Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Bye Bye Clawhammer... - Page 2

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 20, 2002 12:11:14 AM

Yeah, just like nVidia (hopefully) isn't gonna make a crap competitor to R9700, I'm sure Intel won't let Hammer totally crush them.

Spuddy made a good point. Intel's been having lots of trouble getting market share in the high-end server market, cause there's more companies that are more firmly rooted there like IBM and Sun Micro. I'm sure AMD isn't gonna just be able to waltz in and grab loads of market share.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...
October 20, 2002 12:14:44 AM

Why, I mean nobody except enthusiasts know AMD!
There's so little of an image in the public for them, that they can enter just like a new CPU manu could!

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne
October 20, 2002 12:19:20 AM

I realize that, but Intel's entry had an extremly sucky CPU (just look at the I1 benches vs I2) with so little to justify getting one. Not only this but their unique architecture left many who were either transitioning from 32-bit to 64-bit or looking for low cost alternatives but with a core architecture that they were familiar coding to.
AMD is still on x86 and x86-64 can easily attract those who still are on that architecture.

Quote:
The biggest baddest CPU manufacture in the world isnt going to notice a bad ass CPU like this and will most likely have something to deal with it.

Please try to make your phrases a bit more understandable.

And also, Prescott has nothing to do with the server market dude. If AMD gets back to the desktop, they arguably KNOW there is Prescott and competition. The only way to come back striking is to have:
1)Lots of money from the server market success.
2)Put that money into R&D for an evolved K8 or even K9 (The AMD Bulldog!!!......................sorry for the pun)
3)Devlopped and readied 0.09m chips or getting ready for them soon.
4) OPTIONAL: Prepared to advertise on TV

Num 1 to 3 need to be achieved if they are to ever imagine having a desktop competition CPU, when compared to Prescott and Tejas.

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne
Related resources
October 20, 2002 12:26:59 AM

One problem is, this plan revolves around that they make money in the server market. Now what if they were to lose money there? So they'd be losing money in the sever market and not have a position in the desktop market.

I know this is absolute worst outcome possible, but AMD isn't in a great position now either.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...
October 20, 2002 12:31:55 AM

Intel is more than ready, they are already competing in a crusher way. They have loads of technologies and chips in dev, that they can use and rush in to kill the competition. Just a few:
1)Tri-Gate transistor
2)SOI
3)0.09m technology featuring strained silicon

This is why AMD cannot keep up, rather they need to halt, take a break from there, gather some money and develop something that can SCALE, RUN COOLER, PERFORM, and has future potential like the P4 who can still go 3.3 times its current speeds AND expand its execution units and components for more IPC!

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne
October 20, 2002 12:34:12 AM

They haven't even started the server market, and even if they do, what do they have to lose if they haven't started producing and fulfilling demands?
I make a chocolate bar ready to sell, and I used my bank money, I am not in the red. I go into the chocolate market, exactly what will I lose money if I already have the bars ready to be sold? I can wait a long time and be able to sell anytime, and not lose. Get what I mean?

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne
October 20, 2002 1:04:27 AM

AMD is in big do-do. When the Barton is finally available (if), they will be competing against Intel P4s with hyperthreading and dual DDR boards. I don't think AMD is going to catch up on the performance end for a long while on the desktop, mobile, server?? Even the cheaper older Northwood P4's smack the XP's around and killing the price on the XPs as well. Intel long term plans and implementation has been much better as time tells. AMD sells 500 million worth but loses 250 million for the quarter! How long can AMD survive like that?
October 20, 2002 12:19:48 PM

Yeah, I understand what you mean, (playing devil's advocate here k?) but AMD spent a lot of R&D money on Hammer and if they don't succeed in the server area, and can't get back into the desktop area, aren't they gonna be screwed even worse than they are now?

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...
October 20, 2002 1:16:02 PM

Obviously, which is why they have opted to try a new way, since the Desktop aim is almost 90% guaranteed to doom them!
The odds have fallen against them because of constant delays and Intel launching and discovering new technologies.
I first thoughts them ducking the CH and desktop market in favor of the server was bad, but when I think about it, it will at least allow them to chill somewhere else, where Intel won't try to squash them, where competition is not something where we see each few weeks, a new system.
This seems to be the only alternative which has a 50/50 chance of success IMO, while the desktop is 10/90.

PS: If you're the devil's advocate, who am I, God's advocate? AMD isn't god! :wink:

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne
October 20, 2002 1:19:29 PM

Hmmmmm

Instresting topic..I feel i must add my 2 cents worth (Or Pence as im in UK.)

Ok its looks like AMD wont b able to reclaim there crown for a while.. (A bit like Nvidia)
But when its comes to pricing and performance intel have got a long way to claim that crown.

E.G: A intel 2.5 chip is nearly over 100 pounds more then a AMD XP2600. Both Compariable chips.

Your average person just wants a decent PC set up.
If the stats are true then the average CPU is a 700 - 900 processor. :-p

So in my opinion the die hard overclockers will go with the P4's and the people who just want a good but not the fastest sys will stick with the better priced AMD.

Of course im stating UK prices...if in US the P4 is simliarly priced to the AMD then please disregard this post. :-)
October 20, 2002 1:24:57 PM

You can't get a XP2600+ yet (IIRC) and a P4 2.53GHz is <$240. An OEM XP2600+ is $300+

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...
October 20, 2002 2:51:11 PM

Oops yeah ur right meant the Intel 2.66 which is 340 pounds
And Komplett have the XP2600 (Pre order for Mid November)for 240 pounds.

The intel 2.66 and XP2600 are compariable right....??
October 20, 2002 4:18:02 PM

No, not really. The P4 2.53 beats the XP2600+ in many (if not most) apps. The P4 2.66B is above the XP2600+ by a bit.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...
October 20, 2002 6:15:05 PM

In trays of 1k:

P4 2.80 = US$508 / XP 2800 = $397
P4 2.66 = $401 / XP 2700 = $349
P4 2.53 = $253 / XP 2600 = $297
P4 2.40 = $193 / XP 2400 = $193

Nov/Dec should see the release of a D stepping P4 @ 3.06 which will cause the intel chips to drop a "rung" on the "price ladder" (ie: 3.06=$500, 2.80=$400, 2.66=$250, 2.53=$200. There are rumors that intel will keep making P4 1.8 chips (most of which will easily o/c to 2.7Ghz+) and sell them for $60 to really put the pressure on AMD.
_____

re: "Your average person just wants a decent PC set up.
If the stats are true then the average CPU is a 700 - 900 processor."

Very true. We still purchase Celery-1200s on i810 based Dells in the office. More then fast enough for Word/Excell/IE/Outlook/ACT/QuickBooks/etc.

- JW
October 20, 2002 7:08:52 PM

Intel is gonna put pressure on a company who can't continue competing?
Even if they put it 60$, I can rest knowing AMD is aware of what Intel is trying to do, and that they decided to shift their axes on another market. Chances are they will be safer than what Intel is doing now, which seems to be breaking the competition to bits, and paving the way to monopolistic positions. I am "sure" that's what they want, yeah... (that was sarcasm for those who didn't know)

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne
October 20, 2002 9:01:22 PM

DOH

U guys have messed up my plans for my Dream Machine im building next month.

Its was gonna be MSI 6590 KT4 Ultra/AMD 2600+/Corsair Platinum Series XMS3200 256MB/WD 80GB 7200 8MB Cache

But if the P4 is gonna drop and is gonna be same price as AMD.... HMMMMMM
Really Undecided
Help...................!
October 20, 2002 9:18:29 PM

Actually, your supposition makes some good sense Eden. If AMD gets one tier 1 server maker (SUN, for instance), they might be able to sel al the Hammer chips they can make in Q1. Now, if I was AMD, and pricing for Claw was planned at around $3-400 per chip, but Opteron pricing was planned at 600-1000 per chip, I'd plan to make Opterons! While it might cost more to produce Opterons, the much higher selling prce they generate would realy be much more useful in my coffers.

Think about it this way:

Take my lw estimate price for Claw and Opteron and multiply that by the estimated 100k chips in Q1.

Claw, at 300 would generate 30 million in revenue.
Opteron would generate 60 million in revenue.

Assuming AMD sold 6 million Athlon XP's in Q1 @ $65 each and 200 million in flash, their bottom line would be around 650 million. That's much better than 620 million. Still not enough to break even, but it would be 30 million more to the bottom line with next to no additional cost associated with it.

The additional time refining Hammer production might also mean improved yields and, hopefully, better/higher binsplits, with perhaps an intro closer to PR3600 rather than 3400.

Mark-

<font color=blue>When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!</font color=blue>
October 20, 2002 9:48:22 PM

Thanks for also trying to see the bright side of it here.
Fact is, even if CH came out now, it'd not provide much. Opteron MIGHT, but even those Spec benches to me leave something to be desired. It really needs to scale, but it most needs to have a significant over 50% advantage over high end P4 Xeons, for AMD to release them.

I recall SUN had some ties with AMD for their server chips, remember? What happened to that? If they can start with SUN, their name will widen its reputation, not to mention SUN purchasing many chips, then other companies will know it has some importance and will create demand. The server market isn't as filled with chips monthly like the OEMs demand, so the supplies by AMD should be adequate, not sub-par. That alone can let them generate SOME kind of profit. This will require a lot of patience though, hence why I said to forget the AMD name in the forefront, just know they are out there, but try not to emphacize on them and the desktop world.
Of course if Opteron has killer performance, who's to stop home users from paying the extra buck over P4s to run them at home? They might still have some true value!

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne
October 20, 2002 11:17:29 PM

1) Tri gate is Intel big guy <A HREF="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/2002091..." target="_new"> Here </A>
2)SOI is a global semi-conductor technology not just AMD's
3)Again a global semi-conductor technology

Your dreaming is starting to get annoying AMD isn’t going to come into the server market and be a huge hit. They have a Image and that image is second rate. Like the statement "no one gets fired for buying a Intel server" that is very literal.

AMD isn’t in the position either they don’t have the resources to supply a large OEM demands. They don’t have the image either. I have no doubt the CPU will be good, but I do have my doubts on its initial introductory success.

-Jeremy


<font color=blue>Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood blue man </font color=blue> :smile:
October 20, 2002 11:26:29 PM

I think 50% performance advantage to be a contender sounds kinda pessimistic. IMO, Opteron only needs to show 10-20% performance advantage AND the stability to go with it in order to be a contender. If AMD HAD to produce a CPU 50% better than anything Intel made in order to *compete* then you essentially would be dooming the chip to failure before it rolls out the gate.

While I agree thst AMD is in the midst of economic troubles as wel as unaccounted for delays, but harken back to the months before Athlon. Back then doomsayer analysts were suggesting AMD would run out of cash 3-6 months before Athlon would roll out the gates, other enthusiast sites were mixed on performance, at best and other negative things. Back then AMD was in significantly worse financial shape than they are in now from what I can tell AND Hammer looks to be a contender on almost all fronts. While it took Athlon 2 years to be ready for notebooks and servers, Hammer in various incarnations will be available for all three before the end of next year.

Mark-

<font color=blue>When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!</font color=blue>
October 21, 2002 7:32:47 AM

You know I rather see amd take there time and make the Chip Right. Then do the Mess up Intel did with the P3 1.13mhz.
October 21, 2002 11:30:46 AM

I think they'll need at <b>least</b> a 20% performance advantage today, because tomorrow, by the time AMD gets the chips out the door, intel will be 20% faster themselves. If AMD wants to be 20% faster in 6~8 months, they'd better be 50% faster today.

Nov/Dec will usher in the 533FSB Xeons (Prestonia B) with the E7507 (Placer) chipset. By March they will be available in 3.06~3.2 speeds.

- JW
October 21, 2002 11:57:26 AM

Now here is where I don't agree with you. Given that Hammer is more scalable than Athl.on (according to AMD) andalso that AMD is continuing to refine the chip and production process FOR it, Hammer will continue to improve performance-wise. So, if they are 20% faster than the fastest Intel X86 CPU now (they are according to the SPEC benches) they wil likely continue to be that much faster when the chip actually starts shipping.

Continuing in this vein, if Opteron is clocking at around 2Ghz, I have to suspect that Claw (Athlon K8) is clocking around 20-25% faster. AMD stated earlier this year that the desktop K8 would be at least as fast clockspeed-wise as the fastest released K7 at time of release. K7 will be running at around 2.4-2.5Ghz by the time desktop K8 ships next year, so I expect K8 to launch at around 2.5Ghz as well.

Claw will NOT perform as well as Opteron clock for clock. It will probably perform about 10% or so lower. However, Claw should be clocked around 10-20% higher, so that should help make up for the performance difference. So, Claw will likely debut at a higher PR, OR AMD may just hold off on releasing the higher speed grades until they have sufficient supply.

Lots of possibilities.

Mark-



<font color=blue>When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!</font color=blue>
October 21, 2002 7:59:43 PM

Quote:
1) Tri gate is Intel big guy Here
2)SOI is a global semi-conductor technology not just AMD's
3)Again a global semi-conductor technology

Your dreaming is starting to get annoying AMD isn’t going to come into the server market and be a huge hit. They have a Image and that image is second rate. Like the statement "no one gets fired for buying a Intel server" that is very literal.

Just what the hell are you trying to quote me about or replying me for?!
Spud I'd forgive you if you were drunk when you wrote this, but you are truly starting to be annoying with your erroneus syntax, lack of punctuation and simply no relation to what we say.
I stated 3 facts that Intel owns, and CAN use them at a speed to crush the competition. 0.09m is almost perfected, as we've been told, TriGate requires no new tools to the fab, therefore they can forget 2005 and go for it NOW. They have SOI predicted for 2005 as well, but they can just throw a billion for R&D and perfect it now while AMD is still trying to. I wasn't even stating facts FOR AMD, how the hell you thought I was is beyond me, but you are a biased symbol of Intel.

I did not even state that AMD would be succesful for sure. I said this was a THEORY, a SUPPOSITION, that if Hammer delivers, they MIGHT get what they want. SUN was reported to be working with AMD to supply some low-end server purpose Opterons. But it doesn't matter, my point is that AMD has done the right thing trying a different approach, they definitly CANNOT win or compete anymore if they have delayed CH for 2H 2003. Rather, at least trying to halt the competition, tell Intel "You do what you want, I'm outta here for now man", and go try something new, the server world. Some had complimented the excellent use Opteron could have for web servers due to its integer power, well there, here's a beginning.

Once more, where did you grab from me the idea that they want to supply OEMs?
Jesus Spud, try to quote me right at least. Dell may be an OEM for the server market, but they're not the only people out there to supply complete server PCs! And the server market as stated is not as contingent as the desktop OEM market, you don't just supply a million PCs to companies, ya know? In the desktop world, you're supplying to ONE person's paid money, in the server world a company pays for the whole.


--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2002 8:46:38 PM

Quote:
AMD isn’t in the position either they don’t have the resources to supply a large OEM demands. They don’t have the image either


Funny.. <A HREF="http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2002/co..." target="_new"> seems they just sold between 10 and 16 thousand Opterons to Cray.</A>

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
October 21, 2002 8:51:20 PM

Lol, talk about irony.

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne
October 22, 2002 12:17:59 AM

I wish AMD would clear up the names of these things.

As I understand it they are designing three chips:
Clawhammer = Basic K8
Opteron = K8 DP (dual processor - 1 or 2 processor system)
Sledgehammer = K8 MP (multi processor - 3+ processor system)
________________________________

Why do you think Clawhammer will not perform as well as Opteron clock for clock?

It's my understanding that Opterons are the same core "certified" to run in SMP - Clawhammer/Opteron = XP/MP. They are supposed to start at 3400+ and work up to 4400+ by the end of the year (2003).

Sledgehammer will be have a 1024k L2 with a 128bit DDR memory bridge and is set to debut at a rating of 4000+.

Unless I have the names mixed up and what I'm calling Slegehammer is what we're talking about.

- JW
October 22, 2002 1:38:04 AM

There are only two cores, but two marketted names.
ClawHammer is the basic new K8 core with all the addition known so far. Expected IPC, 35% based on estimation of current Spec Benches for Sledge.
Sledge extends with 1MB cache, Dual Channel DDR and MP support. Expected IPC, give or take the Spec benches, 50% higher than current AthlonXPs with Palomino core design.
Athlon DT is the name for Claws at 1-2 cores, and Sledges at 1-2 core max.
Opteron is the name for Claw with over 4-way capabilities while for Sledge it is for the full 8-way support. I am mixed in the Opterons since I thought CH was not supposed to have over 4 way CPU support, but I could be wrong, though that would pose a profit problem, since they will cost about twice less, and have about 20% less IPC, thus some companies may not look at Sledge with a big smile.

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
October 22, 2002 9:10:12 AM

Are you sure ? this is not how I understood it.
I though something like:
Athlon "DT" = clawhammer (256Kb cache, 1 memory controller, single cpu operation, 2 (?) HT links)
Opteron DP = clawhammer (256 or 512 Kb cache, 1 mem controller, dual cpu capable 2 (?) HT links)
Opteron MP = sledgehammer (1 Mb cache, 2 mem controllers, glueless quad cpu support, 3 HT links)

I could be wrong though...

>I am mixed in the Opterons since I thought CH was not
>supposed to have over 4 way CPU support, but I could be
>wrong,

You are wrong; well, you forgot the word "glueless"; since Opteron has three HT links, it can support 4-way SMP without any external logic. But nothing stops you from creating a HT switch, and scale well beyond 32 way. Heck, Cray's Red Storm will use well over 10.000 Opterons, connected by a 3 dimensional HT mesh. This is in no way comparable to traditional beowolf clusters, and is a very strong testimonial of the flexibility and power of the hypertransport architecture. Its really like using lego blocks...

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
October 22, 2002 6:47:51 PM

Quote:
Just what the hell are you trying to quote me about or replying me for?!

.
Hmm good question I cant find what I quoted you for. I never got drunk either so I got no idea wtf happened there. Sorry ill try to "NOT" do that again.

Quote:
but you are truly starting to be annoying with your erroneus syntax, lack of punctuation and simply no relation to what we say

Come on there Eden be nice will ya I all frustrated as it is trying to find out what I quoted from. I really don’t need you pointing out my poor English I'm sure it makes you feel real good to point that out but Ill remind you this is a open forum It's hardly a issues (in my opinion) to have perfect syntax, grammar and sentence structure. But whatever can’t win em all I guess.

Now for the record what I quoted there where ever I originally got it from what I perceived you quoting as AMD technology. Now since I cant find the quote that I quoted you from originally I simply will say I had a memory lapse and could be going crazy.

Quote:
Once more, where did you grab from me the idea that they want to supply OEMs?

OEM's are a huge chunk of revenue for any given CPU manufacturer.

-Jeremy


<font color=blue>Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood blue man </font color=blue> :smile:
October 22, 2002 7:43:28 PM

I wasn't trying to imply about poor grammar or such, for me it does not annoy me when someone has poor english, it's simply the way you reply to people in a run-on way, which OFTEN changes the whole meaning of your phrase, and I'd imagine you meant something you didn't mean. That's what annoyed me.

As for OEMs, I don't doubt what you said, but I replied to you on that because you seemed to infer I SAID that they will supply OEMs mainly and largely. I simply said the server market is much less dependant on huge supplies the OEM market would need for the Desktop sector, and that is undeniable, until further proof to correct me.

--
"Let Go." -Avril Lavigne<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 10/22/02 03:44 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
October 26, 2002 9:44:49 PM

Well,

Prescott to run at 5Ghz
Madison to run 30%~50% faster then Itanium II

- JW
      • 1
      • 2 / 2
!