Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Nail in the coffin for AMD ?

Reply
Thread Tools

Nail in the coffin for AMD ?

 
 
Puddle
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-05-2007
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...h_air_cooling/

AMD have to be very worried about how far Intel are racing ahead.

Now they are being beaten in power consumption also.

4 cores 3.79 watts idle at 4ghz 12 megs cache and the new sse4
instruction set

79 watts total when all cores are running at 100%

and it's 45% faster than AMD's fastest CPU.

I really cannot see how AMD are going to survive... They really need to
pull something out of the hat and soon...
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
thingy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2007
Puddle wrote:
> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...h_air_cooling/
>
> AMD have to be very worried about how far Intel are racing ahead.
>
> Now they are being beaten in power consumption also.
>
> 4 cores 3.79 watts idle at 4ghz 12 megs cache and the new sse4
> instruction set
>
> 79 watts total when all cores are running at 100%
>
> and it's 45% faster than AMD's fastest CPU.
>
> I really cannot see how AMD are going to survive... They really need to
> pull something out of the hat and soon...


They didnt with the new server cpus.....so i expect a fizzle....

regards

Thing
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Nighthawk
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2007
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 12:34:44 +1300, Puddle <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...h_air_cooling/
>
>AMD have to be very worried about how far Intel are racing ahead.
>
>Now they are being beaten in power consumption also.
>
>4 cores 3.79 watts idle at 4ghz 12 megs cache and the new sse4
>instruction set
>
>79 watts total when all cores are running at 100%
>
>and it's 45% faster than AMD's fastest CPU.
>
>I really cannot see how AMD are going to survive... They really need to
>pull something out of the hat and soon...


Well, they have had lots of money gained from questionable practices
in the market place to throw at it, haven't they? Look at how many
places around the world where Intel have put pressure on PC builders
and retailers not to use AMD CPUs, resulting in multiple antitrust
cases brought against them. It would be a pitty if this tactic
succeeded in bringing the demise of AMD. To say that AMD has been
hurt by these actions is a given. I sincerely hope they can hold on
until the court cases against Intel are resolved successfully. What
AMD could have done with extra development money would have been
interesting, especially moving to 45nm and ramping up their quadcore
speed and production.

Unless bragging rights are your thing, or you legitimately need the
high power, why support Intel?


 
Reply With Quote
 
Puddle
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2007
Nighthawk wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 12:34:44 +1300, Puddle <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...h_air_cooling/
>>
>> AMD have to be very worried about how far Intel are racing ahead.
>>
>> Now they are being beaten in power consumption also.
>>
>> 4 cores 3.79 watts idle at 4ghz 12 megs cache and the new sse4
>> instruction set
>>
>> 79 watts total when all cores are running at 100%
>>
>> and it's 45% faster than AMD's fastest CPU.
>>
>> I really cannot see how AMD are going to survive... They really need to
>> pull something out of the hat and soon...

>
> Well, they have had lots of money gained from questionable practices
> in the market place to throw at it, haven't they? Look at how many
> places around the world where Intel have put pressure on PC builders
> and retailers not to use AMD CPUs, resulting in multiple antitrust
> cases brought against them. It would be a pitty if this tactic
> succeeded in bringing the demise of AMD. To say that AMD has been
> hurt by these actions is a given. I sincerely hope they can hold on
> until the court cases against Intel are resolved successfully. What
> AMD could have done with extra development money would have been
> interesting, especially moving to 45nm and ramping up their quadcore
> speed and production.
>
> Unless bragging rights are your thing, or you legitimately need the
> high power, why support Intel?
>
>


Bragging rights?, heh you are way off track there, I was just admiring
the cpu really. I guess you haven't read my other posts in this group.
I have nothing to brag about when it comes to hardware (I am still on a
p4 2. and most of my past machines have been AMD. I guess you missed
my other post also saying that it would be a real shame if AMD did go
under. I don't really care what business practices Intel have used, I
was purely looking at their product which is far superior to AMD's
offerings. Whether you like their business practices or not you have to
admire the end product and we can thank AMD for Intel getting to this
stage which is why we also need AMD to stay in the game so that Intel
are forced to keep coming up with the goods.

It is not a case of whether i am supporting Intel or not, I don't care
what name is on my CPU, I support whoever makes the best CPU for me,
simple as that.

I would love to have one of these yes because I like games like Supreme
Commander that would easily chew up all of that power and then some.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Aaron Lawrence
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2007
On a pleasant day while strolling in nz.comp, a person
by the name of Puddle exclaimed:
> It is not a case of whether i am supporting Intel or not, I don't care
> what name is on my CPU, I support whoever makes the best CPU for me,
> simple as that.


Yes, agreed, that is the short term smart thing to do,
but if we all go that route and the bottom drops out of
AMDs sales, they will be gone promptly and Intel will
have a monopoly to do as they like. Worse for us all in
the longer term.

--
aaronl at consultant dot com
For every expert, there is an equal and
opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jerry
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2007
Aaron Lawrence wrote:
> On a pleasant day while strolling in nz.comp, a person
> by the name of Puddle exclaimed:
>> It is not a case of whether i am supporting Intel or not, I don't care
>> what name is on my CPU, I support whoever makes the best CPU for me,
>> simple as that.

>
> Yes, agreed, that is the short term smart thing to do,
> but if we all go that route and the bottom drops out of
> AMDs sales, they will be gone promptly and Intel will
> have a monopoly to do as they like. Worse for us all in
> the longer term.


Or to put it another way, whether you prefer Intel or AMD, we all need
AMD to keep Intel honest.

 
Reply With Quote
 
thingy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2007
Jerry wrote:
> Aaron Lawrence wrote:
>> On a pleasant day while strolling in nz.comp, a person by the name of
>> Puddle exclaimed:
>>> It is not a case of whether i am supporting Intel or not, I don't
>>> care what name is on my CPU, I support whoever makes the best CPU for
>>> me, simple as that.

>>
>> Yes, agreed, that is the short term smart thing to do, but if we all
>> go that route and the bottom drops out of AMDs sales, they will be
>> gone promptly and Intel will have a monopoly to do as they like. Worse
>> for us all in the longer term.

>
> Or to put it another way, whether you prefer Intel or AMD, we all need
> AMD to keep Intel honest.
>


hence why I now have 2 AMD boxes....however, for my "dream machine" as
it stands today I would be silly to by AMD as Intel is going to do a
better job of running games....

regards

thing
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2007
In message <4730b615$(E-Mail Removed)>, Jerry wrote:

> ... whether you prefer Intel or AMD, we all need AMD to keep Intel honest.


I guess I haven't really got a strong preference either way. My first x86
box was Intel, because I wanted to be conservative--this was my first Linux
box, so I wanted to be sure everything would work. For my second one, I
decided to go a bit more bleeding-edge, including running full 64-bit.
Since AMD were the 64-bit pioneers, I went AMD.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Hank
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2007
>
> Or to put it another way, whether you prefer Intel or AMD, we all need
> AMD to keep Intel honest.


That may be true but why should I spend my money on an inferior
product just to prop a company up that can't compete? Im no Intel
fanboy and all my past machines have been AMD, even when AMD used to
lag behind Intel in the early days but now the performace gap is huge
and my next PC will have an Intel Quad in it full stop. If AMD can't
sort their **** out its not my problem as they obiviously dont have
what it takes to be a CPU manufacturer anymore.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Nighthawk
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2007
On 7 Nov 2007 03:14:00 -0800, Hank <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>
>> Or to put it another way, whether you prefer Intel or AMD, we all need
>> AMD to keep Intel honest.

>
>That may be true but why should I spend my money on an inferior
>product just to prop a company up that can't compete? Im no Intel
>fanboy and all my past machines have been AMD, even when AMD used to
>lag behind Intel in the early days but now the performace gap is huge
>and my next PC will have an Intel Quad in it full stop. If AMD can't
>sort their **** out its not my problem as they obiviously dont have
>what it takes to be a CPU manufacturer anymore.


You must have deep pockets. What OS utilises a quad-core anyway?

Why don't you google 'AMD Intel antitrust' ? It isn't about AMD
'can't sort their **** out', as you put it, it is about AMD having
been damaged by Intel's illegal marketing ploys. Intel have used
their position of being the dominant CPU maker to illegally put
pressure on computer builders not to use AMD CPUs, either by paying
them millions or directly threatening them. Even when AMD were
producing the highest performance CPUs they weren't able to capitalise
on it, unable to gain market share on the strength of their superior
CPUs. This has cost them hundreds of millions (some say billions)
over the years, monies that could have made a big difference with the
development of their CPUs.

The case goes to court in 2008.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/cont..._Complaint.pdf

Download the PDF for full details of AMD's case.

Antitrust actions have also been taken against Intel by Germany,
Japan, Sth Korea and the EU.

It is highly believed that AMD will win its case against Intel. It is
much simpler than a Microsoft antitrust case as there is no IP
complications. Indeed, AMD have had successes already:
http://www.geek.com/amd-moves-one-st...trust-victory/

AMD does have what it takes to be a CPU manufacturer. There was a
time when Intel made the fastest CPUs but AMD did well in the low to
mid range. Not everyone wants the fastest CPU, mostly gameboys. AMD
still make very good mid range CPUs. It is only with the latest range
of CPUs that Intel have overtaken AMD. This is not likely to be
permanent.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is Desktop Linux the final nail in the coffin for vista (expee sp3) Crap? 7 Computer Support 19 09-19-2010 08:18 PM
One more nail in the coffin... Kinon O'Cann Digital Photography 7 06-01-2007 03:22 PM
compuer nail printer nail art painting Nail Art Printer Computer Salon Digital Paint MUST HAVE arcade Computer Information 1 11-30-2006 04:11 PM
compuer nail printer nail art painting Nail Art Printer Computer Salon Digital Paint MUST HAVE arcade Computer Information 0 11-30-2006 02:40 PM
Another nail in film coffin Paul Heslop Digital Photography 9 08-11-2005 07:59 PM



Advertisments