Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AMD Challenges P4 With 1.33Ghz

timothy posted more than 13 years ago | from the yes-sir-it's-fast----it's-named-after-an-indian-legend! dept.

AMD 228

ravedaddy writes: "AMD is again upping the ante in the processor war with two new high-performance products: the Athlon 1.33GHz, designed to operate on the 133MHz DDR EV6 bus, and the Athlon 1.3GHz, which runs on the 100MHz DDR bus. There are a couple of reviews pitting the 1.33 Athlon versus the Pentium 4 1.3 and 1.5GHz at Sharky's and at Hardware Central." I'm still happy with last-year's Athlon -- does anyone harbor any lingering thoughts that AMD is a second-class citizen in the chipmaking world?

cancel ×

228 comments

AMD is VERY GOOD, but.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#346639)

The problem is while it is a fince commmercial processor, it's major weakness is corporations. The reason companies such as the one I work for doesn't buy AMD chips (which I feel are far better for the price than Intel) is because the chips are not certified with certain corporate software packages, such as some CAD programs like PRO/E.

If AMD would get such certifications, the business world would take AMD more seriously. And with corporate money comes money for advertising to make them even bigger in the private sector than they already are.

AMD rocks. (2)

Wakko Warner (324) | more than 13 years ago | (#346640)

Who else can sell you a $40 CPU (Duron 600) that you can overclock to a gigahertz?

- A.P.

--
* CmdrTaco is an idiot.

Blue man group sucks. (2)

Wakko Warner (324) | more than 13 years ago | (#346641)

And the funny part is, they use Macs in their stage shows.

Anyway, Intel can show us as many stupid-ass commercials as they want -- it doesn't matter when they're losing marketshare to AMD at an alarming rate. Intel recently issued profit warnings. AMD reported record profits last quarter. So go figure... maybe advertising isn't everything.

- A.P.

--
* CmdrTaco is an idiot.

Re:Practical Reasoning (1)

Bill Currie (487) | more than 13 years ago | (#346642)

What would be an interesting review would be: Athlon 1333-DDR against a Celeron 450 (overclocked) against a K6-2-550.
Or even more impressive: going from a 386-33 to a 486-66 (4x was nice:) to a dual celeron 300 (now 450:). That last jump just knocked my socks off. A 40+x speedup is just phenomenomly fast. Even after two years, I consider my box fast (though the G200 is sloing its slug heritage). Everything is relative. I still remember doing cpu intensive things on an 8M V20(?). Now? Well, SMP or nothing :)

/me drools over the though of dual (or more:) 1.3G cpus.

Bill - aka taniwha
--

Re:Practical spending. (1)

Defiler (1693) | more than 13 years ago | (#346644)

Try encoding an MPEG4 clip on that 800MHz CPU, then on the 1.33GHz CPU. Report back, and explain that you were wrong.

Another shot in the MHz war (1)

Imabug (2259) | more than 13 years ago | (#346645)

With this latest shot in the MHz war, I often find myself wondering if there's some other way to increase processing power other than cranking up the clock frequency. RISC systems offer reasonably comparable computing power for usually less than half the clock frequency of Intel/AMD chips (look at Sun's UltraSPARC chips now). Are there other ways of getting the same horsepower for lower speeds?

It would seem off hand that an immediate benefit of this would be lower power requirements and significantly less cooling needs. OC'ers routinely chill their CPUs to get to even higher speeds, but at this rate how soon will it be before CPU chilling becomes standard or required?

stop the madness!!!
:)

Re:2 worst reviews (1)

Faceprint (2612) | more than 13 years ago | (#346646)

don't forget Tom;s Hardware [tomshardware.com]

Re:Heat Issues! (1)

cdipierr (4045) | more than 13 years ago | (#346648)

Or you could put a heatsync & fan on the thing for $10 and be done with it.

Seriously, I'm sick of this type of AMD bashing. Yes if you run the chip w/o proper cooling it'll die, but on the other hand, if you run it /w proper cooling, it works great.

Case in point. I built a system for a friend on a Duron 750. Got the generic $9 cooling fan solution and some thermal paste. Pasted it up good, put the heatsync & fan on, booted it up and all is fine. Even after running for hours doing 100% CPU load, it won't get hotter than about 100 degrees F ... that's pretty good if you ask me.

Yeah yeah. (3)

Uruk (4907) | more than 13 years ago | (#346649)

OK great. A newer, faster processor.

What I want to know is when we're going to get motherboards with IO buses and IO devices that can DEAL with a processor running this fast.

Let's face it. You can attach a 40 million gallon per hour water pump to a straw. But that doesn't make it any better than a 30 million gallon per hour water pump because of other limiting factors.

I do! (1)

rho (6063) | more than 13 years ago | (#346651)

does anyone harbor any lingering thoughts that AMD is a second-class citizen in the chipmaking world?

AMD doesn't have the very cool Blue Man Group [blueman.com] shilling for 'em.
"Beware by whom you are called sane."

Re:I do! (1)

rho (6063) | more than 13 years ago | (#346652)

Actually, I'd pay good money to see Bob Young dangled from a rope, splattered with paint and flung against a canvas.
"Beware by whom you are called sane."

Re:I do! (1)

rho (6063) | more than 13 years ago | (#346653)

Nah. Bob Young might actually do it. Larry Ellison never would. (I have invested in Oracle).
"Beware by whom you are called sane."

Fighting the brand name bozo's (3)

ch-chuck (9622) | more than 13 years ago | (#346657)

The last 5 or 6 upgrds I've smuggled into here have all been very affordable 800Mhz T-birds - as long as I NEVER mention that they're NOT Intel the users are VERY happy and they don't start quaking with fear, uncertainty and doubt. Ditto with the Linux mail server. Guerrila IT works if you can expunge the mktng bozo's and all the hypnotized suits under their command.

Re:AMD is releasing a highly adaptable bus (3)

Christopher Thomas (11717) | more than 13 years ago | (#346658)

Guess what? AMD is beating Intel there too. Intel is trying to bait users with more performance but added vendorlock. AMD convinced API, one of the leading Alpha system producers to use their bus. Why? Intel uses a 1-bit high frequency bus, AMD uses a slightly lower frequency variable width bus which gets you 8-bit,16-bit,32-bit, and I believe 64bit and 128-bit are possible with some tweaking.

Um, you seem to be missing a few points:

  • RamBus is 16-bit, not 1-bit.
  • Intel chips are perfectly capable of using SDRAM. It's the motherboard chipset that decides which is used, not the CPU.
  • The limiting factor for total CPU-to-memory and -to-system bandwidth for both Intel and AMD chips is the front-side bus - its bandwidth, and protocol.


The main thing that affects a system's I/O and memory performance is the motherboard architecture and memory architecture. Chip architecture is secondary.

The main impact of chip architecture is, as mentioned, the communication point between the chip and the motherboard chipset. This has no relation to the RAM type.

In summary, about two thirds of your post was based on incorrect information.

Is it just me (1)

Ravenscall (12240) | more than 13 years ago | (#346662)

Or wasn't this announced a few weeks ago?

The benchmarks are nice though

Usual Suspects (2)

Chris Pimlott (16212) | more than 13 years ago | (#346664)

Don't forget my fave, AnandTech [anandtech.com] . Lots of people like Tom's Hardware [tomshardware.com] as well.

second class? yep. (1)

novarese (24280) | more than 13 years ago | (#346666)

does anyone harbor any lingering thoughts that AMD is a second-class citizen in the chipmaking world?

I assume you're comparing them to Intel. I would offer that Intel is *also* a second-class citizen in the chipmaking world, given that their current batch of CPUs still boot into real mode.

In any case, I don't think AMD is even close to the level of sophistication of Intel; anyone who does think so has a very narrow view of the industry. Sure, AMD makes a better x86 FPU than Intel, but they still haven't shipped a chipset to run dually athlons, and they don't do nearly as much experimental research - they're really just focused on imitating rather than innovating. Intel is about to (finally) roll out a completely new architechture with IA-64, while AMD is simply coming up with a 64-bit extension to the IA-32 architechture.

I'm no Intel fan, and personally I think the Athlon is a better chip than the Pentium III/IV, but AMD is no Intel.

Re:Mainboard support another story (1)

everyone (37129) | more than 13 years ago | (#346675)

What do people do to their AMD systems to make them unstable? My 1GHz Thunderbird has only been restarted a single time since the day I got it. And that was 17 days ago, during a power outage that lasted slightly longer than my UPS. I have had AMD systems for years and none of them had even the slightest hint of a problem with stability.

Maybe I've just been lucky... ;-)

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (1)

Tower (37395) | more than 13 years ago | (#346676)

OnStar gets mentioned in a lot of car and car rental commercials...

SAP has several wonderfully boring commercials, but they are fairly frequent.

BASF... about three or four years now, the whole "We don't make the things you buy..." routine...

All of these are featured prominently on CBS/NBC/ABC/ESPN/CNN and any other news related timeframe, or any type of show aimed more at adults than children (like "When MIR Attacks!!!" on Fox)...

Of course, you'll never see these if all you watch is Cartoon Central for Anime or Cow and Chicken...
--

Re:Practical spending. (1)

ncc74656 (45571) | more than 13 years ago | (#346680)

Is there anything being done to keep the efficiency of software moving along just as fast as the hardware? You'd think that 300 MHz should really mean something. I remember having a 25MHz machine and thinking that there'd NEVER be a 200MHz computer made for years, but when it was, it'd be amazing. I was sorely disapointed, not because it didn't show up, but when it did, it the software for that day and age didn't run any better than the software for my old 386.

It depends on whose software you're running. I remember kernel compiles taking the better part of an hour when I was running a 386SX-25 with 4MB RAM and 120MB of 3600-rpm disk, and that was for pre-1.0 kernels with just the QIC-02 driver added in. The system on which I run Linux now is a K6-III-450 with 256MB RAM and 10GB of 5400-rpm disk, and kernel compiles take just a few minutes with support for multi-protocol networking (NFS, SMB, and AppleTalk), sound, SCSI, and other stuff. If I ran it on the 1.0GHz Athlon I built a couple of weeks ago (with 256MB DDR and 45GB of 7200-rpm disk), it'd be faster still. Win98 is more responsive on the faster hardware, at least. Still, I don't doubt that there is less attention paid to efficiency and more attention paid to piling on features in today's software that most people will never use.

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (2)

Dr.Evil (47264) | more than 13 years ago | (#346682)

It's a sad but true fact of life that in the world of consumer goods, brand image is crucial to growing market share, because in fact most people do care about brand names. The way advertising drives demand, you at some point have to work at establishing brand consciousness in the public at large. Why do you think companies like OnStar, BASF, and SAP spend money advertising the way they do? They never sell directly to the end consumer, but they work at making their brands household words nonetheless.

It's about creating a perception that you're the only game in town - that's why intel spends so much on their advertising - specifically to drown out AMD. AMD's best bet for wooing away Dell and the other business-machine providers (where the real money in PC sales comes from), is to get buyers asking Dell, "Why don't you sell AMD machines?" The best way to do that is through aggressive advertising. The fact that AMD has the superior product should only make that job easier.

Faster chips are great, but... (3)

Dr.Evil (47264) | more than 13 years ago | (#346683)

What AMD really needs is mindshare. When was the last time you saw an AMD commercial on TV? Compare that with the Blue Man Group ads for the Pentium 4 that intel runs just about every hour on every channel. AMD can't get OEM agreements with the big PC manufacturers - did it ever occur to them that it might be because Joe Consumer doesn't ask Gateway or Compaq about the latest Athlon machines?

OEMs are never going to worry about building AMD-based machines when there's no market demand. AMD has to make the public believe it's a serious competitor before the OEMs will believe it. I want very much to see AMD succeed and make the Athlon the top chip for x86 machines - but they have to know how to drive demand.

Intel "Innovation" != Good Thing (2)

Amoeba (55277) | more than 13 years ago | (#346686)

I don't know if I think of AMD as a second class CPU maker/distributor, but I still hold Intel in a higher regard simply because they tend to offer more in the way of innovation.

Is it "innovation" or "let's add stuff to lock more people into our products!"?

Take a look at Itanium (or their IA-64 instruction set) vs. AMD's Sledgehammer core-- IA-64 is just another operating environment, like Protected Mode was to Real Mode, except that IA-64 processors start out in IA-64 mode instead of having to switch modes after being reset. Sledgehammer, AFAIK, is just new instructions without a new operating mode. IA-64 introduces a HUGE number of general purpose CPU registers (no more EAX, EBX, ECX, EDX, EDI, ESI limitations!) while (from an admittedly brief review) AMD adds a total of 8 general purpose registers.

So Intel has added as of yet unused and so far unnecessary registers to a new operating mode which can (will?) potentially lock consumers into their products as software gets written to take advantage of said (dubious and patented) innovations?

While AMD has simply taken an existing operating mode, added a few general purpose and non-proprietary registers, and improved the overall design and performance of a tried-and-true architecture with known quantitative qualities?

Do I need to bring up the higher monetary entry point in the marketplace for those "innovations"? Why pay extra for something that isn't fully utilized when I can purchase a similar product, which performs just as well (if not better) for much less?

Somehow this doesn't seem to be "innovation" to me. It reminds me somewhat of how the Japanese do little that is truly "new" in the gestalt sense but instead rely on tweaking existing technologies to bring out their full potential. And last time I checked they 0wn3d many major markets which were invented and developed elsewhere (VCR anyone?) by approaching the market in such a manner.

Of course, I'm probably just an idiot.

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (2)

glitch! (57276) | more than 13 years ago | (#346687)

Why do you think companies like OnStar, BASF, and SAP spend money advertising the way they do?

OnStar? Never heard of them. SAP? Never heard of them. BASF? Sure, about 20+ years ago, I had some of their open reel tapes. Now they are probably making cassettes.

If these guys are spending money on PR, I don't think they are getting their money's worth! As far as I know, BASF probably stands for something like BayerischeAktiengesellschaftScheissFabrik...
(I told you their PR isn't working...)

Re:Does it have the chip ID number? (1)

questionlp (58365) | more than 13 years ago | (#346689)

Intel has dropped the processor UID from the Pentium 4 and the cC0 revision of the Pentium III processors. AFAIK, AMD processors have never had such a UID that could be used like that one Intel implemented.

Re:Still second class... (1)

questionlp (58365) | more than 13 years ago | (#346690)

But then you have a lot of people who do (I don't... I'd rather get an Alpha over anything right now) and with that kind of FUD, a lot of people are going to think that AMD is a POS company.

Re:Coke or Pepsi (1)

questionlp (58365) | more than 13 years ago | (#346691)

Or Jolt for us Alpha/SPARC nuts? Hehehe :)

Re:Another shot in the MHz war (1)

questionlp (58365) | more than 13 years ago | (#346692)

Other than increasing the speed of the chip, you can increase performance by doing simultaneous multi-threading (a la Jackson), increasing IPC (instructions per cycle) or placing multiple dies together with very wide and very fast interconnects (a la IBM). But each adds to the complexity of the processor, thus adds additional transistors, pins, power, etc.

I think manufacturers should develop a processor that acts like a Transmeta processor in that it runs at a specific speed based on the processor's utilization. This would help reduce the heat that the processor makes and reduces power consumption while a AC submits a FP attempt. Of course, the processor is not the only thing in a PC that soaks up power, but it's a step.

Re:AMD still isn't on TOP for ONE reason ... (3)

questionlp (58365) | more than 13 years ago | (#346695)

Unfortunately, the current revision of the Pentium 4 processor and the i850 chipset only supports one processor. It's not until the new Pentium 4-based Xeon until we see 2+ processor based systems.

The standard Pentium III processors can only scale up to two processors, but then you are limited to the BX/GX chipset (aging, only officially supports 100Mhz FSB), the Via chipset (I'm still a little wary of it), or the i820/i840 (requires Rambus memory). The Xeon allows you to scale well above 2 processors, but then you have to pay through the nose for a decent motherboard and the processor.

I think AMD should take it's time to release the 760MP to make sure that performs like it is supposed to and it is stable enough to cram in 2x1.33Ghz processors. Since the current gen Athlons use the EV6 protocol, there are a lot more traces required to connect to the processors to the northbridge chip, but then you get two independent channels rather than a shared bus found on all Intel chipsets and processors. Even the first-gen Itanium will still run on a slightly tweaked version of AGTL+ (ie: shared bus).

Re:2 worst reviews (2)

jtdubs (61885) | more than 13 years ago | (#346701)

I'm not sure what definition of "sold out" this is... but AMDZone is far more "sold out" than anandtech. It's got a freaking brand name in it's URL. What do you expect it to say "This chip sucks. It's too fast." These four sites are all also biased, just differently. Everythings biased. Thats one of those fundamental truths of life. People just tend to call "fair" whatever they see that is biased in a way that they find agreeable.

Justin Dubs

Re:wow! (1)

Cuthalion (65550) | more than 13 years ago | (#346702)

At a certain point this will no longer be possible. Not because of an end to Moore's law or anything, but eventually (soon?) things will be pretty much as ugly as they can get!

erm.. (1)

Cuthalion (65550) | more than 13 years ago | (#346703)

No. Being marketing driven is not the answer. That will cause them to wind up doing all kinds of dumb shit like Intel has lately. The answer is to produce superior technology for a year or two and build up a well-deserved good reputation.

Yes, but Palomino is delayed (2)

selectspec (74651) | more than 13 years ago | (#346706)

AMD is releasing the jacked up Athlons but delaying the Palomino's.

Practical Reasoning (1)

barneyfoo (80862) | more than 13 years ago | (#346708)

Could any of you really tell the difference between this setup and a 1.2Ghz machine?

I honestly dont think this chip is for people with 1.2 Ghz machines. It's for people like me, with old overclocked celerons who were gonna do their yearly upgrades soon.

Inherent in your rhetorical question is an assumption that 1) Chips aren't any faster than they used to be (noticablely faster) and 2) that the cpu companies like AMD are just marketing fluff -- all Ghz and no substance.

Truth is, chips are significantly faster than they used to be. Moore's law has gotten faster not slower in the past 2 years. You must read alot of review sites, that are constantly comparing the new stuff to the stuff that came out a week earlier :). No wonder you sound so jaded. What would be an interesting review would be: Athlon 1333-DDR against a Celeron 450 (overclocked) against a K6-2-550. now /that/ would be interesting, and would educate me as to how I should upgrade.

AMD is releasing a highly adaptable bus (1)

Rares Marian (83629) | more than 13 years ago | (#346709)

Guess what? AMD is beating Intel there too. Intel is trying to bait users with more performance but added vendorlock. AMD convinced API, one of the leading Alpha system producers to use their bus. Why? Intel uses a 1-bit high frequency bus, AMD uses a slightly lower frequency variable width bus which gets you 8-bit,16-bit,32-bit, and I believe 64bit and 128-bit are possible with some tweaking. Intel's bus still shares the bandwidth among devices. AMD's is almost peer to peer.

I wasn't talking about RAMBUS (1)

Rares Marian (83629) | more than 13 years ago | (#346710)

I wasn't talking about chip arch. I was speaking of motherboard arch. AMD is releasing a high speed main bus which is API compatible with PCI but blows Intel's 1-bit serial bus (Infiniband or something like that) out of the market.

Re:AMD is releasing a highly adaptable bus (1)

Rares Marian (83629) | more than 13 years ago | (#346711)

In summary your post was 3/3 based on incorrect information. :)

AMD had an ISA consumers said will it run xyzOS? (3)

Rares Marian (83629) | more than 13 years ago | (#346714)

The ISA is a consumer issue not an Intel issue. Nobody gives a damn except consumers who already have old software.

IDT Winchip uses a MIPS core with an x86 ISA. MIPS is one of the most cost-effective power-saving high-performance cores you can buy. If they would just advertise. I love AMD. It's great, but now that I've heard of IDT's use of MIPS I have to try it in an Amiga sometime. (yes you can use multiple CPUs at the same time with software running concurrently)

AMD tried their 29K system with their own ISA. It smoked Intel's crap. Guess what? Nobody wanted it. Why? Software wouldn't run on it. The people holding the pursestrings as far as ISA is concerned are consumers not Intel.

1st tier is as pointless as grains of film to a wedding photographer.

No one cares about the ISA. It's purely a compatibility feature.

You'll note Merced/Itanium was announced almost two years ago and still it hasn't hit the market. The ISA is a road block to the owner as well as the competition.

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (1)

jidar (83795) | more than 13 years ago | (#346715)

AMD has been scoring big with OEM's lately. I work at Radioshack and we sell Compaq's and we are selling a lot more AMD systems than Intel. Nobody asks if we have "Intel Inside".. noone seems to care.

Re:2 worst reviews (1)

jidar (83795) | more than 13 years ago | (#346716)

Heh, you claim bias and the first link you post is to AMDZone...

uuhh.. have I just been trolled? damnit!!!

Re:I do! (2)

frankie (91710) | more than 13 years ago | (#346720)

AMD doesn't have the very cool Blue Man Group shilling for 'em.

Of course, Intel doesn't have the very cool Blue Man Group [google.com] using their products.

AMD strategy (2)

Paradise_Pete (95412) | more than 13 years ago | (#346723)

This is very clever on AMD's part. By moving the Athlon line to the 266 DDR EV6 bus, AMD now can increase overall system performance and finally take full advantage of PC133 SDRAM and PC2100 DDR, something which Intel has not as yet been able to do. AMD is also mimicking (almost mocking, in fact) Intel's now standard move of continuing to produce 200 MHz DDR processors in higher and higher speeds.

Re:X86-64 project (1)

bobv-pillars-net (97943) | more than 13 years ago | (#346725)

IANAL, but don't they have a huge licensing conflict?

Reading from their legal statement (link is at the bottom of their page), I see them simultaneously requiring me to adhere to the GPL attached to their "experimental versions of GCC and binutils", and also forbidding me from (2) modifying them, (3) using them for commercial purposes, or (4) decompiling/reverse-engineering/disassembling them.

Sounds like RMS should give them a call...

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. ("AMD") hereby grants you permission to use, copy and distribute documents, related graphics and software delivered from this AMD Web Server ("Materials") provided that you:
  1. include both the above copyright notice and this permission notice in all copies;
  2. do not modify the Materials;
  3. use the Materials for non-commercial purposes within your organization only; and
  4. with respect to software Materials, that you comply with a relevant agreement associated with such software Materials and, at a minimum, do not decompile, reverse engineer, or disassemble such software.

Re:Practical spending. (1)

cjcollier (115316) | more than 13 years ago | (#346734)

This whole thread reminds me that programming efficiency is getting less and less important as computers get faster. We're at the point that big name companies are releasing slower and slower software and charging more and more money for it. Is there anything being done to keep the efficiency of software moving along just as fast as the hardware? You'd think that 300 MHz should really mean something. I remember having a 25MHz machine and thinking that there'd NEVER be a 200MHz computer made for years, but when it was, it'd be amazing. I was sorely disapointed, not because it didn't show up, but when it did, it the software for that day and age didn't run any better than the software for my old 386. Maybe this is standard evolution, but I've always hoped for more...

Second-class? (4)

vex24 (126288) | more than 13 years ago | (#346740)

does anyone harbor any lingering thoughts that AMD is a second-class citizen in the chipmaking world?

Dell, apparently... those jerks still won't sell me AMD powered boxes. :P

Re:Coke or Pepsi (1)

Hellburner (127182) | more than 13 years ago | (#346742)

NO!
Coke is it!
mwuahahaha!

Cool your AMD Sledge-o-duron with new laser de-crystallized frozen Coke slushies!
Woohoo!

Cool (2)

SpanishInquisition (127269) | more than 13 years ago | (#346743)

Windows crashes 33% faster on this one compared to a 1 GHz model
--

AMD still isn't on TOP for ONE reason ... (2)

ryanw (131814) | more than 13 years ago | (#346745)

The only problem with AMD is they still haven't delivered a working machine with more than one processor. Until they can give me a dual or quad processor system .. they're going to have to be TRUELY in second place ..

Even if the 1.3G Athlon beats out a PIII or P4 system, if I get a PIII or P4 system with 4 or 8 processors in it, I'm sure that would kill an athlon system.

Question: Do you think AMD is holding off on releasing the 760MP Chipset (the multiprocessor chipset) because they don't know if they'll be able to keep up with demands once people start buying two or four processors at a time?

wow! (4)

shren (134692) | more than 13 years ago | (#346747)

now software designers can release even sloppier, slower, uglier code and still have it work fast enough!

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (1)

jeti+ (135357) | more than 13 years ago | (#346748)

AMD can't get OEM agreements with the big PC manufacturers - did it ever occur to them that it might be because Joe Consumer doesn't ask Gateway or Compaq about the latest Athlon machines?

I got the feeling that AMD is currently selling as much processors as it can manufacture (and they are selling well - Intel reported slowdowns lately but AMD have been increasing both sales and profits). So the very reasonable prices and word-of-mouth are probably enough for now. (AMD is building more factories but those things take time to do.)

OTOH if you want to sell a CPU which is much more expensive than the competitions CPU (or even your own older models) and which performs worse expect in few special cases - then you need an expensive advertising campain!

Re:Practical spending. (1)

yamla (136560) | more than 13 years ago | (#346749)

Virtually nobody is going to upgrade from a 1.2 Ghz to a 1.33 Ghz machine. And sure, most people would choose to go for a 1.2 Ghz chip if they were buying new right now. But that isn't the point.

Nobody would buy a 733 Mhz chip when they wouldn't notice the difference over a 700 Mhz chip. Yet the 733 Mhz chips have sold very well. Because people don't just compare it against the 700 Mhz chips.

Everyone has their own sweet spot for CPUs. Some people might want the extra tiny bit of performance a 1.33 Ghz chip provides over a 1.2. Others will be quite happy at 900 Mhz with a 100 Mhz FSB.

--

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (2)

cqnn (137172) | more than 13 years ago | (#346750)

AMD put themselves in a good postion last year by (more or less)
consistently delivering on product. It also helped that 2000
seemed to be a year when it was Intel that was the one who could
not seem to keep their overall quality going from Fab to retail space.

Does it have the chip ID number? (1)

HerrGlock (141750) | more than 13 years ago | (#346752)

or is that an intel only thing. That tells me which I'm getting.

AMD here I come.

Mix this with the chip cooler from yesterday and we'll have something that will suck electricity like there's no tomorrow.

Oh, it seems the pre-shipments went to California already. About a month or so ago, right? May want to hold off getting one.

DanH
Cav Pilot's Reference Page [cavalrypilot.com]

Re:AMD rocks. (1)

loraksus (171574) | more than 13 years ago | (#346762)

no shit.
Dunno about pumping it to a gig on a cheap board, but yeah. AMD rocks.
I got a athlon 700 oc'ed to 1gig easy, only thing is ny board shits at the sight of a gig (cheap board). So I'm running at 950 :(


I have a shotgun, a shovel and 30 acres behind the barn.

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (2)

Ian Wolf (171633) | more than 13 years ago | (#346764)

This is very true, I think that Joe Consumer, doesn't give a damn about brand of CPU. The big deal now is price. AMD has silenced a lot of vocal critics in the media with their quality. It used to be that every AMD review had a paragraph or two about their past quality issues. Even though those problems were isolated and way in the past you used to see those pot shots everywhere. Now AMD has proven themselves in the media and more importantly with their customers both OEM's and consumers alike. Now that the playing field has been leveled the only thing that matters is price.

Re:Practical spending. (3)

Ian Wolf (171633) | more than 13 years ago | (#346766)

I agree with you completely, but I say push on boys and girls.

As the people who have to have the fastest chips start to gobble these up the prices are going to to fall even further on their slower, but capable cousins and that is always good.

Re:wow! (4)

Ian Wolf (171633) | more than 13 years ago | (#346767)

I laughed, but this isn't funny. It's all too true.

I have to laugh when people (non-technical people) complain about how a computer is obsolete the day you buy it. To which I am always inclined to ask what they are doing with their computer that it can't keep up. The answers are almost always the same, word processing, email, and browsing. They simply think that becauses there is something faster out there that theirs is somehow obsolete.

Hardware companies are building jets, and most software companies are simply building bigger biplanes with gold plated instruments, leather seats, and a teak prop.

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (3)

jerkface (177812) | more than 13 years ago | (#346769)

I disagree. AMD's success is a sign that people - whether or not they are clueless about microprocessors - care very little about brand names. (There are a few anti-intel fanatics who are the exception to this rule). Intel's attempts to pump up their brand name are obviously a failure with the general public. Most of the people who bought an AMD from Gateway or suchlike probably don't even know what AMD is. I'm glad AMD isn't wasting dumploads of money on establishing a brand name. Consumers see little reason to care.

--

Re:Yeah yeah. (1)

superdk (184900) | more than 13 years ago | (#346773)

What about chipsets? There's really not a good chipset option for the AMD processors. Two big issues I've run into have been 1) AGP 4x problems with GeForce video 2) issues with Aureal based sound.

Granted, there are workarounds and I suppose these aren't earth shattering issues. Still, AMD/VIA hasn't made a chipset that can stand up to the functionality of the good 'ol 440BX. Hell, neither has intel for that matter... I've loved the AMDs I've installed, but they just don't always work as smoothlly as the intel based solutions. Back in the socket 7 days when you could run a 430HX or TX with an AMD in the socket it was great. Good price/preformace, reliable chipset. Via just isn't cutting it yet.

Re:Second-class? (1)

AnyLoveIsGoodLove (194208) | more than 13 years ago | (#346778)

It upsets me that Dell wont budge...I am a Dell shareholder...but I bought a Compaq back in Jan......Saddens me how the best manufacturing will not use AMD....

Heat Issues! (1)

ZeLonewolf (197271) | more than 13 years ago | (#346781)

AMD has faster, cheaper, more efficient CPU's...there's no doubt anywhere about that.

Unfortunately, these processors also run EXTREMELY hot, especially above 800Mhz, and they can melt. I've personally witnessed two AMD CPUs (one a Duron 600, one a T-Bird 1.2) spew out the smell of burnt silicon. Am I just a statistical fluke?

I still refuse to pay Intel's high prices, so I guess I'm forced to deal with sending back melted chips every so often...

Oh yeah... (1)

Jayde Stargunner (207280) | more than 13 years ago | (#346784)

A site with the name "AMDZone" doesn't sound biased toward AMD at all. Nope.

-Jayde

Well... (4)

DarkEdgeX (212110) | more than 13 years ago | (#346800)

I don't know if I think of AMD as a second class CPU maker/distributor, but I still hold Intel in a higher regard simply because they tend to offer more in the way of innovation.

Take a look at Itanium (or their IA-64 instruction set) vs. AMD's Sledgehammer core-- IA-64 is just another operating environment, like Protected Mode was to Real Mode, except that IA-64 processors start out in IA-64 mode instead of having to switch modes after being reset. Sledgehammer, AFAIK, is just new instructions without a new operating mode. IA-64 introduces a HUGE number of general purpose CPU registers (no more EAX, EBX, ECX, EDX, EDI, ESI limitations!) while (from an admittedly brief review) AMD adds a total of 8 general purpose registers.

AMD is definately a lot different from their start-up days, and it's nice to see them trying to innovate with technologies like 3DNow! (and even nicer to see adoption of their technology alongside Intel's own technology), but I still see some work to be done before they get the major acceptance Intel enjoys in the marketplace (and not the hobbyist).

(Before anyone flames me, I know Gateway and other companies offer AMD processors in some of their offerings, but in general you still see a much larger number of Intel processors out in the retail sector vs. AMD processors.)

My biggest beef against the whole PC market; (5)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 13 years ago | (#346805)

What for?

Here I have a 650MHz P3, there a 300MHz P2, at home a Celeron 450, and in my hand a 400MHz P3 laptop

Most suck power being idle.

What can we do (Open Source, PC industry, software industry) to make computers truly powerful, useful, productive! All these resources, Python, Perl, C/C++, CPUs, memory, storage, networking...

What can we be doing with all of this capacity to truly make our world better?

Geek dating! [bunnyhop.com]

Re:Practical spending - Real Performance (2)

wardomon (213812) | more than 13 years ago | (#346806)

Right about incremental performance boosts. Running UT I get 40fps on a K6-2 300 overclocked to 418 and a Geforce 256. A new system would be a 300% increase for me, but what's the increase on 1.2Ghz to 1.33Ghz, 9%. "Hi, would you like to upgrade 300% or 309%?" When I can see a tenfold improvement, it'll be time, just like upraging from my 486-33. Until then, I need the money for beer.

Practical spending. (2)

3G (220614) | more than 13 years ago | (#346809)

Now, it's neat that AMD has just put out a top-of-the-line Athlon with DDR & 133MhzFSB support, but tell me fellas:

Could any of you really tell the difference between this setup and a 1.2Ghz machine? I mean seriously, this isn't flamebait. Your app might open, what, 1/20th of a second faster, and you might bet 5 more FPS in Q3A.

It almost seems like what's the point with these incremental releases.

Heh heh... (2)

3G (220614) | more than 13 years ago | (#346810)

Neither did Intel [apple.com] , until the endorsement money started talking.

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (1)

japhmi (225606) | more than 13 years ago | (#346814)

Well, I don't even have a TV, and I've seen OnStar and BASF commercials in my short time watching TV at friends houses... I usually think I'm living under a rock commercial-wise.

Re:i wonder.... (1)

sheetsda (230887) | more than 13 years ago | (#346815)

Have you forgotten that Intel had to recall their 1.13 GHz chips a few months back? /. story [slashdot.org] . I am presently using an 800 MHz Athlon on a Tyan motherboard and haven't had any problems with it. I don't recall the last time AMD had to recall any CPUs.

"// this is the most hacked, evil, bastardized thing I've ever seen. kjb"

P II 233 (2)

NineNine (235196) | more than 13 years ago | (#346816)

Well, I think that both companies would do much better if they could convince people like me why I should shell out more money to replace my perfectly usable P II 233. If it runs, it runs. I couldn't care less about how fast my CPU is.

Re:Practical spending. (2)

HiNote (238314) | more than 13 years ago | (#346818)

Yeah I can tell the difference: it's in the price tag. These incremental releases keep the prices falling. To me, this release means that I am one step closer to getting the 800 Mhz processor I have my eyes on.

2 worst reviews (3)

ruiner5000 (241452) | more than 13 years ago | (#346819)

Wow, the two worst reviews from the Intel biased sites get posted. Surprise surprise. Here are a lot better reviews from sites that have not sold out.:)

AMDZone [amdzone.com]
Gamer's Depot [gamersdepot.com]
Ace's Hardware [aceshardware.com]
GotApex? [gotapex.com] .

And here is a presentation [amd.com] with benchmarks and a roadmap. Have fun. Don't let biased slashdot postings warp your mind!

Re:2 worst reviews (1)

BD55 (246849) | more than 13 years ago | (#346820)

"Ruiner" is Chris Tom's handle. Chris runs amdzone. Hi, Chris.

2nd class (1)

TheSHAD0W (258774) | more than 13 years ago | (#346826)

> does anyone harbor any lingering thoughts that
> AMD is a second-class citizen in the
> chipmaking world?

Yes, I do. The Pentium 4 is a new chip architecture, and no one disputes its current incarnation is a dog. It's fairly easy to beat the P4 1.5 GHz using older chip designs.

Problem is, the whole reason Intel switched architectures is because the P3 was reaching the limits of its design, while the P4 is capable of much, much more. In a few short months the P4 should be up to 2 GHz, and promises to run even faster. When this happens, AMD will be hard pressed to compete without fielding a new design itself, and then it'll be back to Intel out front with the other chip makers playing catch-up.

Re:Second-class? (1)

Stibanater (261368) | more than 13 years ago | (#346828)

I can tell you, from the horse's mouth, that Dell and Intel are so in bed together that you will never see an AMD box from them.

Hell, you shoulda seen the stink Microsoft caused when they started offering linux!

Re:Second-class? (1)

Dielectric (266217) | more than 13 years ago | (#346829)

..and they never will. It's a personal thing between Michael Dell and Jerry Sanders (head honcho of AMD). This is pretty well known. At one point, Jerry said something like "If Michael Dell wants AMD processors, he can kiss my ass." Funny stuff.

2nd class...prolly, but it wont matter (1)

Teahouse (267087) | more than 13 years ago | (#346830)

I have two Athlons and three P3s in my home workpit. The Athlons were cheaper by far initially, but thanks to crappy chipsets, I spend more time making the Athlons work than the Pentiums. At work, I don't even bother risking help-desk issues by buying AMD. Sorry guys, but as long as I still need to let users load personal apps on their boxes, AMD is still a 2nd class citizen to me. Besides, Windows is evil, when did we decide Intel was evil? Intel makes a good product for the price, and based on what AMD is putting out, I think the pricing is justifiable.

SMP? FireWire? (2)

kylepike (304383) | more than 13 years ago | (#346832)

Until their mainboards support SMP, they will be second class.

While we're on the topic, what's up with the lack of x86 mainboards with FireWire (IEEE 1394) support? I read a while back that the boardmakers aren't supporting 1394 because Microsoft doesn't want them too - because M$ doesn't control the standard.. but you'd think that would scare the Intel guys more than the AMD guys..

How about it, VIA, can I get a MB with Firewire for my new camcorder? Or do I have to go Mac?

Mozilla (2)

XBL (305578) | more than 13 years ago | (#346833)

Maybe Mozilla will actually run fast on one of these :-)

Fa-a-a-st. (4)

banuaba (308937) | more than 13 years ago | (#346835)

Yeah, I got one of those bad boys. Overclocked it to just over 2ghz, I'm cooling it with liquid oxygen. I run at about 35 kelvin
Had a little problem with open flames, tho. Foom! [purdue.edu] No more box.
Course, I did manage to decapitate one of the blue men in the ensuing explosion. I made his little blue head into a hat for my dog.


Brant

Mainboard support another story (1)

mech9t8 (310197) | more than 13 years ago | (#346837)

In my experience, while the Athlon chip itself is great, its motherboard chipsets just don't seem to be up par with the chipsets for Intel systems in terms of driver stability and compatibility.
--
Assume that there are valid arguments against your position.

Coke or Pepsi (1)

JohnnyKnoxville (311956) | more than 13 years ago | (#346838)

This is turning itno one those old debates where it is just a simple matter of personal preference. Each company has 'die hards' that will never admit the other company has done something good. Pepsi IS better though.

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (1)

linuxpng (314861) | more than 13 years ago | (#346841)

Except AMD *is* a brand name now. Get Joe Schmo to go buy a Cyrix then we'll see how much brand recognition matters. Joe Consumer only cares about what the media tells him, right now the media is telling him AMD is superior, AMD broke the gigahertz barrier etc. People see 3 blue guys on an intel commericial that only intel execs find humour in. I think your point is only semi valid. Afterall, it's cheaper to have the press advertise for you than running your own commericials right?

Re:Faster chips are great, but... (1)

twbecker (315312) | more than 13 years ago | (#346842)

What AMD really needs is mindshare. When was the last time you saw an AMD commercial on TV?

I've seen a few AMD commercials, which is a few more than I expected considering their practically non-existant revenue compared to Intel.

Compare that with the Blue Man Group ads for the Pentium 4 that intel runs just about every hour on every channel. AMD can't get OEM agreements with the big PC manufacturers - did it ever occur to them that it might be because Joe Consumer doesn't ask Gateway or Compaq about the latest Athlon machines?

Joe consumer asks for the most bang for the buck, which AMD clearly delivers. AMD can't get a deal with mainstream PC manufacturers because noone makes (from an OEMs point of view) a good cheap motherboard for its Duron line, which is even more superior to Celeron than Athlon is to PIII (or P4 for that matter) If the hardware support is right, and OEMs like Dell get their heads out of their ass and offer up some AMD boxes, the demand will materialize. . .

AMD vs Intel (1)

isa-kuruption (317695) | more than 13 years ago | (#346845)

I recently purchased my FIRST AMD chip since the 486 era and I must admit I was amazed by the speed and loved the price on it. However, since then I've been cursing up a storm due to problems with the VIA chipset under Windows 2000 and compatibility with the Geforce series of cards (which I happen to have). I had to reinstall 21 times before I found the *right* combination of drivers to install so Windows 2000 wouldn't bluescreen on me.

And yes, I know all of you are going to say "windows 2000 sucks" or "run Linux", well my answer to that refers to why business systems and makers of these systems (eg Dell, upper end Compaq workstations, etc) do not use AMD chips! Sure, Counter-strike ran great on my AMD chip, but Intel chips are still more stable in the workstation market and that's what these manufacturers (and myself) are really looking for.

I'm sorry, but until AMD gets another chipset maker other than VIA to start developing chipsets, the shortcomings of the chipset available will stop me from purchasing another AMD (and yes, the new laptop I just bought was an Intel and was a Dell and will run Windows 2000... without any problems =)

Re:AMD vs Intel (1)

isa-kuruption (317695) | more than 13 years ago | (#346846)

Well, yes, I do blame VIA (whether it be the software or hardware developers there), but my point was not to bash AMD directly other than to blame them for not having multiple manufacturers releasing chipsets for their CPUs. (Blame via proxy... via, VIA... hah no pun intended =) And I can not blame Microsoft for this problem, since it's up to the hardware manufacturers to write drivers for their hardware that work under a particular O/S (at least in the commercial world), and it's Microsoft's responsibility, in this case, to "certify" the drivers (which they haven't because the drivers don't work right?).

Re:AMD vs Intel (1)

isa-kuruption (317695) | more than 13 years ago | (#346847)

Well I was referring to the KT133 chipset with the new Socket A chips. (Yes, I know the KX133 had no problems and Yes, I should have specified).

Re:Well... (1)

oupetrel (317755) | more than 13 years ago | (#346848)

You might want to check out the X86-64 project [x86-64.org] for a good read and lots of info about where Sledgehammer (now commonly known only as Hammer) is going.

Re:Where is the dual mother board ?? (1)

jrsmith (318084) | more than 13 years ago | (#346849)

tyan makes one called the thunder 7.. it's server class and subsequently VERY expensive.. ~$950

Still second class... (1)

infinite9 (319274) | more than 13 years ago | (#346853)

I was bored last night so I was watching a shopping channel. They had a p3-800 with 64 megs of ram, 20 gig disk, 17" monitor, and a throw-away printer and scanner for $1800! The salesman implied that AMD processors are unreliable. Just what we need: used car salesmen selling computers.

Re:i wonder.... (1)

Lt Wuff (319298) | more than 13 years ago | (#346854)

Intel (the ones who have had trouble with that tricky 'division' thing in the past) has what in the way of testing that AMD doesn't?

I mean if would be one thing if Intel has always had rock on chips, but they have the same 'industry standard' failure rate for chips (Not just processors, but chips!) that others have.

Re:Still second class... (1)

UltraBot2K1 (320256) | more than 13 years ago | (#346856)

And you would buy a computer from the shopping channel because?...

Success (1)

Diplomat73 (323901) | more than 13 years ago | (#346859)

It seems to me that the only reason AMD is doing this is because AMD is riding an unprecedented wave of success in the processor market. AMD has made enormous strides and each set of quarterly results seems to herald a new record in terms of overall sales and net income.

Yet more reviews (1)

wpmegee (325603) | more than 13 years ago | (#346860)

It's going to be hard for AMD to keep up the clock speed race with the Pentium 4, but this is a good start. Here's two more reviews, Anandtech [anandtech.com] and Tom's Hardware [tomshardware.com] .

Re:Practical spending. (1)

CybrGuyRSB (410357) | more than 13 years ago | (#346861)

Yeah, you are right (for now.) At the moment, there is no reason, performancewise to get a processor that fast. After about 800 Mhz, the difference in processing times is barely noticable. However, as more advanced OS's come out and more resource hungry apps, the speed difference will become more noticeable.

Re:Practical spending. (1)

CybrGuyRSB (410357) | more than 13 years ago | (#346862)

Okay, let me rephrase my previous statement. You're right, there are a lot of processor intensive tasks like encoding movies and playing very graphical games. I guess what I was referring to was the average consumer who uses his/her computer mostly for word processing and the Internet. Those people would not have much use for a 1.33GHz processor and wouldn't experience any notable speed difference when going from an 800MHz to 1.33GHz.

What about bits? (1)

CybrGuyRSB (410357) | more than 13 years ago | (#346863)

Isn't it about time somebody came out with a 64bit processor for the PC instead of just continuing to up the clock speed on 32bit chips? Isn't the G4 a 128bit chip? Why hasn't Intel caught up yet?

Re:Practical spending. (1)

gnuLNX (410742) | more than 13 years ago | (#346864)

I would notie a difference, but I develope neural network programs which take a lot of time to train. However I am much less interested in the MHz of the processor than most. Cache size is very important for big calculations. Besides as long as they keep putting out better processors I will have a reason to stay in debt.

Re:LN2 (1)

gnuLNX (410742) | more than 13 years ago | (#346865)

Anyone not using liguid N2 better know what they are doing. liguid Oxygen can be very explosive. Helium. not to bad, but Nitrogen is cheaper and has a much olower freezing point.

SMP chipsets? (1)

coffee17 (411083) | more than 13 years ago | (#346866)

Until there's a/some server class SMP boards, AMD will remain a 2nd class chip maker in my mind.

All the machines I request for purchase at work are intel. All the machines at home which I've paid more than $10 for are AMD.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...