Junkkyy

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2002
47
0
18,530
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
 

Junkkyy

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2002
47
0
18,530
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
 

slvr_phoenix

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
6,223
1
25,780
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>
 

Junkkyy

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2002
47
0
18,530
"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
 

Junkkyy

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2002
47
0
18,530
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
 

Victory

Distinguished
Feb 17, 2002
247
0
18,680
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:
 

shallowbaby

Distinguished
Apr 5, 2002
204
0
18,680
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>
 

Matisaro

Splendid
Mar 23, 2001
6,737
0
25,780
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:
 

LED

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2002
511
0
18,980
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.
 

Victory

Distinguished
Feb 17, 2002
247
0
18,680
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:
 

Matisaro

Splendid
Mar 23, 2001
6,737
0
25,780
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:
 

Matisaro

Splendid
Mar 23, 2001
6,737
0
25,780
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:
 

Matisaro

Splendid
Mar 23, 2001
6,737
0
25,780
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:
 

LED

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2002
511
0
18,980
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...

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.
 

nja469

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2002
632
0
18,980
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.
 

Dark_Archonis

Distinguished
Apr 20, 2002
286
0
18,780
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>
 

Victory

Distinguished
Feb 17, 2002
247
0
18,680
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:
 

LED

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2002
511
0
18,980
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.
 

Dark_Archonis

Distinguished
Apr 20, 2002
286
0
18,780
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</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>
 

LED

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2002
511
0
18,980
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.
 

eden

Champion
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!
 

eden

Champion
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!
 

Dark_Archonis

Distinguished
Apr 20, 2002
286
0
18,780
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>