-bred was released, that would be an example of a processor limited in quantities. AMD is struggling to keep their heads above water at this point. The real reason for the "suprise" of the 2600+ was all marketing. Theyre not ready. It was to deflate Intels 2.8ghz blimp. They can't hang at this point. 3ghz are already packaged and ready to go. Will be in the retailers hands as systems by November 1st.

This sig runs too hot.
September 7, 2002 7:28:59 PM

3.06GHZ by November?
Hmm I thought the roadmaps indicated Xmas.

--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!
September 7, 2002 7:35:38 PM

Quote:
That says a lot more than your shadow Eden that agrees w/ you even when you call people stupid.

Do your part in this forum and stop spreading FUD and putting stuff in my mouth LED.
My views are not the same as Matisaro each time, many times I have disagreed with him, many times I have agreed because we share some similar views, and if I seem to defend him, then go ahead think so. I many times have said it in other forums, about Mat's attitude, unfortunatly you seem to sleep in this forum only, so it's your own fault for putting false FUD in my mouth.

I'd like to add, WHO CARES about the XP2600 and 2400's launch! Really, we are aware, AMD is putting it all on Hammer, they're lucky they are pumping these Tbreds out in the same damn fab! (I doubt UMC has 0.13m high-end Tbreds yet) I don't give a crack about these Tbreds, the Barton is coming very soon, and seems to want to come out in a month or two after the XP2600. For crying out loud stop blaming it on a company who has one fully functional fab pumping out so many chips at once, one is a totally new core, one has XP and MP versions. Geez you make it all seem like AMD is Intel, capable of supplying 10 times like Intel. AMD is well aware they have to compete a bit, but they have stated it so many times, they ARE NOT gonna put the K7 as their main competitive product, they can't and won't, they will simply continue offering upgrade paths for their current users, but in no way are these CPUs intended to directly outperform and compete P4s. ClawHammer is what is intended, and it depends. It seems AMD has changed dates, instead they will improve Barton more, and make it out in October-November so that they can further improve CH. That's how I see it, otherwise they'd have gotten Barton ready to be shipped soon, and CH for Xmas. Unfortunatly for AMD, Intel is competing very well at the moment, so they changed strategies, plain and simple.

--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!
September 7, 2002 7:46:44 PM

LED, you're correct. Intel right now is in fact sampling the 3.06G P4's w/ hyperthreading. For now, Intel has given samples only to it's closest retailers/providers, though.

Plus, I heard that Gallatin (big cache Xeon) is coming in Q4 of this year. If that's true, it'll knock some wind out of hammer.

eden, i know that the K7 now is irrelevant, but FOR ME, it's still important that AMD made a lousy paper lauch, it just angers me alot.

- - -
<font color=green>All good things must come to an end … so they can be replaced by better things! :wink: </font color=green>
September 7, 2002 8:03:07 PM

For the last year, Intel has been almost consistent with releasing pentium 4s and even celerons weeks before they were originally planned. Roadmaps are rarely followed, intel way ahead of them lately, with AMD and nvidia falling well behind. The guys above are correct about the 2.8GHz. It was on sale, even on pricewatch a week before the official release.

I seriously suspect a 2.93 and/or the 3.06 from intel, weeks before thanksgiving. Especially with PC sales actually up, getting to 3GHz might even help this trend more, being that the public is brainwashed on numbers. I'm sure intel will have a present for AMD when they finally release the 2700+, with its "advanced front-side bus." I'm having a hard time understanding how AMD can say they'll have a 2700+ and a whole new core, the Barton at 2800+ in October when it's not even able to get 2400+ or 2600+ out in September!
September 7, 2002 8:06:28 PM

I don't know when the systems will be for sale, but in the hands of retailers by first week of november.

Maybe you don't always agree w/ him, but more often than not you're right behind him in the arguments Ive had w/ mat. And then there was that whole 100FSB guy that he called stupid......You agreed w/ some sorta twisted explaination. But n/m that debacle. I apologize for draggin you into this thread, that was wrong of me.

This sig runs too hot.
September 7, 2002 8:56:29 PM

I appreciate the apology.
While I do often take his side, I have to admit I do it when I see some people truly kissing Intel's boots. That just cries for someone to play the devil's advocate. More often, I see either you or Dark touting too much Intel, it is only then that I take AMD's side. If you read my other conversations, you'll see I often praise Intel these days and recommend their systems. I am not blind to who is better now, ya know.

However don't think I am not angry at AMD. I am disappointed they are doing just like Slvr_Phoenix feared, following Intel's mistakes and personality. This paper launch is nothing good. It will only put AMD fanatics in a position of delirious fanaticism and belief. However this is probably so they can be sure the Tbred Bs are fully tested and revised, so their higher grades like the XP2700, and the Barton can come right after, allowing the XP2600 to quickly become low-end, and allow many new upgrade choices which are very nice for the price (Picture the following lineup:
-XP2400
-XP2600
-XP2700 with 333MHZ FSB
-XP2800 Barton with 512K L2 and 333MHZ FSB
-XP3000 Barton " " " "
All should be there by Xmas. This will allow the XP2400-2600 to go low-end, therefore have a powerful price/performance ratio for upgraders. Again AMD's goal is NOT for competition, it is not top priority anymore because they know they cannot compete a new generation CPU that has full potential for a long time. They will however cater to price/performance people, and especially upgraders. The XP2600 is pretty much guaranteed to work on mobos that are one year old, with a proper BIOS flash, and Barton is also expected to as well. I see no way AMD can come back and destroy the P4 right now, and the K7 won't and can't, because it would cost too much for nothing. It's a dying platform by WILL, but not a dying platform architecture-wise (P3s could have as well gotten to 2GHZ).

As for the P4 story, I still do not beleive Intel will release a 3.06GHZ with HT by November. There are two main reasons:

1) They are AND have beaten the competition by a fairly nice margin.
2) That would imply them having TOO much win, and that equals the court monopoly stuff, therefore complementing point 1.

If Intel wants to totally wipe competition for months already, then ok, but I think that would truly put them in a monopolistic position.
By Xmas, OK! That's a good date because AMD will have something out to compete the 2.8GHZ.

--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!
September 7, 2002 9:27:47 PM

We'll just have to wait and see. I seriously doubt intel will wait 3 plus months to release a faster chip. Especially when AMD releases 2800+ or 3000+. Intel would definately launch the 3.06 to rain on that parade.
September 7, 2002 10:06:29 PM

It would wait only a month later, not 3!

--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!
September 7, 2002 10:24:06 PM

Intel may release the 3.06 just to blow the wind out of hammer, and barton. That way, Hammer's release may not be as exciting as AMD plans it, and Intel will have an edge, because Intel's "going full steam ahead" in terms of competition in 2003. They've got a whole crop of new CPU's that'll be released. Intel will time the 3.06 release to coincide probably with Barton, or in other words, the next speed grade. I doubt that all of these Barton speed grades you speak of, Eden, will be out by Xmas. That's way too much for AMD to release so closely together. Plus, that much releases could hurt Hammer's own launch alot, if the 3000+ Barton's performance is very close to the clawhammer.

Eden, I don't tout "too" much Intel, I simply tell the facts. If I tout too much Intel, how come you never say MAt touts too much AMD? AMD is favoured more on these forums than Intel. I'm just trying to create a balance and to let people know the truth. The truth, though, is not always fair and just, and which why alot of people can't handle the truth (especially the AMD fanboys). Theere is a will, or passion that drives me to argue and debate, and that is becuase I'm sick and tired of all these moronic AMD fans everwhere, and just, in general, tons of people on the net who are totally clueless, or misinformed. I get flamed sometimes for speaking the truth, and people disagree with me, but that is to be expected. If I continue to be persistant, hopefully some AMD fans at least will see the truth that Intel is "not evil" and that Intel's pricing is the way it is not because Intel employees are morons; it because of different factors. There are quite of few techies and enthusiasts who don't know the truth, and I just want to spread my knowledge, as well as the truth.
- - -
<font color=green>All good things must come to an end … so they can be replaced by better things! :wink: </font color=green>
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Dark_Archonis on 09/07/02 06:34 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 7, 2002 10:26:40 PM

AMD is now aware of Intel's plans, otherwise they wouldn't have changed the roadmaps. They probably are planning to make it surpass the 3.06GHZ but again, CH's performance is so unknown, we don't want to hype anything.

--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!
September 7, 2002 10:33:16 PM

Post deleted by AMD_Man
September 7, 2002 10:36:07 PM

Hehe, ya it is, but you should've kept them on the page at least.

This might cause a few angered people...

- - -
<font color=green>All good things must come to an end … so they can be replaced by better things! :wink: </font color=green>
September 7, 2002 11:42:59 PM

Edit that, eh?

This sig runs too hot.
September 8, 2002 12:09:54 AM

When you argue for AMD you're not really playing devils advocate, you're jumping on the bandwagon. When I registered here I couldnt believe how the people that had anything negative to say were called trolls, or thoroughly beaten down. Sometimes people had to back down, or not argue at all because this place was dominated by AMD loyalists. Meltdown, yeah, he does it for kicks. But even he has never gotten downright insulting. Although earned every right to be called a troll. But it seems just a negative comment towards AMD gets you labeled a troll by Mat, or heavily disagreed w/ by loyalists, even if your point deserves to be taken into consideration, and clearly valid. Just a blatant disrespect, and double standard. I was called a troll, Junky in this thread.......Enough w/ that sht already. Cover your ears and say "la la la la la" while youre reading it if you don't like it. There was no trolling. AMD is making some of the same mistakes that Intel did in order to be labeled, as silly as it sounds "the darkside", "evil"...lol. But yet no one seems to take notice, or when you do you're a troll.

Yeah, AMD isn't as big as Intel. But point is they shouldn't do it no matter what. It's unfair tactics. Maybe a few loyalists will get fed up and drop off......doubt it, but ya never know. They released a processor that isnt available. You fail to realize that. You make excuses for their fabs, and talk about the Hammer which is irrelevant......they shouldve never put out the white paper so early. That's all on that.

Maybe Intel wants to dominate by a large margin if only for a short time, perhaps until hammer. Or maybe they think people will feel the need to upgrade their P2 400's when they see a 3ghz released during christmas. Let's keep in mind the christmas buying season starts before december nowadays. Either way, the high clocks will increase PC sales for both chip makers this season.

This sig runs too hot.
September 8, 2002 12:29:16 AM

I would not doubt if Intel came out with P4 3.06 this November at all. First off, it'll be 2 months and they did say Q4 2002. When they said Q3 for the 2.66/2.8, they came out in late August, which is the middle of Q3. Now the middle of Q4 would be late October/early November. I think they'll pull through.

I don't think Intel's gonna let AMD get even near in the future, at least til K8 rolls around. If you think about it, AMD's having trouble pulling out some launches, and I really doubt AMD's gonna be able to pull another launch, even paper before 3.06GHz. Now considering K8 is supposed to be released Q4 2002, then Barton should come out before that. Unless AMD pulls the Hammer's launch date back, then Barton'll have to come in Novemver. I don't think they'll put that many CPU launches in December. So if AMD's able to put Barton that close to the XP2600+, I don't think Intel'll have a problem pulling off a 3.06GHz launch before then.

I'm not kissing Intel's boots. Far from it actually. Before I started posting on these forums, I was totally Pro-Intel. When I came here and saw the almost unanimus(sp?) support for Athlon XPs, my opinion was greatly wavered. When I then planned to do an upgrade this past summer, and did the research, I realized that AMD had fallen behind quite a bit. When I saw that Intel was gonna be cutting prices in September, I thought I should wait and get one sweet deal and overclocking system. Now, I'll tell you, if AMD made a CPU that's ~$300CDN, performs on par with a 2.4GHz at stock speed and can overclock better, then I'll go AMD all the way. But since the XP2400+/2600+ is not out yet, I'm not gonna wait around for them.

I just look at what I need/want :lol:  and then look for what fits that. Since at the moment, Intel's looking better for what I want. Therefore I'll go Intel. If AMD can pull Hammer off, when I get my next comp next year, I'll have a look and if it's better than whatever Intel's got, I'll take the Hammer.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
September 8, 2002 3:17:37 AM

What'd he write?

--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 09/07/02 11:40 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 8, 2002 3:28:44 AM

Quote:
When you argue for AMD you're not really playing devils advocate, you're jumping on the bandwagon. When I registered here I couldnt believe how the people that had anything negative to say were called trolls, or thoroughly beaten down

Dude, in case you and Dark seem to think this place is AMD infested, you have no idea how it was in September 2001. You were not here before, I dunno about Dark's register date.(EDIT: I just checked, you both have 2 days difference in registration dates, lol) If you were, you'd know this place had only 10% Intel topics. Why? Because AMD was king back then, people who came asking for a 1.5GHZ P4 were almost flamed, the damn thing sucked hell.

Back to now, to me this is a very balanced forum, I don't know how you two manage to think we have pro_AMD more than pro_Intel or balanced, but no way are we infested any more. In fact I'd say this place now has a bit more Intel than AMD.

I am not jumping on a bandwagon, I am jumping on the side that needs argumenting, I do not like it when one side has more credit than the other, or when some spread FUD around to promote one side too much.

Quote:
But even he has never gotten downright insulting.

Again you may have not been here enough to know what Meltdown has done. In fact once he made a joke involving the 9/11 terrorists, and guess what? A fellow THGC was the victim of this innocent 'joke' of his, he was a survivor of that day. I can name more, but I am sick of this guy's insensitivity towards anything, especially AMD-chip users.

Quote:
They released a processor that isnt available. You fail to realize that. You make excuses for their fabs, and talk about the Hammer which is irrelevant......they shouldve never put out the white paper so early. That's all on that.


Did you take a second to read what I said in the previous post? I almost CONDEMNED AMD for doing that launch.
I am not making an excuse for their fab, I am stating truth. They are doing 4, I repeat, 4 different products, or perhaps even some more, in one fab. Take about cramped space. I have yet to hear UMC releasing AMD chips to the public. The fact is that AMD cannot supply much K7s than K8s if they want the K8 to ever see the day. This is not related to the paper launch topic, this is related in overall of how AMD can manage the chips now. True, they have to phase out K7, otherwise K8 can never get the space in the fab to become mainstream supply.


--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 09/07/02 11:48 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 8, 2002 3:40:11 AM

Quote:
Eden, I don't tout "too" much Intel, I simply tell the facts. If I tout too much Intel, how come you never say MAt touts too much AMD?

You tout too much. There, I said it!
You add points that are near irrelevant to anyone just to convince someone to buy Intel.
Mat does tout too much AMD, sadly each time he does, it is in a situation! Back when Tbred A came out, it had horrendous clocking skills, almost everyone just bashed it. Mat stood up, wanting more proof that these are the real chips. He ADMITTED they sucked, but no way he was ready to admit AMD had faulty 0.13m process or that it is like this from now on. Me, him and very few others kept our minds open, but people just charged at him mostly, as if he is AMD's shining knight. What happened? Well he was right, or as he puts it: Vindication. Tbred Bs proved that it was not the core's end, nor was it that AMD had a bad process fab and cannot recover.
There were many situations where when he took AMD's side, it just seemed like he was touting them, funny how his luck draws out.

As for him being AMD-biased, I should just remind you, his next system should be a P4. Am I the only one smelling big fat irony in the air?

Quote:
AMD is favoured more on these forums than Intel

Refer to my reply to LED. Anyone who has been here for a long time will agree, this place is clearly balanced now compared to before. There will always be fanboys, just ignore them, let them be. You know there are open minded people here. I am one of them, despite me taking sides in such conversations here.

Quote:
Theere is a will, or passion that drives me to argue and debate, and that is becuase I'm sick and tired of all these moronic AMD fans everwhere, and just, in general, tons of people on the net who are totally clueless, or misinformed

Anyone who is conscious here would know what you are talking about and would be also sick. Dude, I hate as much as you those people who are rabid fans. True, Intel's fanboys are resting these days, Meltdown has nothing to link us to anymore because AMD is just behind, that's plain and simple. I know many AMD fans who still bash Intel, but dude, that's what they are, CLUELESS. Ignore them, just giggle at them. You know your pride is kept, you know you are right deep down, they know they are insecure with Intel's upper hand now.

Quote:
There are quite of few techies and enthusiasts who don't know the truth, and I just want to spread my knowledge, as well as the truth.

Unfortunatly you stretch the truth to a point it becomes FUD. You've done it several times enough for me to now tell you, you put too much faith in Intel. Talk about a backstab huh?
As in the Simpsons, by Lionel Hutz: There's the truth :smile: , and there's the truth :mad:  ...
Sometimes your truth goes too far, and it ticks me off to see such comments like go for Intel because it's stable. Chipset-wise, there is no doubt an Intel chipset or SiS (recently) will be very stable, next to bugless. But to imply AMD chipsets are still not up to par, is stretching it. KT266A and above have been incredibly solid, and I am not alone on this, being an owner of a KT266A. Let's face it, the days of the SB Live crashes saga of VIA, the days of crazy chipset incompatibility are almost over. I don't know many who are having hardware problems straight out because of the chipset.

In anycase, facts or not, you like to add cherries on them.



--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 09/07/02 11:51 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 8, 2002 3:46:24 AM

Quote:
I'm not kissing Intel's boots

You of all people? I would never imply that on you.

Quote:
Before I started posting on these forums, I was totally Pro-Intel. When I came here and saw the almost unanimus(sp?) support for Athlon XPs, my opinion was greatly wavered

My dear, our stories are so similar. I suggest you search back to October 2001, check my style of posts, and prepare for a good laugh!

Ever since I found AMD, I was so crazy about them. Of course before that, I was also pro_intel, I could not accept when I saw the 1.5 being trumpled by the 1.4 Tbird. I simply looked at the places where it won, like the Sandra Memory Benches and the Internet Content Creation, and then based that off it.
Then I switched to AMD and asked foolish fanboy questions. Until today, where I have no remorse in looking at both and praising them.

Quote:
Now, I'll tell you, if AMD made a CPU that's ~$300CDN,

I could not beleive my eyes when on RB, the 2.53GHZ was 420$ CDN. That's enough to make any Canadian go drooling. The 2.8GHZ has broken a barrier. It only costs 860$, this is a new low for high-end Intel. For sure, this is much lower and much more attractive than before (though still too much). 2.8GHZ for 860$, all-time low. Maybe Intel really is slowly changing?............
>................
>................
Nah! :tongue:

--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 09/07/02 11:52 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 8, 2002 5:21:38 AM

I just want to say i'm finally glad someone's pointed out the obviousness of Matisaro's bias and quick-tempered attitude. I'm not sure if it was LED or Dark Archonis (sp?), but I'd like to say yay. I wondered why it seemed like everyone (ESPECIALLY eden) supports matisaro when he says anything, even when it flies in the face of facts, common sense, etc.

Mat, you are an AMD fan (maybe fanboy, maybe not, although i'm careful to use that term due to recent discussions :) ), that is undeniable. And you tend to jump on people for stating things that just rub u the wrong way (especially if they are true), just cool down a little. Lately you seem just as bad as FUGGER or Meltdown.

Regardless...i don't know if there is a person out there that doesn't like both amd and intel at the same time for the benefits they give each other (and more importantly us). Without Intel, there would be no AMD and without AMD, there would be no p4 less than 1000 bucks. So let's just enjoy the speed race and have fun. The paper launch is annoying because it's a sneaky tactic that slows down the race (why would Intel produce faster chips so quickly anymore unless they were either threatened by the who knows when it will appear hammer? There isn't a reason to. Not many people are buying 2.8's right now, are they?). I would have much rather AMD would have said "ok, our current process is limited and we're spending our R&D on a new architecture that proves to have incredible results" than to pretend to release 2 chips that still fall short of Intel's top chip. Anyway, just my 2 cents.

*flame clothes on....bucket of water nearby*....alright, looks good *presses continue*

Athlons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games
September 8, 2002 2:03:37 PM

Quote:
I wondered why it seemed like everyone (ESPECIALLY eden) supports matisaro when he says anything, even when it flies in the face of facts, common sense, etc.

One of the main reasons I respect Mat, is because he admits his mistakes. I respect people like that. Many times when he was proved wrong, he either apologized or admitted he was. You don't see many doing that here, espcially a certain ahem, Raystonn, who runs away when he is proved wrong. If he never admit his mistakes and just denied the proof someone lays in a debate against him, I would never have given him my respect. You can look in the OTHERS forum, practically nobody hates him.

Again please refer to what I explained about me being "his shadow" as LED put it. I am starting to be sick of this to the point that if I was a mod of this forum, and I get this thing again, I would do something about the post!

Quote:
Mat, you are an AMD fan

Maybe, maybe not, I don't care, at least he lays out his arguments and reasons each time he has a claim on AMD's side. Most AMD fans or fanboys DON'T do that, they just continue ignoring.

--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!
September 8, 2002 3:18:33 PM

Ah come on guys!! Lay off Eden. I really don't think he goes around for fun lickin Mat's shoes. They've obviously got some of the same opinions in some fields. Anyways, Mat is definitely not some AMD fanboy. He's been advocating Intel systems for anyone who wants to overclock, and AMD for people who don't want to. And that's the same with me.

Also, Mat has worked in the semi industry, so I'd think the most of the stuff he says is true. That's probably why people agree with him. He obviously knows his stuff, and since most of us haven't worked in the semi industry, I'd think he knows more than the average computer enthusiast.

Mat's a good debator. He doesn't give up easily, and while that sometimes may be seen as arguing too much, it's the way he is. When he believes something is right, no bit of posting is gonna waver his opinion, unless it's definitely wrong. He takes his stand and I respect him for that. One recent thing was the R8500 vs Ti4200 debate. He obviously had some great points, and even though I'd prefer the Ti4200 over the R8500, I took up the place of devil's advocate and debated with him against that. The points he brought up were great, and I agreed with most of them, but that doesn't mean that I'm like his shadow.

Eden has his own opinions. I respect them. I think you guys should too. I mean it doesn't mean you follow some guy if you agree with them.

BTW, my sig will now be one of Mat's quotes:

<b><i>Intel</i></b> if you overclock; <b><i>AMD</i></b> if you run stock.
September 8, 2002 3:32:27 PM

That quote is outdated. Might as well recommend the geforce2 over the Voodoo5. AMD doesnt have a chip that performs at 2.4ghz and up at stock.

This sig runs too hot.
September 8, 2002 3:41:12 PM

No cause most people don't get anything over a P4 2.26GHz/XP2000 anyways. At lower perf levels, the AXP's defintely got the p/p.

<b><i>Intel</i></b> if you overclock; <b><i>AMD</i></b> if you run stock.
September 8, 2002 4:24:02 PM

Put that in your sig too then. And I'd say a 2.4ghz that cost $195 IS what people are getting. I bought a 1.8a at $230($150 now), and OC'ed it. 2.4 @ $195 sounds like a bargain, and I'd say GREAT p/p considering the AMD is just $45 cheaper..So a 2200 for $150? or a 2.4 for $195?......Or the proc you mentioned, the 2.26, which costs $195 also......I wouldnt consider buying anything less than PR2400 at this point w/ 3ghz coming in 2 months. You're almost buying low end now when you talk about 2ghz, or 2000+. Still midrange though. I'd say that your sig doesnt really apply anymore, and it's misleading, if just for the fact that AMD doesnt have stock processors that can do what Intels can.

This sig runs too hot.
September 8, 2002 4:40:43 PM

Sure, just cause you said that, how's my new sig? :wink:

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...
September 8, 2002 5:34:30 PM

Exactly....and lets overlook the many paper-launches from Intel over the past couple years. The Intel droids are suffering from memory loss or selective memory.

I like the Pentium IV, I really do! And it's so versatile. You simply won't find a more stylish or decorative key chain ornament or paperweight.
!