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!

Intel Snags PC Mhz Crown Back From AMD

CmdrTaco posted more than 14 years ago | from the its-like-a-freakin-yo-yo dept.

Intel 209

textral writes "The Adrenaline Vault is running an article about Intel announcing the new jewel in its crown, the 800mhz PC, again foisting the 'fastest processor on the market' belt away from AMD's 750mhz Athlon. " Its fun watching the big boys do battle over silly little things like megahertz. Every time they up the ante, my poor P2 feels slower and slower. Jerks.

cancel ×

209 comments

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

More power needs more power (1)

Junks Jerzey (54586) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459035)

And of course any new processor from either Intel or AMD is going to be sucking up more electrical power than the last one. Is it really responsible to keep pushing people toward higher and higher power consumption just to get some trivial extra speed that isn't even apparent (i.e. most applications stopped seeming faster around 133MHz, games and rendering packages excepted). Look at 3dfx's recent announcements. Their next generation graphics card uses so much wattage that it needs to be hooked to a hard drive power connector because the power on the bus isn't enough. And the generation after that needs to plug directly into the wall (no joke; this was mentioned in recent a 3dfx press release). This is beyond stupid.

Re:You know, I bet... (1)

bubbasatan (99237) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459036)

Whatever you may wish to believe, the Athlon is a better chip at any clock speed than Intel's PIII. I, for one, have made a point to be Intel free as much as I can. All 3 PC's that I own are AMD powered. If I could afford to, I would go with something with more raw horsepower, but for the $69 I spent on my K6-2 400, I don't really care that Intel just released a chip that costs over $850. Similarly, I wouldn't drop $700 on an Athlon. Soon, those prices will fall, and I am content with trailing edge technology. In a few months, I'll be sitting playing with a quad Athlon system that I'll put together for less than the cost of a single PIII system today. No, there is no pissing contest. Intel couldn't piss their way out of a wet paper sack. AMD can, Compaq's alpha could, and any number of other fine chips out there could, but piss on Intel.

Re:worth it? (0)

Fiore2 (128119) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459037)

http://www.tomshardware.com usually does a good report on the best bang for the buck. Coincidently they LOVE the Athlon and found it more stable than PIII using Win98, but what machine is stable with Win98 :) I have a Pentium Pro 200 and I'm pretty happy.

Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459050)

Ace's Hardware already has a review posted of the Athlon 800 Mhz. The Athlon design allows amazing speed increases. AMD does not know how fast they can get it up to with their new 0.18 process. PIII, on the other hand, is 'maxed' out. Intel is having tremendous difficulty actually manufacturing higher PIII speeds with reasonable yields due to the PIII's dated design. The other unmentioned virtue of Athlon is its incredible stability, something PIII has never been known for, even if you don't mind the embedded serial number thoughtfully provided in each unit by Intel.

So what? (1)

Pollux (102520) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459051)

I'm getting sick of this...AMD and Intel are just doing patty-cake over the chip market. "AMD ups Intel by 50MHz", "Intel ups AMD by 33MHz", "AMD ups Intel by 16MHz", "Intel ups AMD by 50MHz"...

The last important thing to happen in the chip market was AMD debuting the Athlon. It was a new chip, not an echo of a past one. New technology, not new numbers, finally allowed AMD to leap over Intel.

When will AMD go dual? When will Intel get RAMBUS and the i820 working right? When will AMD get a full 200MHz bus with 200MHz SDRAM? When will Intel try and streamline a new form factor motherboard?

AMD and Intel aren't innovating right now. They're just focused on a race for the first to break the GHz barrier. Until they pass it, computer users will only be getting "bigger," rather than "better."

Re:Just waiting for the last 200 (2)

voidref (9482) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459052)

Uhh, cryotech already has the Athlon running at 1000. Just because it is cooled, doesn't mean that it is not "officialy" at that speed. If that were the case, may Cray machines were "unoficially" overclocked from the factory =)

PII & PIII Different Lines? I say YES (1)

hodeleri (89647) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459053)

Changes from P2 to PIII:

  • Optional on-chip 256Kb cache running at full speed
  • SSE instructions
  • CPUID

I don't have any pictures of the P2 vs. PIII dies, but I'm certain they are NOT the same. There are enough changes, minute though they may be, to consider P2 and P3 different lines.

Megahertz, Shmegahertz (1)

KaosDG (85348) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459055)

I just wish they'd have competition like this in the network bandwidth arenas...

My PC's are fast enough for me to work on right now, it's just getting all the damned data I need takes forever.


When I can get OC-3 to my house without having to sell some limbs/organs on E-Bay, then i'll be happy... Who cares how fast I process the data when I can't get it to my processor fast enough?

Re:I don't want faster, I want cheaper (1)

fatcowtoes (105989) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459056)

The reason P-III's are compatible with P-II motherboards is because there are hardly any differences between the two chips. It's really just a bunch of misleading marketing hype. People see the P-III name and assume that the difference is as radical as the difference between the Pentium and the P-II. In actuality, the technology difference between the P-III and the P-II is more similar to the difference between the Pentium and the Pentium MMX. And the speed difference of similarly clocked chips is even less.

800 Mhz Athlons are already out (2)

SurfsUp (11523) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459057)

Watch for AMD to beat this by 50MHz or so pretty soon...

800 Mhz Athlons are already out [tech-report.com] . I'm not familiar with the exact details but suffice to say that the K7 was designed to scale much more easily in clock speed than Intel's parts. Coupled with the good luck AMD is having with yields it looks like Intel is going to be playing catchup for the foreseeable future.

And don't forget that and the same clockspeed Athlon delivers up to 40% more floating point power, making this the world's finest Quake II engine. Then there are the 3D now instructions. :-)

Re:Irrelevant due to Architecture (1)

Signal 11 (7608) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459058)

I'm willing to bet, however, that their 5-7% performance increase will cost you about 25-30% in cost.

processors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459059)

It seems as if processor are getting faster every month. This is really good but how about the rest of the industry, memory manufacturers and especially HD companies. Sure clock speed will make a difference, but just think about the performance gains from say faster storage. These guys have to catch up, because what good is a really fast CPU if it has to wait for slow I/O devices. This is where we'll start to see even bigger performance gains.

Who is shipping volume? (1)

mikemxyzzy (31571) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459062)

What's the fastest processor shipping in volume -- AMD or Intel?

worth it? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459065)

I am curious to what other people think on getting the fastest processor available at any given moment. The thing is, they (Intel/AMD/etc) seem to be going ahead full speed, but the rest of the industry is quite away behind in terms of actually utilizing the speed. When is it ever the best time to buy the newest and fastest?

Megahertz Schmegahertz (1)

greenfly (40953) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459067)

I wonder whether the 800Mhz Intel outperforms a 750 Athlon.

I seem to remember reading some Tom's Hardware benchmarking results awhile back that had the 700mhz Athlon outperforming the 733 Coppermine.

But then again benchmarks can be slanted too.

Not exactly true... (3)

Oirad (19452) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459068)

Over at Ace's Hardware [aceshardware.com] , they've got a news item about AMD's forthcoming announcement of an 800 MHz Athlon, supposedly today as well. And (AFAIK) unlike Intel, AMD's supposed to be able to be shipping them in volume very soon. Intel's still got volume problems, especially with the 800 MHz chip.

Yeah!! (1)

FoulBeard (112622) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459071)

I thinks they both create good chipsets but this little battle royale has reaped benefits for consumers. If Intel had it their way the P2 would just be introduced. What if M$ had a competitor like AMD to Intel. Oh well, could it be linux... lets hope so.

Boy a 800 would taste good n/t (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459074)

n/t

I feel the need for speed... (0)

Chip Stillmore (16985) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459076)

I don't want just one fast AMD or Pentium CPU, I want 2. Slap those puppies in a dual mobo, and let the Q3A begin.

The only thing stopping me is money for the rig. *sigh*

Re:Is this good? (2)

randombit (87792) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459077)

It just doesn't matter to most people, at least practically-speaking. As people pointed out in a recent discussion, even though it doesn't matter, people will still buy the hottest chip around. Very much like how people buy the greatest SUVs, the fastest Porches, etc.

Agreed, but some people do need to crunch serious numbers, and it's good if you're running large servers and suchlike. But if you're just running Office and reading email, 800mhz isn't going to help you much. However, 800mhz CPUs will drive down the price of a 500mhz {insert prefered CPU here} chip, so overall everyone (performance freaks and "normal" people) wins.

But consider that VW does well with their "0-60? Yes." advertisments. How long will it be until a processor company pops up with a similar ad campaign? I give it 12-18 months.

Celerons already have that reputation among geeks, though it's not advertised as such (in fact, I don't remember ever seeing an ad for celerons (or athlons!), just P3s). I know a coupla people running dual overclocked celerons that they got fairly cheap. However, I detest Intel and their bloated architechture, so I would probably get a K6-3 or an Athlon anyway . Yes, same bloated architechure, but at least AMD didn't create it. And from what I've heard the Athlon internals are Alpha-like, which is cool (it would also help explain the performance!).

Re:Intel lost me.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459078)

I fail to understand people like this. First, the Processor ID in PIII's can be turned off. TURN THE GODDAMN THING OFF if you don't like it. Second, this could be a great boon to online stock trading/commerce. However, this person is locking themselves out of a potentially innovative company (which may be realized with this new competition). Too many ignorant people (conspiracy theorists, perhaps?) make dumb statements like the above. And let's face it, folks, Intel has vast resources that AMD lacks. If Intel wants to win, they can. All they have to do is buy victory, whether it's pumping massive amounts of cash into R&D, or licensing technology as AMD has with Athlon (note, however, that I am not condoning Intel's behavior).

!!!There are no PIII-800s, its all a scam!!! (2)

hodeleri (89647) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459079)

Intel(R) Pentium(R) III processor- Advanced Processor Technology for Powerful DesktopPC [intel.com]

The Pentium III processor sets a new baseline for high-performance business desktop computing, and is also available for entry-level workstations and servers. And now, the new mobile Pentium III processor enables greater productivity on the go, at speeds of up to 500 MHz.

Right here, straight from the source. 500MHz is the max that a PIII will do. The rest must be overclocked. I hope that those of you who bought >500MHz chips don't melt 'em.

Re:PII & PIII Different Lines? I say YES (1)

Duel2 (125688) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459080)

256K running at full speed is only with coppermine. :o) They ARE the same core logic. Just a couple parts thrown in. There's no difference in the internal ogice of registers or buffers (aside from the cache thing).....so Still that much different?? I think not!

We're Bein' Scammed! (1)

penguin_nipple (127025) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459081)

From the desk of : What's the deal anyhow, the market is pushing bigger faster on a monthly basis. When most of the moronic fools on this planet will never do more than type out a letter on their computer. This is a frikkin' Wintel conspiracy. Those dumbasses are reeling people into a massive scam...what's the system requirements for WinBlows 2000? 128Mb Ram P3-333...give me a break! My P150 (no MMX!) 64 Mb 72pin SD RAM running RH6.1 and Blackbox outperforms their ass....I think I could vomit...but *sigh* 800Mhz...Quake III would run sooooooo smooth ;-) Intel , Microsoft CRAP.... AMD -- I love you guys Cheers

Re:!!!There are no PIII-800s, its all a scam!!! (1)

KaosDG (85348) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459082)

new mobile Pentium III processor enables greater productivity on the go, at speeds of up to 500 MHz
Uhm.. that's the current max for the Mobile p3...

Hmm, let's try to buy a PIII 750... (2)

Kagato (116051) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459083)

Let's check out the www.thechipmerchant.com ...Hmm, no 750Mhz PIII there, but the Athlon 750Mhz is there. Well it must have been a fluke, let's look at pricewatch.com. Gee, there isn't even a search category for PIII 750, plenty of Athlon 750's though. You're about as likely to find a PIII 750 (or 800) as Boss Hog is likely to turn down a pork chop. Intel can take the crown when they aren't selling vaporware.

Re:worth it? (1)

Stonehand (71085) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459084)

It depends on what you do.

For instance, it sometimes happens that my office box (a PII/400) has a load average > 3 for weeks continuously, running compute-intensive jobs. Replacing its SE440BX with something SMP-capable, and using two processors could actually help as a lot of the work is actually quite parallelizable. If the kernel weren't an archaic kernel altered by others in ways about which I have minimal information, it might actually be worth it to save time and sanity...

Re:Alpha are still faster... (1)

Duel2 (125688) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459085)

Okay....but kinda hard to compare an Alpha to a Intel or AMD dirrectly because they don't use the x86 instruction set! Apples to apples is why it's a big comparison....And the really great thing is that the only that really differs between the two computing platforms is the motherboard and said processor. I guess you can argue RAM now with RAMBUS.....but that's another sad story.

Vapor CPUs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459086)

Looks to me like they don't even sell the vapor 733mhz PIII yet. Hmmm... Athlon 750 is still selling. Seems to me Intel doesn't even have anything close yet.

Re:Is this good? (2)

waldoj (8229) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459097)

Celerons already have that reputation among geeks, though it's not advertised as such (in fact, I don't remember ever seeing an ad for celerons (or athlons!), just P3s).

You know, you're absolutely right, they really are filling that niche. I hadn't thought about Celeron a) because it's Intel, an existing company and b) they don't advertise it as such.

I wonder if, upon advertising it appropriately, Intel could have Celeron capture that market?

x86 is way outdated (1)

[TWD]insomnia (125505) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459098)

We're stuck with old instructions that no one use, which in turns slows down the CPU. We need ludicrous GHz speeds to match CPUs with half and even the third of the MHz speed (PIII/K7 .vs. Alpha anyone? Or even easier to compare, PIII/K7 .vs. G4 Altivec core anyone?). Still, who needs all that number-crunching speed? Well that [TWD] tag suggest some clan game playing, therefore I need all that speed, especially for Q3, and to continue checking keys for d.net and to hope to get that 2k euros prize after CSC finishes. :) Besides that, I wouldn't need anything better than a i386, linux, and an old (read: quick) word processor ! (Oops I forgot XMMS.. ok let's say a P90...)

Re:Irrelevant due to Architecture (1)

spoon42 (41389) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459099)

Like the chipset, right?

Tom's Hardware recently ran benchmarks of Intel's chipsets [tomshardware.com] . What I got from this (which may be wildly inaccurate :) is that the i820 (which is probably what you'll get if you buy a P3) is in many cases no better than the 440BX. In order to get a real performance boost, you'll need the i840, which Intel isn't yet releasing in mass quantities, and they're marketing it as a workstation (not desktop) chipset. hmm.

anyway, I've got a P2-350 and don't plan on upgrading anytime soon (and it'll probably be an AMD when I do. :)

Re:News for rich nerds... (1)

bperkins (12056) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459100)

The fact is that the high end processors of today will be next week's surplus. Whether this translates into better affordable PC's in the future is another question, but it seems like it can't hurt.

In the end, this has nothing to do with what you or I buy, but it has everything to do with the industry and what seems like the flagging domminance of Intel. People like to buy from the manufacturer that makes the fastest chips. Even if they can't afford top of the line.



Re:Transmetta? (1)

Powers (118325) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459101)

Er, the nineteenth was yesterday. And what's Transmetta?

Re:Who is shipping volume? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459102)

AMD does the same thing - exactly where can you buy their *announced* 800 Mhz chip?

Re:Is this good? (2)

humphrm (18130) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459103)

>This is like cars that do 0-60 in 2.4
>milliseconds and can go up to 250mph.

No, it's not like that at all. Cars that can go 250MPh (show me one) are irrelevant because there is no speed limit that high. Unless I've missed something, there is no speed limit on processors.

>It just doesn't matter to most people, at least
>practically-speaking

To the unwashed masses, it doesn't matter; but that's not who the chipmakers are targetting in their first releases. I work for an investment bank whose traders won't be happy with 1GHz; faster math processing = faster trading = more profit.

Also, as someone else pointed out: how important was the PII to the "average person" when it first came out? Just as important as this speed bump, I'd say. Newer, faster technology at the top pushes prices down at the bottom and all the way up. When an even newer, faster technology comes out your "average joe" won't buy anything less than n-1 tier technology.

Re:worth it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459104)

Very few people buy the absolute fastest chip... I'm more than content to get a few steps down, overclock it to the max, and get as much out of what I have at the time... rather than wasting my hard earned cash on a CPU that my software can't fully utilize. I'm currently running a P3/550, and see no need to upgrade in the next six months at least... another 128MB of RAM will provide all the performance boost I need for quite some time.

Re:worth it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459105)

"what machine is stable with Win98"

Mine is, thankyouverymuch :)

Re:Who is shipping volume? (3)

MatriXOracle (33400) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459106)

AMD hasn't announced an 800MHz chip yet. The fastest they've announced is 750MHz, and those are quite easy to find. The Register was saying last week that actual systems with the 800MHz PIII won't be available until *March*. They're not shipping them in volume today, just sampling them to top-tier manufacturers. So if you ask me, they're still behind AMD.

Re:Megahertz Schmegahertz (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459117)

It does - check Sharkyextreme.com [sharkyextreme.com] - they just did a roundup on three new Intel processors, and both the 800/100 and the 800/133 outperformed the Athlon 750 in nearly all benchmarks... even the P3 733/133 outperformed the Athlon 750 in some tests.

Man, this is weird (1)

Skinka (15767) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459118)

Seems like everyone is *against* higher clockrates. Am I really the only one here who thinks faster is better? I want a system that can run Q3A with full details at 60fps. I want a system that can run the latest bloatware fast. I don't want to have to wait all day to encode MP3s, or spend five minutes waiting for that damn Java applet to load. I want a fast PC, preferably sooner than later.

I would never do something as stupid as buing the latest and most expensive CPU. I can't afford an Athlon 800, but when faster models come out, the price of slower models comes down - JUST HOW IS THAT A BAD THING?

Re:AMD should be still faster than just the MHz (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459119)

It's not - check www.sharkyextreme.com for a thorough benchmark comparison of the Athlon 700/750 and the P3 733/750/800. P3 800 is a good bit faster than the Athlon 750

Just a PR-stunt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459120)

preannounced

Re:Is this good? (1)

fatcowtoes (105989) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459121)

Whether your car does 0-60 in 2 seconds or 20, it still accelerates quickly enough to enter the interstate at a reasonable speed. In 10 years, the rate at which your car currently accelerates will still be sufficient. That's because Micro$soft doesn't build the roads. If cars were like computers, then in 5 years, the entrance ramps would be no more than 1/10th of their current length. In other words, your car that blows everything off the road now would be the minimum required to safely get on the interstate.

Furthermore, whether or not you run Linux is immaterial. There will always be new software that pushes the limits of current hardware, and as hardware advances, so will the software. Just because you don't agree with Micro$oft's philosophy that it suddenly takes a P-III 800 with 256 MB RAM for your son to write a book report doesn't mean that there won't be something you want to do that requires faster hardware. Whether it is voice recognition, 3D animation, home automation, or AI, something will come out that will make you need faster hardware. And if you don't believe me, look at your current software and OS and tell me you would just as soon run it on a 4MB 486SX/25Mhz.

My link for the day... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459122)

www.sharkyextreme.com - the p3/800 runs over the Athlon750.

So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459123)

And a Cray is faster than an Alpha-based PC. But you're still severely limited by lack of software. You may have a rocket-powered Lincoln Continental, but you're not going to get very far without the proper fuel.

Re:Is this good? (1)

Control Group (105494) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459124)

I wonder if, upon advertising it appropriately, Intel could have Celeron capture that market?

They probably could, but I doubt they want to. All the geeks I know who drool over celerons do so because, overclocked, they run about as reliably as gravity...so they get some incredible benchmarks on them. The celeron 300 can be easily and safely OC'd to somethng like 550Mhz. But I really don't see Intel advertising chips along these lines, since it would probably detract from higher-end chip sales.

Besides, all the people who are even vaguely qualified to OC their system are pretty much guaranteed to know about celerons...

Gigabit Ethernet (1)

Ozzy (119339) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459125)

It's not your Network that's slowing your computers down, it's your IDE bus.

The latest technology leap in HDD's has been ATA-66, which realistically only pushes 20MB/s which is only marginally faster than a $30 100MB ethernet card.

Now with gigabit ethernet cards, although they are expensive, are fast enough to easily saturate your system bus. Once we finally get away from slow hard drives and buses, we can really see improvements in overall end-user-apparent speed.

Anyone who has attempted to play Wheel of Time knows what I mean :) I've never waited that long for a level to load, ever... and it takes away from the game.

Re:Just waiting for the last 200 (1)

SaDan (81097) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459126)

I'll keep my hand up, thank you very much! The K6 was an excellent processor that had a crappy FPU, that's all. I've been a fan of AMD since the 386 days, and I'll back them until they break Intel's balls!!

GO AMD!

Re:Transmetta? (1)

vectro (54263) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459127)

nineteenth of January. And transmeta's webpage is at www.transmeta.com [transmeta.com] .

Three letters... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459128)

SSE - makes 3dNow improvements irrelevant.

Re:Just waiting for the last 200 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459130)

Agreed. The FPU is an enormous waste if you ask me. The K6 is an awesome chip. I'm using a K6-166 for my server right now. If only Intel hadn't stopped making the 486SX :(

How... (1)

homerj79 (58075) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459147)

How can a chip you cannot buy anywhere be considered the fastest chip available? In fact, has anyone tried to purchase a 733 PIII from their local computer dealer? I've asked around town and no one has them. Not a one. But, all the same dealers I spoke with had 750 Athlon's in stock. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if AMD announces an 800MHz sometime in January. Mark my words.

Fastest == most expensive (1)

ChrisKnight (16039) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459148)

I never buy the fastest chip at any given moment. I buy behind the curve and save a fortune.

Re:Irrelevant due to Architecture (1)

deefer (82630) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459149)

Yep. But the barely computer literate PHB's and AOL users will see it and make analogies with cars 'horsepower etc... It's "got more MHz, Elmer, it must be faster!!!"
The public is, in general, getting more techno-savvy. However, as this proves, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. And by the time your PHB's actually know what a superscalar pipeline is, we'll be getting into some seriously weird new stuff...

Re:Irrelevant due to Architecture (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459150)

"To summarize, this advancement from Intel is basically irrelevant, as AMD could (probably) have 1GHz Athlons on the market already"

Then why don't they? A 1 Ghz processor would be a quick, swift kick in the patootie of Intel, and would make AMD a "contender" in the eyes of the general public. AMD can't afford to play coy if they want to win - which leads me to believe that they *currently* can't produce a 1Ghz chip in mass-quantities.

FUD, pure and simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459151)

The Athlon is not superior to the Intel. They each have their strengths and weaknesses and are not *that* much different in performance (although the anti-Intel geek community would have you believe otherwise). We're talking a few FPS in Quake 3 either way. There's not enough *real world* performance gain to proclaim AMD the winner or Intel the loser. And any price advantage the Athlon has is negated by having to buy a different (and more expensive) motherboard.

Imagine... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459152)

a bewoulf cluster of these.

Re:Is this good? (1)

dsb (52083) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459154)

"This is like cars that do 0-60 in 2.4 milliseconds and can go up to 250mph"

But it is the cars like Saturn that are surviving 'crashes' and intersection collisions.

Is there a push for chipmakers to meet the side impact compliance standard?

806 MHz Athalon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459156)

I've been running a 500 MHz Athalon overclocked to 806-806 MHz, running at 87 degress F, for a while now. Cheaper, better, faster, cooler, etc.. than any intel:) (add the GeForce card and this mother plays QIII like you wouldn't belive:)

ACT Reading Comprehension score = -23 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459157)

"MOBILE" P3 - big difference.

Re:We're Bein' Scammed! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459159)

The logic astounds. If you don't need an 800mhz system, DON'T BUY ONE. I'm perfectly happy with my 450.

AMD should be still faster than just the MHz (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459167)

AMD Athlon should be still faster than just the 50Mhz speed increase that Intel has put out. Anyone got details?

Re:Who is shipping volume? (1)

Mark F. Komarinski (97174) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459168)

The 750 from Intel is available, according to yahoo [yahoo.com] . The 800 is in limited quanitites. It kinda gets me frosted that a company would announce a product like this, but isn't really shipping it. At least not that anyone can find.

Sounds like MS all over again.

Re:Not exactly true... (1)

Oirad (19452) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459169)

Man, me and my addled brain today...forgot to mention they've also got reviews of the new chips (800 MHz, Intel and AMD) up there too...

Ace's Hardware [aceshardware.com]

Awww, poor P2 user =) (1)

Powers (118325) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459170)

Hey, my P166 runs StarCraft and Baldur's Gate. What else do I need?

Okay, okay, so I'm currently looking at an upgrade. Probably a PIII-600 or 550, depending on price differentials.

The increases in MHz seem petty, that's true, but I see them as just more steps along the path charted by the processor-speed corrollary of Moore's Law.

What I'm really waiting for is the next big shift in computing technology. There's something out there analogous to the introduction of the microchip, although I don't know what it will be. What ever it will be, I can hardly wait! =)

I don't want faster, I want cheaper (1)

hodeleri (89647) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459171)

The best part about the PIII is that it drops right into a 440BX motherboard. Mine (ASUS-P2B-LS) can clock up to 6.5x and currently has a P2-350 in it. I'm waiting for the PIII-650 to drop into the $200 range for my upgrade. Kudos to Intel for maintaining compatibility between the P2 and PIII lines!!

now THAT'S power!! (1)

nicky p (106499) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459173)

The Dimension B Series will be targeted to the so-called "power user" and high-end gamers.

yeah, and it will give me the power to "supercharge my Office Applications."

Re:worth it? (1)

Powers (118325) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459176)

Personally, I just compare prices and speed at the time I'm ready for an upgrade. I ask myself if the extra 50 MHz is worth $300 or not. =)

Yeah, But.... (2)

The Iconoclast (24795) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459178)

The Intel Chip might have a higher MHz rating, but the fastest Athlon Chip will still cream it, especially in Floating Point perfromance. MHz for MHz, the Athlons are about 15%-20% faster than an Intel. I wish that they would hurry up with SMP Athlon boards. I am going to have to build a computing cluster soon, and I would LOVE to make it out of Dual Athlon Boards, but it appears that SMP Athlon Boards won't be out until Q2 or Q3 2000. :-(

Alpha are still faster... (2)

bbk (33798) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459180)

For the near future at least, Alphas are still sitting on top of the performance heap. With API's (www.alpha-processor.com) new UP1000 AMD Irongate based motherboard (uses the same chipset as all Athlon boards), you can get a >40 SpecINT, >60 SpecFP computer for under $5000 (www.dcginc.com) . Nothing on the market is this fast.

For the price, Athlons and PIII's are great, but for serious number crunching, Alphas are the way to go.

Re:Who is shipping volume? (1)

jmauro (32523) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459181)

Intel used to pride its self on only announcing products that were shipping and only shipping when shipping in volume is possible. It is sad to see how much the company has fallen since it started to get real competition from AMD.

Re:Is this good? (1)

waldoj (8229) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459187)

"This is like cars that do 0-60 in 2.4 milliseconds and can go up to 250mph"
But it is the cars like Saturn that are surviving 'crashes' and intersection collisions.
Is there a push for chipmakers to meet the side impact compliance standard?


I dunno, but I've survived several crashes thanks to my airbags.

So, where can I buy that Athlon 800? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459188)

More vaporware... let's not be the pot calling the kettle black.

Why does the instruction set matter? (2)

um... Lucas (13147) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459189)

You just give two CPU's the exact same tasks to perform and measure the amount of time it takes... Therefore, the Alpha's faster...

If you still want to say otherwise, i'd venture to say that both the K7 and P6 (especially the K6 though) are not really executing x86 instructions anyhow... They've got microcode that converts x86 instructions to their native instructions, because x86 was just too cumbersome...

Regardless, though... It's not at all hard to compare an Alpha to a Pentium...

Re:Is this good? (2)

mOdQuArK! (87332) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459190)

I *LOVE* my dual-processor Celeron system, overclocked to 550Mhz (with some REALLY big heat sinks/fans on the processors)...

I've got the distributed.net software & povray crunching away on it, day and night...

Re:You actually want an 800 mhz processor? (1)

mlesesky (81453) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459191)

Speed is one concern, but the image Intel (hear 4 notes) has built carries more clout that pure speed. Most people can not name another chip maker other than Intel. Market share is made by marketing in this case. Intel=Kleenix

AMD ...for now (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459192)

subject is message

Not until Q1 2000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459194)

The units the press are reviewing currently are SAMPLES - not production units. Production will not ramp up until Q1 2000 - possibly as late a Febuary. I don't see Intel shipping these chips any sooner than that - they are having problems shipping the 733mhz in volume that they anounced back in October. This is just more classic Intel Marchitecture. Their is good article about this over on The Register - www.theregister.co.uk

Megahertz At All Costs (2)

burris (122191) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459195)

You may wonder why there is such a race to crank up the clock rate on processors. The reason is that most consumers do not understand all the intricacies of what processor is faster, but can understand that 800mhz > 700mhz.

People who read Slashdot know that clock rates are only directly comparable between identical processors. We know that different architectures have different performance at the same clock rate. The vast majority of people that purchase processors these days don't know that. Most people don't understand why (if they are even aware) a PowerPC, SPARC, or Athlon has better real-world performance than a Pentium at the same clock rate.

Most people look at the "megahertz" and use that as the sole comparison of the processors performance even when they don't understand what that number actually means.

For this reason, the mantra at processor companies is "Megahertz At All Costs"

Re:MHZ BS! (1)

guacamole (24270) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459198)

I want Quake2/3/Unreal Tournament framerates. I want to see distributed.net and seti@home rates. I want to know how fast it can compile a 2.2.9 linux kernel.

DUH, those are not CPU nechmarks. Games depends on too many things, not just the processor. Same is linux kernel compilation.
If you want to see _CPU_ benchmarks check out Spec95 (www.spec.org) which is the industry standard, I am sure Intel and AMD publish it. Last time I checked, Spec95 numbers P3-733 was slightly faster than Athlon 700 in both, int and fp.

AMD strikes back wih 900 MHz (3)

Wolfgang (4724) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459199)

I just found http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/gs-20.12.99-00 1/> [heise.de] saying that AMD demonstrated two version of their CPU running 900 MHz, one who aluminium and one with copper interconnections. Well, the article is in german, so ask some babelfish to translate!

Does this one work when its booted now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459207)

Well, does this one work reliably when it's booted now? Considering that their 733mhz had boot problems. :)

Irrelevant due to Architecture (3)

adimarco (30853) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459208)


When the Athlon was first released, Toms Hardware [tomshardware.com] did a very detailed write up on the architecture of the Athlon, and how it relates to the PIII.

You can find that article here [tomshardware.com] . To summarize, this advancement from Intel is basically irrelevant, as AMD could (probably) have 1GHz Athlons on the market already, the Athlon is designed to run at those kinds of speeds, and has a (in their opinion) dramatically superior architecture to the PIII.

Tom mentioned somewhere in the article that AMD would probably do to Intel what Intel had been doing to them for years, which was to one-up whatever speed they come out with. Watch for AMD to beat this by 50MHz or so pretty soon...

Anthony

Intel lost me.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459209)

When they added the ID 'feature'.

Re:I don't want faster, I want cheaper (1)

The Iconoclast (24795) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459210)

Kudos to Intel for maintaining compatibility between the P2 and PIII lines!!

It's not a different line, it's the same thing, DAMMIT! Stupid Marketing Propoganda, grrrrr!!!!!

Is this good? (3)

waldoj (8229) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459211)

This is like cars that do 0-60 in 2.4 milliseconds and can go up to 250mph.

It just doesn't matter to most people, at least practically-speaking. As people pointed out in a recent discussion [slashdot.org] , even though it doesn't matter, people will still buy the hottest chip around. Very much like how people buy the greatest SUVs, the fastest Porches, etc.

But consider that VW [vw.com] does well with their "0-60? Yes." advertisments [vw.com] . How long will it be until a processor company pops up with a similar ad campaign? I give it 12-18 months.

And I'll get one, too, because I don't need the latest, greatest hardware. 'Cuz I run Linux. :)

Just waiting for the last 200 (2)

Hangtime (19526) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459212)

The real crown will be who busts 1GHZ. It will be interesting because both Intel and AMD are looking at making some serious headway in the design process and 1GHZ will be a landmark for years to come. Look for 1GHZ by early 2nd quarter if we keep up the pace we have been on. Alright show of hands, who 3 years ago with the release of the K6 actually thought AMD would be around this long and this competitive. You in the back with your hand up. Put it down, your lying! Just that much better for the consumer, btw P2 266 gonna upgrade to the Athlon once they release the new motherboards with 133MHZ bus and 4X AGP. =)

Hangtime

News for rich nerds... (2)

Mr_Plow (30965) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459213)

Stuff that matters to people with disposable income. All this is to me is another outrageously frivolous component. Hmm... that 500MHz not enough for you? Why not shell out about a grand on a new 800MHz processor. Get less than twice the performance for over three times the price. This is silly, and hardly all that newsworthy. See this [slashdot.org] for components that people who are not Internet billionaires can afford.
----------------------------------------- -----------------

Transmetta? (1)

DeRobeHer (76234) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459214)

Perhaps thats what Transmetta is sitting on? We've got to wait until the 19th though.

Yay! Speculation is fun!

--
Donald Roeber

MHZ BS! (2)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459215)

Why are so many people buying into this? Let's see some BENCHMARKS!

I want to hear about number crunching ability. I want Quake2/3/Unreal Tournament framerates. I want to see distributed.net and seti@home rates. I want to know how fast it can compile a 2.2.9 linux kernel.

MHZ is as meaningful a measure of a processor's ability as bogomips.

LK

You actually want an 800 mhz processor? (3)

ntsucks (22132) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459216)

Intel cannot afford to announce only the processors they can do volume on. If they did AMD would have a small lead in MHz number. Then manufacturers like Gateway and Dell would think about rolling out AMD based machines. By announcing fast chips, whether there is volume or not, Intel strings these guys along just enough (OK, co-marketing money helps too) to keep them from making any significant investment in Athlon machines. We have already seen Compaq and others introduce Athlon machines, if Intel cannot keep the MHz crown, AMD might get a foot hold with all the big US manufacturers. Intel would not want that.

The flip side is that AMD has probably been holding back a little bit to maximize revenue from each step up in MHz.

If only the rest of the industry.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459237)

If only the rest of the industry had competition running at this scale. I bought my PII 350 a little less than a year ago. I dont think advancements like this have ever been made as quickly. Sure would be nice to see the same thing in the OS market...

You know, I bet... (1)

mochaone (59034) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459238)

The guys who run Intel and AMD were the type of guys who would try to piss farther than their friends when they were growing up.

Thank god for mid-life crises! Now I can read email 0.000004% faster than before !!


Re:Yeah!! (3)

cybrthng (22291) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459239)

Microsoft already comes out with pretty decent innovations. Like it or not, microsoft has lots of competitors.. netscape, aol, real audio networks, all the unices out there.. There is alot more then the average linux zealot recognizes.

And if windows 2000 isn't technologically advanced as you would expect, then i can't imagine how linux could appear to be superior or even competitive..

Directory Services, USB, High Speed networking, good multi proc support, standard application base, good web server performance, stability improvements (my nt servers now run longer then my linux boxen on todays hardware.. but if i throw linux on my trusty old p2 systems, its vice versa).

So yeah, in this case the AMD and Intel is working for the customer.. as true for Microsoft and all its competitors.. the best man will win and has been winning. And as for choice, i choose Sun Solaris for my databases, NT for my file servers and linux for my development boxes. And now i get to choose which CPU i want to use. Too bad AMD hasn't released its Multiproc systems yet, or announced any developer chips for 64bit systems..

Re:I feel the need for speed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459240)

The only thing that is really stopping me from getting a dual K7 is the fact that there doesn't exist such a motherborad...

Well Yeah :) (1)

adimarco (30853) | more than 14 years ago | (#1459241)

For the near future at least, Alphas are still sitting on top of the performance heap.

This is like popping into a debate between Ford and Toyota to mention that Porche makes much better engines :) "Well, duh!"

While you're right, Alphas aren't really consumer-level products (god don't I wish they were), and I believe that's the context they had in mind for this comparison.

If you want to take it a step further, for the price, Alpha's are great, but for serious number crunching, Cray's are the way to go :)

Anthony

Re:Alpha are still faster... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459242)

What you said about "for the near future at least" is kinda funny. If the Alpha stopped progressing, that would eventually be true - the x86 chips would catch up to the speed/performance.
As we all know though, Compaq is dumping a lot of money into the Alpha architecture. The Alpha will continue to push the upper limit further and further. Fast 21264 processors (whose branch prediction puts the x86 to shame) are available _now_. The 21364 is in the labs, and 21464 EV8 processors are on the drawing board.
Despite all the 'bad' feelings towards DEC and the Alpha architecture in recent years, one thing can be said: DEC has always, always delivered what they promised. They make the shrewd choice to not set release dates for something which is already in silicon. Can Intel (or Mickeysoft for that matter) claim the same? I think not.

Hey! What about dual celerons.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1459243)

Go, go gadget dual celeron 366@550!!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?