Beta
×

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 Hits Milestone in Server Market

CowboyNeal posted more than 9 years ago | from the moving-on-up dept.

AMD 215

DontClickHere writes "According to data from Mercury Research, AMD has finally cracked the 10% mark in x86 instruction set server CPUs. AMD's Chairman had hoped that their server sales would hit 10% at the end of 2004, but they had only reached 5.7%. Some of this gain can be attributed to AMD's introduction of dual core chips in April this year. With Intel only due to ship dual core chips for low end servers later this year, AMD has been handed a golden opportunity to take a larger share in the server market."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Obligatory. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193579)

First post? Anyone?

Re:Obligatory. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193605)

First dual first post...

Re:Obligatory. (2, Informative)

m3rajk (670560) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193611)

not suprising, AMD has been making products that have better quality than Intel since th eAthlon was first launched. The fact I work in a place where 75% are ex-DEC hardware engineers and found out that three fourths of the alpha processor people left before Intel got their hands on that, combined witht he fact half odf them went to AMD and the fact I know someintel people and know that the Xenon is the ONLY chip to have ANY alpha technology integrated says a lot. AMD has been making AMAZING strides in graphics ability. Alpha basically handled ALL Intel x86 and apple stuff better than both of those, was the frist TRUE 64 bit chip. even now intel Itanium is a massive change fromtheir standard, and wwas released AFTER the AMD 64 bit. it's only a matter of time until AMD starts seeing their marketshare increase as the general populace starts to realize that Intel HAS ALREADY become the dinosaur that DEC was.

Re:Obligatory. (4, Informative)

orz (88387) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193646)

even now intel Itanium is a massive change fromtheir standard, and wwas released AFTER the AMD 64 bit.

The Intel Itanium was released before the Athlon 64. You're thinking of EM64T-enabled Pentium 4s and Xeons.

But yeah, AMD got a lot of very good engineers from DEC.

Re:Obligatory. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193665)

Tat commentwa s one of teh MOST ddiffcult ive EVER read.

Who's gonna pay (0, Redundant)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193585)

AMD hits milestone and cracks the 10% mark: who's gonna pay for the damage, hmm?

Re:Who's gonna pay (1)

crow_t_robot (528562) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193597)

"You break it, you buy it."

I think that it is pretty clear who is going to pay.

Re:Who's gonna pay (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193621)

Somebody explains to me how a second post, with the first post being just "first post", can be redundant...

Redundancy and humorless mods (0, Offtopic)

WidescreenFreak (830043) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194498)

Somebody explains to me how a second post, with the first post being just "first post", can be redundant...

It's because the concept of humor is wa-a-a-a-y beyond the grasp of most Slashdot mods. You can check just about any thread and you'll find statements that are at the very least humourous enough to put a smile on your face, not necessarily an all-out laugh, and some humorless mod gave it an overrated, redundant, or off-topic when it should have been given a +1 Funny or at worst left alone unmodded.

Besides, "redundant" doesn't just mean "repetition". It can also mean "unwanted" or "excessive". Apparently, too many Slashdot mods feel that humor is unwanted and excessive in this world. I guess that's an indication of what kind of people they are. They're apparently not very happy people. Life is too short to be like that as far as I'm concerned.

Oh, well. That's enough philosophy on a Friday morning. I'll just sit back now and wait for the "overrated", "offtopic", "troll", and "flamebait" modifications to come rolling in, thus proving my point.

Main Reason (3, Interesting)

dsginter (104154) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193586)

The main reason is that they sell the only 64-bit consumer chip. Yes, I understand that it is mainly marketing but the Athlon 64s are hot sellers. They need to crack Dell now.

Re:Main Reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193628)

They need to crack Dell now.


Indeed...

Re:Main Reason (1)

yorugua (697900) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193689)

Well, they already have IBM making some AMD64 servers ( http://www-132.ibm.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/C ategoryDisplay?categoryId=2590406&storeId=1&catalo gId=-840&langId=-1 [ibm.com] ). I can only hope IBM (don't know about others) had a broader line of AMD 64 based servers, but this is certainly a start.

Re:Main Reason (4, Informative)

fshalor (133678) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193809)

And HP.... hehe

I'm actually an all AMD shop, except for a few workstations. The only intel machines in the institute are PIII 700's and 900's from before my time there and a set of 6 Dell Precicions 650's (running Debian.). (Which were also the fastest machines in the place 3 years ago when I started.)

Servers are all AMD MP's with a few AMD opterons rouding out the bunch. Workstations are dual MP's. Desktops are mostly Duron's through XP's .

Just bought a few 1u tyan machines. (amd opterons) and planning on building up a cluster in a few weeks with about 30 more.

AMD has won on the campus scene at least.

Oh, and the desktop machines in my house are all AMD except for a crappy compaq that my bro bought and an iBook g3.

Kind of funny. Can't believe they only have 10% right now. But it happens I guess. ;)

Best,

Re:Main Reason (1)

xMilkmanDanx (866344) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194404)

IIRC, they don't have the fab capacity to take on more of the market (yet).

Re:Main Reason (4, Informative)

Lonewolf666 (259450) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193711)

Not anymore. Intel sells the Pentium D now, which is a dual core Pentium 4. The cheapest model (the Pentium D 820 with 2.8 GHz) is available at Alternate.de for 279 Euros.
One might suspect Intel of dumping prices here, but it cannot be denied that this is an attractive offer.

Re:Main Reason (1)

Shads (4567) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193744)

... and that's the main reason the OP said that amd needs to crack dell now. :P

Re:Main Reason (4, Funny)

magarity (164372) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194088)

Intel sells the Pentium D now, which is a dual core Pentium 4
 
But Pentium D doesn't have "Xeon" in the name so it obviously isn't for servers. Intel should know better. AMD was wise enough to come up with a new name for their chip to indicate that it was appropriate for use in servers. That's why they're taking Intel market share.

Re:Main Reason (2, Informative)

Erwos (553607) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193729)

"The main reason is that they sell the only 64-bit consumer chip."

This is just plain wrong. Intel's 6XX series of Pentium4's has the EMT64 (aka, AMD64) instructions as well. Both AMD and Intel are selling 64-bit CPUs now.

-Erwos

Re:Main Reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193980)

emt64 is based on itanium which is a server only situation due to the extreme heat they output.

for consumers, AMD is the only option, as it is compatible with x86 too.

Re:Main Reason (2, Informative)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194114)

EM64T is based on AMD64, EPIC is based on Itanium. Why do people still get this wrong? EPIC is not a backwards compatible instruction set.
The difference is, intel's memory addressing on EM64T is weak by comparison (which has nothing to do with on die memory controllers)

Re:Main Reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193773)

The article is talking about the server market not the consumer desktop market. The server market uses Opteron chips. All Xeon chips are 64-bit now but AMD had a head start in the market. I think some people are finally coming around after finally being able to compare apples to apples for 64-bit server cpus.

Re:Main Reason (2, Interesting)

/ASCII (86998) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193795)

I seriously doubt that the reason for AMDs sucess in the _server_ market is their 64-bit _consumer_ chips. As to whether the G5 and the 64-bit Pentium 4 are consumer chips or not, that distinction is pretty arbitrary, but since the 64-bit G5 can be found in the $1299 iMacs, I don't think you have a very strong case.

ONLY 64bit Consumer Chip? (1)

Alan Partridge (516639) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193913)

Those PPC 970 CPUs inside the iMac G5 line are figments of my imagination then are they?

Let's not even talk about games consoles and other such fun.

Re:Main Reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13194500)

The main reason is that they sell the only 64-bit consumer chip. Yes, I understand that it is mainly marketing but the Athlon 64s are hot sellers.

Your comment directly contradicts the summary of the article, they are talking about server market share, not consumer. And no, the athlon 64s aren't going in any servers either, so your post is absolutely worthless for this conversation

Atta boy (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193588)

I'm so proud...*sniff*

FP (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193589)

Thanks for all the memories....

Amd more innovative (4, Insightful)

germanStefan (766513) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193594)

I haven't boughten an INtel chip for myself for quite a while. Originally I wanted to support the underdog, but now (without my youthful activism) I just think they create more innovative and better products. I just ordered the pieces to build a server for my company and got AMD64 chip, not an Intel.

Re:Amd more innovative (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193799)

Last Intel I bought was a P5-200, in late 1995 I believe. Oh, I guess a P6-400 Dell laptop. Since then, all AMD.

What I never liked about AMD is that they really don't innovate. Its hard to find anything excitingly new in their processors because they follow the blazen trail. That's not to say they don't make great chips, but they're just making applying new techniques to proven ideas. The interesting things they have done, such as HyperTransport and the on-chip memory controller, are actually derived from DEC. AMD64 is a good instruction set, but I wouldn't call it anything exciting.

Intel has screwed up and are recoving. They let x86 rott by putting all their resources into Itanium. The P4 has a lot of unique twists to processor design, even if it has numerous flaws. The P-M has some cool improvements to the P6 micro-architecture, and I'm excited to see what Intel's next generation architecture will be. The good thing about Intel is they always make new and creative designs. Its just been for quite a while, they haven't been the smart buy.

I'm really hoping AMD's next architecture will be novel. They've finally got the engineering talent to do it.

Re:Amd more innovative (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194152)

Crack pipe much? They do not innovate? O...K there buddy. How about Hypertransport instead of an aging front side bus that intel uses
(DEC is dead, many engineers from them are working with AMD, and Hypertransport is not a DEC technology, there is an HPT consortium from way back when it was called Lightning Data Transport LDT)? How about directly connected CPUs vs intel's that need to communicate over the FSB? How about SOI before intel? How about on die memory controllers? They have been around on other CPUs before, but again, DEC is DEAD and this is a totally different arena. If 64bit extensions to the most popular instruction set in use right now doesn't excite you, perhaps you should rethink your geek status

Re:Amd more innovative (1)

raxx7 (205260) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194350)

It was a inovative decision in terms of market strategy. But in terms of pure technology, there's nothing new about it.
Actually, we'll never see much inovation in the interconnect of mass market CPUs because it's not limited by what Intel or AMD can think of and put in a chip. It's limited by how much it costs to them and specially to the technologicaly much less capable companies that build chipsets and motherbeads.

Re:Amd more innovative (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13194628)

My impression from reading news articles was that LDT came from DEC, and was matured at AMD. However I might be wrong, since its hard for me to find anything on LDT anymore. I would agree a NUMA design is far better than a shared bus like Intel uses, which I really wish they'd finally drop. A shared bus makes perfect sense in terms of cost, but those days are over and its even used on Itanium. Just ridiculous.

I agree that x86-64 is great, I just upgraded and am running a 64-bit OS. However instruction sets are pretty easy to design and they using the same underlying hardware (like SSE) to perform the operations. Nothing new that I could tell.

What AMD has done wonderfully is to take proven ideas and bring them to users. I believe HyperTransport is freely licensed, so that's helped find its way into non-AMD devices. The other major highlights of AMD's chips weren't first commercially done by AMD, nor had they contributed any significant R&D towards those inventions.

Many of the Athlon architectural revisions, especially the early ones, seemed to revolve around implementing better branch predictors or other core logic. I can tell you, implementing high-speed arithmetic is a pain and some are really cool designs (such as prefix adders). When the P4 came out we heard about Intel's innovations in its arithmetic unit and trace catch. These were new inventions on tough problems, not just implementations of known algorithms. That's what I mean by AMD lacking innovation.

Good guy streak? (4, Funny)

bigtallmofo (695287) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193619)

Wow - AMD gets 10% market penetration for servers.

With good news like this, I wouldn't be surprised if something like Firefox reaching 75 million downloads were to happen! I hope I see a Slashdot story on that soon.

Re:Good guy streak? (0, Offtopic)

ceeam (39911) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193678)

Wait till a new /. editor takes the shift and you probably will see it!

Re:Good guy streak? (3, Funny)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193811)

With good news like this, I wouldn't be surprised if something like Firefox reaching 75 million downloads were to happen! I hope I see a Slashdot story on that soon.

      And you just know they are going to tie all of this in with google somehow...

Re:Good guy streak? (1)

jsight (8987) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194182)


And you just know they are going to tie all of this in with google somehow...


Well, Google does buy a _lot_ of servers... :)

(ok, for the pedantic, I know they are probably still all Xeons)

Re:Good guy streak? (1)

ms1234 (211056) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194272)

Don't worry. the dupe will soon be posted.

Hi my name is Michael Dell.. (1)

speights_pride! (898232) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193632)

...where can I buy 64 bit processors?

Re:Hi my name is Michael Dell.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193814)

How about here:

www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-III/index.xml

In a world where Microsoft uses PowerPC and Apple x86 anything is possible.

Re:Hi my name is Michael Dell.. (1)

level_headed_midwest (888889) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193817)

India. That's where the rest of your company is.

Re:Hi my name is Michael Dell.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13194180)

You could try Apple - I hear they have them for a limited time these days ...

Laptops? (3, Interesting)

MarkByers (770551) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193633)

I applaud them for their server sales, but I hope that they will soon develop a power efficient chip for laptops. At the moment they have nothing that can compete with Intel's M chips. Do they have plans to compete with Intel for this market or are they happy to stay in the server market?

Re:Laptops? (5, Informative)

RockModeNick (617483) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193650)

Pentium M's are good because they are primarily based on P3 technology, not P4 - the P4 architechture delivers signifcantly less bang per mhz, and thus far the increased top clocks of the P4's are not keeping ahead in actual performance the way they were expected to.

Re:Laptops? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193710)

P4 is not the problem for AMD, the P-M is, and they need to be able to compete on mobile chips with Intel. Not only does AMDs offering need to be good, it needs to be much better than intel's and must be cheaper too or few laptop makers will switch.

AMD is gaining ground on Desktop and Server CPUs because their products are much better AND cheaper.

Intel doesn't need to be the best, they just need to be good enough to keep AMD out.

Re:Laptops? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193761)

I don't think the OP was arguing that the Pentium 4 was more efficient than Athlon products, but he is still stating a valid point, that with notebook sales now outpacing desktop sales, if AMD wants to compete for the normal users, they need to release a low-energy, high-performance laptop chip. Their current entrance into the market with the Turion 64-bit processor is cheap, but is outperformed in power consumption and computing power by the Pentium M.

Re:Laptops? (2, Interesting)

creeront (890604) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194116)

"Pentium M's are good because they are primarily based on P3 technology, not P4..." Pentium M's are based off of Pentium Pro Technology, arguably the best chip Intel has ever produced. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_M [wikipedia.org]

Re:Laptops? (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194517)

The Pentium 3 is based on the Pentium Pro. It would be arguable that the Pentium M more closely resembles the changes made to the P6 core (which the P Pro, P2, 2nd gen celeron, and P3 were based on) from the latest generation rather than a decade old design

Re:Laptops? (1)

RockModeNick (617483) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194596)

If I recall, pentium pro was adapted to P3 which was adapted to Pentium M...

Re:Laptops? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193784)

What about Turion? As in the HP Special Edition L2000 (go Lance!)

Re:Laptops? (2, Interesting)

stinerman (812158) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193841)

Agreed.

I'm nearly an AMD fanboy, but I would have a hard time buying a notebook with their mobile processors in it. I think Via might have a good chance at cracking the notebook market with their new C7-M [via.com.tw] chip. Its max power output is 20W, while its idle output is only 100mW.

Re:Laptops? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193932)

What's wrong with the Mobile Athlon XP-M [amd.com] ? If you're looking for better performance, you need a desktop replacement chip [amd.com] anyway.

Re:Laptops? (4, Informative)

wild_berry (448019) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194056)

I don't think you're up to date. The Athlon 64's have been trimmed down for notebook use, called Turion [amd.com] , and they have two performance envelopes [amd.com] , one at 35 watts and another at 25 watts typical power consumption. The present range is explained here [amd.com] .

Re:Laptops? (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194086)

I think what you are looking for is the AMD Turion?

My impression is that Turion os a comparable AMD alternative.

Re:Laptops? (3, Informative)

Nuffsaid (855987) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194143)

I see a big marketing debacle by AMD, if even part of a supposedly technical oriented public like the Slashdot crowd never heard about the Turion 64 processor! Its power consumption goes as low as 27W, with performance slightly better than Pentium M on a clock-by-clock basis. You can already buy some laptops, and the reviews are good so far.

Turion (1)

charnov (183495) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194688)

Yeah, it's called the Turion. 35W and much lower. Check out the MSI S270 (not on sale in the US yet, but very soon). I believe HP is already using it in their line.

How are dual cores counted? (3, Interesting)

mev (36558) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193653)

When calculating the percentage of processors, is AMD counting a dual core as one or two processors?

Re:How are dual cores counted? (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193663)

Actually they count the pins under the chip...

Re:How are dual cores counted? (4, Funny)

ceeam (39911) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193700)

Don't give them ideas! I can imagine an Oracle salesman: "Yes, it's only a $50 per CPU <voice type=faint>pin</voice>".

Breaking the monopoly ... or not (3, Insightful)

00_NOP (559413) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193666)

A few years ago I thought the Wintel monopoly was cracking up ... now despite this (good) news that seems further away than for some time. The constant hostility to Linux from Windows users is just one example - people are frightened of making the change and they cannot understand why something I can give them perfectly legally on a CD/DVD can be as good as or better than something they pay loads for. So too with Intel - Apple's decision may even be good for Microsoft as it will help freeze out alternative combinations of OS with processors...

Apple? (0)

BladeMelbourne (518866) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193669)

Now if Apple got on board (or in bed) they would have an even better chance. I dont want to replace my Mini with a noisy, over heated, power consuming Intel chipped Mini. AMD has a lot to offer.

AMD and FireFox reach 10%? Yay for the little guy...

Re:Apple? (1)

k96822 (838564) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193695)

I was thinking this same thing. I can see the frustration Apple has for their chips. First, they move from Motorola to IBM, probably hoping to get faster chips. IBM couldn't deliver, so they're stuck changing again. They are probably going with Intel because they just don't want to take another chance.

I'm one of those people who still thinks the PowerPC is better, in spite of the Ghz. difference. I understand why Apple would not want to take another risk, though.

Re:Apple? (2, Interesting)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194031)

My guess is that like Motorola IBM is not focused on Desktop chips. IBM is focusing heavily on server and console chips while Motorola was working on embedded (I believe).

Apple know that with Intel there will be a long term focus on desktop/laptop chips weather they were there or not. This saves Apple from requesting their supplier to look at their needs (like gettin laptop G5s, which are applerently comin from IBM but after a lon time).

AMD would have met this requirement too, but Intel probably ave Apple sweetheart deal. Also AMD is still behind in the laptop area and may very well be forever now that Intel is shaping up.

Production shortages (1)

charnov (183495) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194757)

I always figured Apple went with Intel over AMD strictly because of AMD not having the capacity to meet their demand. You have to remember that Apples chip demands are pretty tiny. I believe that it was only 3% of IBMs production capacity. The scary thing is that Inetl just announced last week they are having capacity issues. They do have 4 fabs that are being converted to 65nm, though. The Merom chip will be the one to watch Apple for. Dual core, low power.

Re:Apple? (2, Insightful)

tourvil (103765) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193774)

Now if Apple got on board (or in bed) they would have an even better chance. I dont want to replace my Mini with a noisy, over heated, power consuming Intel chipped Mini. AMD has a lot to offer.

My guess is that Apple will replace the G4s with the lower power Pentium Ms and the G5s with Pentium 4s.

The bright side for AMD is that once the switch to x86 has been made, Apple could potentially consider AMD chips in the future with much less risk than the current switch to Intel. In fact it would probably be best for AMD to let Apple and Intel go through this transition period together before courting Apple.

Re:Apple? (1)

Alan Partridge (516639) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193996)

Replacing G5 with Pentium 4s is a backward step - Apple will go with something powerful and capable of SMP for the PowerMac workstations. If they don't, they'll die in the workstation market. If the competition is using Opteron and Xeon, that's what Apple will need to use.

Re:Apple? (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194006)

I never saw any article that actually provided any evidence that Apple was going to use the x86 architecture. Also, I hope you do know that intel does not only manufactor things only for the x86 architecture. I see them creating PPC proccessors in the future for some reason.

Re:Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13194226)

I never saw any article that actually provided any evidence that Apple was going to use the x86 architecture.

Er, how 'bout the SHIPPING development machines, which are 3.6 GHz. P4s? Apple also announced they're using the Intel x86 compiler suite. The new Macs will DEFINITELY be x86 (though probably Pentium M derived architecture instead of P4).

Also, I hope you do know that intel does not only manufactor things only for the x86 architecture. I see them creating PPC proccessors in the future for some reason.

I think this is wildly unlikely, and is irrelevant to Apple regardless.

Re:Apple? (1)

cookie_cutter (533841) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193794)

Are you saying you prefer AMD to Intel based on power and heat issues?

It's been a while since I built a system, but when I was building a linux cluster a couple years back I decided to go with AMD chips in spite of their power and heat issues. At that time, AMD chips were always reputed to run hotter than Intel chips.

Has the situation reversed?

Re:Apple? (4, Interesting)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193861)

Has the situation reversed?

Yes, at least on the 90m parts. I just built a dual core Athlon 64 system BECAUSE the power consumption is lower than anything Intel can offer in the same class. The Athlon 64 X2 was more expensive than the Pentium CPUs too, but i figure I will make the price difference back on power savings.

Re:Apple? (2, Informative)

Slack3r78 (596506) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194497)

Your information is out of date. Northwood was already getting to be hotter than AMD, but when Prescott was released (almost 2 years ago now), it blew the doors off everything else in the x86 market in terms of power consumption and heat disipation. Disipation's well over 100W and operating temperatures in the 70-80C range. AMD64 chips, in comparison, generally put out in the range of 35-50W and operate between 30-50C. Personally, I've never seen my A64 3200+ get any higher than around 37C under full load with the stock fan.

In addition to this, AMD64 chips feature something called "Cool n Quiet." CnQ is basically a fancy name for intelligent dynamic clock scaling. Again, using my 3200+ as an example, when under full load, it runs at 2GHz @ 1.375V. However, when the computer's idling or under light loads (ie: most web browsing, word processing), the CPU drops down to 1GHz@1.0V. When the load's somewhere inbetween, the CPU scales up in 200MHz increments on the fly. It's actually kind of cool to watch happen in a clock speed/voltage monitor.

So the short answer - AMD's been ahead of Intel in this regard (on the desktop) for quite some time. Prescott took it from AMD being a bit cooler to there being no comparison whatsoever. Hope that helps.

Re:Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193882)

I don't know, apple takes a pretty small percentage of the desktop/laptop market compared to HP and Dell. It would help a significant amount though.

Off topic here but...
I'm wondering, when will they start throwing out Apple commercials with that little Intel inside jingle at the end? That would just weird me out, though its quite possible.

Wait for the laptop (0, Redundant)

Arthur B. (806360) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193679)

Hum I think AMD64 was also a pretty good reason for home buyers. The next killer would be a good equivalent of pentium M, AMD is still far behind intel on the laptop ground.

Dell is the decider (4, Interesting)

soma_0806 (893202) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193696)

Everyone knows that AMD's share would seriously change if Dell could be persuaded away from their holdout status.

The two main reasons generally cited for Dell's allegiance to Intel is the millions in advertising and marketting (hard for AMD to compete when they're sitting on a little over a billion and Intel is sitting on something like 11 billion) and early notification of new developments.

The second one I just don't get. I mean, Intel annouced the Itanium in 1994 which consumers didn't see until 2001, two years later than projected and seven after the announcement. Really, how much notice does Dell need? Wouldn't they rather a company that actually gets things out in reasonable time frames?

Re:Dell is the decider (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13194538)

The truth is it's more a question of religion (and racism) than anything else. Intel and Dell are both controlled by jewish persons.

motherboards (2, Insightful)

jpc (33615) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193698)


The main reason for buying Xeons was the range of motherboards available. This is finally beginning to change and there is a lot more AMD stuff, from 1 way to 8 way. And with things like SCSI and SATA RAID cards turning up in PCI express things are looking even better as workstation and server chipsets become interchangeable.

a thought... (-1)

nuggetman (242645) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193699)

AMD chips are like a big ole Mack truck. they suck up a lot of juice, but they can hold their own hauling a big load.

Intels are like a little fiat. You're not gonna tow a boat up a hill with it, but damn can it be zippy.

Re:a thought... (2, Interesting)

jurt1235 (834677) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193733)

Well, just overclocked an AMD3500+ (about 25% overclocked), and on some programs running 100% CPU (especially RC5-72), it outperforms the intel 3Ghz Xeon by a factor of 2! That way that Mack truck is pretty zippy too!

Re:a thought... (4, Interesting)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193751)

What?

The K8 processors are way more power efficient then the K7s were. Keep in mind the K7 design came out as a competitor for the P3 processor not the P4.

The K8 is basically one-generation ahead of the P4. I'm sure Intel will catch up though as their Pentium-M is a good design in terms of efficiency.

A dual-core 64-bit Pentium-M would definitely give the AMD a run for some money I'd think...

But anything in the P4 camp and you're basically not making a rational comparison.

Tom

Re:a thought... (1)

level_headed_midwest (888889) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193855)

Man, would I ever love to see a 64-bit dual-core Pentium M. Supposedly those chips are to be introduced in Q3 or Q4 2006, roughly when Longhorn, er, Windows Vista comes out. That's when I'll hold off buying a new laptop until. But I intend to run Linux on it, so that last point is moot.

Re:a thought... (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193886)

I'd buy one just to have another platform to test against. If it came in laptop form all the better ;-) provided they can keep the power rating. Right now they sit around 22W and the AMD offerings are 30-35W or so. If they can make a dual [with actual performance not just clocked down] and still be less than 30W that would rock.

Some of my friends say it's a bit overkill to have the X2 and the P4 running but as a professional developer it certainly helps. Though since a 64-bit PentiumM would be ISA compatible with the X2 ... there wouldn't be much point to own both I guess... other than geek factor. :-)

Tom

Re:a thought... (5, Funny)

FullCircle (643323) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193754)

Look at the power consumption numbers again and it looks more like Intel is a zippy Fiat that sucks fuel like a Mack truck.

It's not the 90's anymore.

Re:a thought... (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194613)

diesels are usually good on a mileage per gallon rating. That fiat is more like a mustang. It has 8cyl and loves the gas pump, but it is still no match for a specialized hotrod. I would also compare the AMD64 stuff to a large turbo superduty pickup. It may not have a spoiler, but it can haul ass and take names.

cheaters! (1)

mary_will_grow (466638) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193730)

Do they count the dual-cores twice? :-D

Re:cheaters! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193742)

When calculating the percentage of processors, is AMD counting a dual core as one or two processors?


Do they count the dual-cores twice? :-D


Imagine that, mary_will_grow but she won't_read_the_other_posts...

Re:cheaters! (1)

mary_will_grow (466638) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194062)

I hold myself to the same standard as the Slashdot moderators. So bring on the dupes!!!

zing!!!!!!!!!!!!!

11 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13193800)

I bet they didn't count my AMD K6-233 powered web server.

AMD should subsidize a switch (2, Interesting)

ChrisF79 (829953) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193808)

I lease an Intel based server right now because back when I first signed up for it, that's all that was offered. Now the datacenter offers AMD based machines and I would love to switch. However, the company will charge me the setup fee on the AMD server and I will have to move everything over myself. It's not a steap fee, but it is enough for me to just stick with what I have. Switching isn't necessary by any means, just something I'd like to do. At any rate, I'd bet there are a lot of other people out there like me. If AMD would subsidize the costs for the datacenters to switch (pay them $20 per user that switches from the Intel machine to AMD) or whatever amount is fair, they could claim a bigger portion of the market.

Maybe it isn't feasible... just my $0.02.

How can I compare.... (0, Flamebait)

GoMMiX (748510) | more than 9 years ago | (#13193990)

Cheap car manufacturers, like Hyundai, came into my sights years ago.

I remember when I first saw a Hyundai commercial. It seemed as though every vehicle they made was under $10,000.00.

The cars were so cheap, and so poorly built, the company had an instant reputation for making a very cheap low quality vehicle.

Today, although I know some Hyundai's cost upwards of $30,000.00 -- and carry a 10 year 100,000 mile warranty - I still think of Hyundai of a cheap, poorly made vehicle.

I will probably always think of Hyndai this way, or atleast until they do something truly innovative -- like create some fantastic new vehicle that everyone ELSE tries to immitate - rather than the other way around.

My opinion of AMD was formed much this same way.

AMD made very cheap, inferior processors for years.

Even if AMD is making better CPUs now, comprable in quality and speed to Intel, even -- they still have yet to do something truly innovative to force me to rethink my opinion of them and their product.

Marketing people called in branding. Well, AMD, you're branded. That's the problem from where I sit.

And what's worse, is it seems the moment AMD gets close to intel in quality - they jack their price up to meet or exceed Intel's pricing.

That type of marketing is hardly going to encourage ME to switch from a time honored and trusted manufacturer.

That's just my opinion.

mod parent up (1)

everphilski (877346) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194028)

Mod parent up.

The QC issues they used to (or maybe still do? I wouldn't know, I can't get myself to buy one of their chips) have coupled with their lack of response to it has branded them among people in the know. I think this more than anything is preventing their market penetration.

-everphilski-

Re:How can I compare.... (1)

mary_will_grow (466638) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194042)

Yeah, I can't think of ANY japanese car company that started out with making "junk" that ran strange, and looked cheap, and rotted away on the salty winter roads, and then suddenly became synonymous with quality and dependability. Anyways time to hop in my camry and get to work!

Re:How can I compare.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13194141)

Yeah, I can't think of ANY japanese car company that started out with making "junk" that ran strange, and looked cheap, and rotted away on the salty winter roads, and then suddenly became synonymous with quality and dependability. Anyways time to hop in my camry and get to work!


Talk about goofy looking.. try Subarus.. they still look goofy. Now off to work in my Warthog errrr Baja.

My hyundai has been the best investment ever (4, Insightful)

cybrthng (22291) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194268)

7 year and 150k miles later it still runs and the only things i have had to do is put new tires on, change the oil, breaks and about to put some new shocks & struts on.

Tiberon has been the best car i've ever had. Out of Jeep Wranglers, Jeep grand cherokees, mazda 626's, suburus and others.

THe problem is you look at brand as stature and you use that to ignore the good qualities about everything else out there. You have probably never owned a Hyundai so you assume they're cheaply made. (granted they have had some bummers but so has intel..)

You have probably never owned an AMD for the same reason, you believe the hype. You also probably still pay full price for Nike shoes, still wear Girbaud jeans and are afraid to shop at target.

Can't find value in something that doesn't sound cool?

pretty retarded if you ask me

Re:My hyundai has been the best investment ever (1)

Otter (3800) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194583)

I owned one of the early Excels, and its quality was precisely as he describes. (I got mine used, and it was a cost-effective purchase given the minimal price, but it was a piece of junk.)

The Tiburon came out after Hyundai got through their initial hurdles in the US and the quality was a lot higher. Hyundai makes good cars *now* but their reputation from the Excel still hangs over them, which is his point.

There are still Girbaud jeans? And yet Zubaz has gone under? Now there's your indictment of capitalism...

Re:How can I compare.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13194330)

"atleast until they do something truly innovative"

Have you not been paying attention to the 64-bit chip market? AMD spanks Intel like the little brat they are. Intel's first 64-bit offerings have been pure garbage.

You seriously sound like someone with an MBA (no that is not a compliment). "The commercial says they [Intel] are a market leader, so it must be so!"

idiot (4, Insightful)

RelliK (4466) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194353)

AMD has long since surpassed Intel in quality and innovation. AMD chips now are:

1. faster
2. 64-bit
3. use less power & generate less heat

Intel is now catching up and immitating. Intel kept blathering about how 64-bit is useless on the desktop, then did an aboutface and grudgingly implemented AMD64 instruction set. Intel is also switching back to an updated pentium 3 core (which has now been rebranded as pentium M) proving once again that AMD was right all along: increasing the "megahurtz" while lowering IPC count was a boneheaded idea. And with the new CPU model numbers they are trying to downplay the importance of clock speed -- after years of brainwashing the consumers that this "megahurtz" thing is all that matters.

In short, you are either an Intel shill or you've been living under a rock for the past 5 years.

Re:How can I compare.... (1)

mrscorpio (265337) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194386)

That's your own fault due to personal prejudice, and you sound exactly like my mother-in-law. She refuses to buy a "Datsun" (Nissan) because some salesman was cold to her 25 years ago when she was car shopping, and has a negative perception about non-American cars because of that and other hype throughout the years. That's her loss.

A wise shopper is not stuck on brands, especially in an investment as large as a car. Pick up any car issue of Consumer Reports and you'll find that especially in the area of passenger cars, Toyota, Nissan, Honda, and even Hyundai are KILLING GM and Chrysler (and usually Ford too) in quality. Plus, Toyota's usually a little cheaper and Hyundai is usually a LOT cheaper, even today. Honda and Nissan are more but you are getting a much nicer car than the comparable Detroit model almost without exception.

I can't speak for AMD pre-K6 days, but since then they have made a very good and cost-efficient processor. In fact, there have been few times since the introduction of the Athlon that I haven't preferred AMD's offerings to Intel.

I would recommend that instead of remaining prejudiced based on perceptions you had on information that is years out-of-date, take an objective view at the information available currently. Read about both sides of the coin. You might be surprised at what you find, if you REMAIN OBJECTIVE.

Re:How can I compare.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13194745)

When a brand outlasts the entire engineering team whose work it described, it becomes meaningless and better ignored. I look for bang/buck, sometimes overridden when the leading vendor is a bunch of seriously competition-obstructing assholes.

Tier-1 supply sabotage? (2, Interesting)

DamienMcKenna (181101) | more than 9 years ago | (#13194122)

This week I had to spec out a replacement server when one of ours disappeared thanks to a delivery company, and I really wanted to get a HP DL145, HP's entry level Opteron server. As it turned out CDW's site said there was a two+ week delay in shipping the servers, whereas I needed one pronto. Given that other OEM [monarchcomputer.com] s have no problem with supply, I can only guess this may be part of AMD's case against Intel putting undue influence on the OEMs [bbc.co.uk] .

Damien
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?