Intel No-Show At Spring Processor Forum

Status
Not open for further replies.
sgi02 said:
Apparently intel decided that they had better things to do than show off new tech at the Spring Processor Forum. Here is a link , contains some great AMD material.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/05/31/78659_23OPcurve_1.html
Click to expand...


Wow.. there is so much BS in that article that it's not even funny. I don't understand how people like that can make statements about something they know obviously nothing about, I'm speaking about the memory section of the article
 
yeah, like all the incorrect statements like "1600mhz hypertrasport"... umm hello? that was for s754 and semprons. everything else is at 2000mhz effective which is really 1000mhz :p
 
Yeah - don't you love the "experts" who really have no idea what is going on in the inner sanctum of AMD's R&D facilities? :D
 
BigMacAttack said:
Yeah - don't you love the "experts" who really have no idea what is going on in the inner sanctum of AMD's R&D facilities? :D
Click to expand...

Sounds like most of the posters on this forum.
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
yeah, like all the incorrect statements like "1600mhz hypertrasport"... umm hello? that was for s754 and semprons. everything else is at 2000mhz effective which is really 1000mhz :p
Click to expand...


unless he means 1600 is the base speed o_O inwhich case were talking about 3200Mhz HT
 
mwarps said:
Sounds like most of the posters on this forum.
Click to expand...
Wow.. there is so much BS in that article that it's not even funny. I don't understand how people like that can make statements about something they know obviously nothing about, I'm speaking about the memory section of the article
Click to expand...
This was the comment I was addressing. If Poncho is so hot and knows so much then why isn't he in the industry rubbing elbows with all the bigwigs who are in the know? I'm only making an observation because I make no claims as to knowing all the technical goings on involved. We all like to think we know a thing or two about the technical aspects of computer architecture, but get real. This is info coming straight out of the pipe. Is some of it propoganda? Probably. But the fact remains that this writer was there, and he wouldn't be there if he didn't know a thing or two about the field he's reporting on. I figure the guy has gotta be fairly sharp or his employer wouldn't have hired him. No one wants an incompetent writer on their staff because it won't do a lot for their reputation, savvy? To the statement:
I don't understand how people like that can make statements about something they know obviously nothing about
Click to expand...
all I can say is "look in the mirror." Unless one is a memory/system engineer I think its pretty pointless to criticize what was related in the article. Sounds like Intel "fanism" to me.
 
BigMacAttack said:
Unless one is a memory/system engineer I think its pretty pointless to criticize what was related in the article. Sounds like Intel "fanism" to me.
Click to expand...


I'm on a chipset team, working on the server and workstaion line, at intel. Sorry man... but that article is all AMD "fanism." It's entirely one sided BS.
 
Poncho said:
I'm on a chipset team, working on the server and workstaion line, at intel. Sorry man... but that article is all AMD "fanism." It's entirely one sided BS.
Click to expand...


then what makes you think you know all the details of what goes on in the R&D labs of AMD?

unless your saying Intel practices corporate espanoge openly?
 
Poncho said:
I'm on a chipset team, working on the server and workstaion line, at intel. Sorry man... but that article is all AMD "fanism." It's entirely one sided BS.
Click to expand...
doesn't matter whom you are working for, but that article is just "utter rubbish". Come on, anyone who has 1/2 a brain and is somewhat interested in "computers" will see that the author has ZERO clue.
 
Elios said:
then what makes you think you know all the details of what goes on in the R&D labs of AMD?

unless your saying Intel practices corporate espanoge openly?
Click to expand...


LMAO.... umm, did you read the article. This guy is talking about Intel and what they are doing with FB-DIMMs, DDR3, etc. Guess what... he's passing off his speculation as fact and that is NOT what you do as a reporter. This goes to what the !!!!!! that I quoted in my last post said.... A GOOD journalist should be fair, factual, and non emotional. This guy exibited NONE of those traits. That article slanted to AMD so much and if you guys can't see that.... then the !!!!!! is strong with you.
 
ok then WHAT IS Intel up to with FB-DIMM and DDR3 id like to know becouse my next CPU is most likely going to be a Core 2 Duo
 
Elios said:
ok then WHAT IS Intel up to with FB-DIMM and DDR3 id like to know becouse my next CPU is most likely going to be a Core 2 Duo
Click to expand...


You do realise that all of that is under NDA right? Which means that I can't tell you.... and that "reporter" doesn't know. You want to know what's up with those technologies? Wait a few years and you'll see. :rolleyes:
 
Poncho said:
I'm on a chipset team, working on the server and workstaion line, at intel. Sorry man... but that article is all AMD "fanism." It's entirely one sided BS.
Click to expand...
Fair enough - that's all I wanted to know. Had I known that I would not have speculated, but not having that info made me curious and a little skeptical.
 
Poncho said:
You do realise that all of that is under NDA right? Which means that I can't tell you.... and that "reporter" doesn't know. You want to know what's up with those technologies? Wait a few years and you'll see. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

heh then well just have to keep listing to what ever the press says

and like the guy said this wouldnt be the frist time Intel jumped on a mem tech that wasnt realy ready
 
Elios said:
heh then well just have to keep listing to what ever the press says

and like the guy said this wouldnt be the frist time Intel jumped on a mem tech that wasnt realy ready
Click to expand...

Yea, cause the press, especially when one sided is always right. :rolleyes: And here is the thing... Intel has spent a great deal of time and money to make FB-DIMMs ready... sure the product will mature over the next couple years at which time AMD will reap the benefits of Intel's hard work. Really... it's easy to sit in the background, never sticking yourself out there, and criticise the guy who is taking chances. AMD has used the same hardware for the past what... 4 years? Making little changes here and there, constantly improving their design. Good for them... bad for the consumers. Wait until they release a BRAND NEW technology and we'll see just how good of a product that is.
 
Poncho said:
Yea, cause the press, especially when one sided is always right. :rolleyes: And here is the thing... Intel has spent a great deal of time and money to make FB-DIMMs ready... sure the product will mature over the next couple years at which time AMD will reap the benefits of Intel's hard work. Really... it's easy to sit in the background, never sticking yourself out there, and criticise the guy who is taking chances. AMD has used the same hardware for the past what... 4 years? Making little changes here and there, constantly improving their design. Good for them... bad for the consumers. Wait until they release a BRAND NEW technology and we'll see just how good of a product that is.
Click to expand...


that sounds pretty intel biased to me

A64 is new i dont see intel with on CPU mem controlers...

A64 didnt need DDR2 imo it still doesnt realy lest not till K8L

Intel is still using the old FSB not HT soo thats another new tech AMD did
oh and DDR1 AMD did that frist wile Intel was doing RAMBUS we see how that worked out

i just buy what ever is faster and if Core2 beats the shit out of AM2 cpus ill get that
but i mostlikely wont even need a new CPU till next year soo ill see whos faster then

regardless of what mem tech who ever is using unless it some one ends up back with RAMBUS mrk2 lol inwhich ill go with what ever platform gets me the most speed for the same investment

Intel is starting to do some stuff right now but thay still like a true dual core , on CPU mem controler, and p2p bus
 
Ok interesting nothing new .

Some observations. My opion only (Not the Gosphels of Christ Himself)

1). Turion64 X2 not selling very well and no compition for Merom

2). RevF delayed

3) . FBdimms Intel went threw all the work of developing this tech and it is rough around the Edges. Exspect AMD to jump on after the work is done. Smart but also chiken shit.

4) DDR3 will see that on Intel in the !st QT. 07 on intel chipsets . Sis And ATI'S latest chipsets already have support.

HT nice stuff here but I think Tigerton has a few tricks up its sleeves that Poncho can't comment on right now but it will have point to point interconnects that are said to be faster than CSI
 
AMD has used the same hardware for the past what... 4 years? Making little changes here and there, constantly improving their design. Good for them... bad for the consumers.
Click to expand...
I'm curious as to how this is "bad for the consumer"? It seems that improving a design that is sound from the get-go and making it faster and more efficient is pretty good for the consumer to me. The A64 K8 architecture went through a die shrink and wafer design change (from 130nm to 90nm SOI) which made it more energy efficient and (for us enthusiasts) more overclockable while producing less heat in the process. Sure, prices on the top of the line cpu's were up in the stratosphere but so were Intel's iirc. AMD held the performance crown in gaming (admittedly a small market segment to be sure) and Intel held the business app advantage in the beginning, but AMD chipped away at Intel's supremecy in this area also and when they introdiced the X2 and dual core Opteron lines the Intel advantages pretty much vanished.
It also inspired Intel to get their act together and start producing a better product and Inte'ls new products are the result. Plus, it also forced Intel to slash prices in order to try and regain the market share they have lost to AMD during this time which benefits the consumer rather than is detrimental to the consumer.
Bad for the consumer? I emphatically disagree.
 
Elios said:
that sounds pretty intel biased to me

A64 is new i dont see intel with on CPU mem controlers...

A64 didnt need DDR2 imo it still doesnt realy lest not till K8L

Intel is still using the old FSB not HT soo thats another new tech AMD did
oh and DDR1 AMD did that frist wile Intel was doing RAMBUS we see how that worked out

i just buy what ever is faster and if Core2 beats the shit out of AM2 cpus ill get that
but i mostlikely wont even need a new CPU till next year soo ill see whos faster then

regardless of what mem tech who ever is using unless it some one ends up back with RAMBUS mrk2 lol inwhich ill go with what ever platform gets me the most speed for the same investment

Intel is starting to do some stuff right now but thay still like a true dual core , on CPU mem controler, and p2p bus
Click to expand...


First off you should learn processor history

1) AMD wasn't the first with IMC DEC was ( most those guys now work for intel)

2) HT again it was DEC that introduced point to point.

You may like IMC but Conroe does well with out it as does Yonah. = to or better than AMD with IMC.

K8L to little way to late Penryn > K8L
 
BigMacAttack said:
I'm curious as to how this is "bad for the consumer"?
Click to expand...

Well... look at it this way. Were the initial IMC that AMD released great? Were they as efficient as they are now? Not at all. Bottom line... they don't have the resources to do the proper amount of R&D and Validation on a product so they release it so they can get revenue and then make little changes over time.... getting a little better each time. You are seeing this with AM2. Basically they are using their customers as testers to find bugs in the silicon.
 
$BangforThe$ said:
First off you should learn processor history

1) AMD wasn't the first with IMC DEC was ( most those guys now work for intel)

2) HT again it was DEC that introduced point to point.

You may like IMC but Conroe does well with out it as does Yonah. = to or better than AMD with IMC.

K8L to little way to late Penryn > K8L
Click to expand...

never said frist but newer then what intel is using and yes your right DEC had the EVx bus set that was from the now gone Alpha which lives on in the Athlon line
alot of the Athlon was taken from the old DEC Alpha which imo was the best CPU of its time

as to Penryn i havent seen any thing on it yet so i cant say any thign about it i was only commenting on that AMD cpus so far have not needed the bandwith that DD2 can give till thay start needing to feed 4 core ala K8L

but id love to see some hard details on this intel uber cpu

K8L is siad to have its Northbridge on die id like to see what Intel is going to do to counter that and then theres what ever AMD gets out after that

realy what needs to happen is Vista get out get everone on 64bit
then both camps can toss the old x86 out the window and get it cleaned up
 
Poncho said:
Well... look at it this way. Were the initial IMC that AMD released great? Were they as efficient as they are now? Not at all. Bottom line... they don't have the resources to do the proper amount of R&D and Validation on a product so they release it so they can get revenue and then make little changes over time.... getting a little better each time. You are seeing this with AM2. Basically they are using their customers as testers to find bugs in the silicon.
Click to expand...

and intel didnt?
Presscott any one?
howabout RAMBUS?
Netburst?
i recall when the P4 FIRST came out there were P3s beating the shit out of it
both camps are guilty

and oh yea i beleave that the P-m is based on P3 as is Core2 based on P3 as much as the A64 is based on the Athlon
 
BigMacAttack said:
I'm curious as to how this is "bad for the consumer"? It seems that improving a design that is sound from the get-go and making it faster and more efficient is pretty good for the consumer to me. The A64 K8 architecture went through a die shrink and wafer design change (from 130nm to 90nm SOI) which made it more energy efficient and (for us enthusiasts) more overclockable while producing less heat in the process. Sure, prices on the top of the line cpu's were up in the stratosphere but so were Intel's iirc. AMD held the performance crown in gaming (admittedly a small market segment to be sure) and Intel held the business app advantage in the beginning, but AMD chipped away at Intel's supremecy in this area also and when they introdiced the X2 and dual core Opteron lines the Intel advantages pretty much vanished.
It also inspired Intel to get their act together and start producing a better product and Inte'ls new products are the result. Plus, it also forced Intel to slash prices in order to try and regain the market share they have lost to AMD during this time which benefits the consumer rather than is detrimental to the consumer.
Bad for the consumer? I emphatically disagree.
Click to expand...


All very true. But in fairness to Intel Netburst was Ahead of its time. The lessons Intel learned from P4 will be very valuable in the future. NOT tomorrow but the next day.
IMC has been great for AMD but it did run into a wall . Witness Conroe. Intel is the one bringing these techs forward not AMD . AMD only comes in after there fully developed.

I think AMD 64 bit was wonderful . But it to was ahead of its time and is still not being utilized . Hopefully Vista will change that.

I think everyone is going to very surprized when they see the IMC that Intel employs on Nehalem . The big thing is going to be that this is tech that AMD will not beable to use as Intel is going to licensed from another tech company. AMD will never be allowed to use this tech.
 
Elios said:
and intel didnt?
Presscott any one?
howabout RAMBUS?
Netburst?
i recall when the P4 FIRST came out there were P3s beating the shit out of it
both camps are guilty

and oh yea i beleave that the P-m is based on P3 as is Core2 based on P3 as much as the A64 is based on the Athlon
Click to expand...

You are missing the point.... those products you listed were all NEW products, whether or not they shared older tech.... they were still new products. AMD releases new steppings of the SAME memory controller, yet they call the core a different name. Everybody raves that this new core overclocks SOOOOOO much better, when they should have realized that they should have gotten that core from the beginning.
 
Elios said:
and intel didnt?
Presscott any one?
howabout RAMBUS?
Netburst?
i recall when the P4 FIRST came out there were P3s beating the shit out of it
both camps are guilty

and oh yea i beleave that the P-m is based on P3 as is Core2 based on P3 as much as the A64 is based on the Athlon
Click to expand...

I'd have to agree. Intel revised the P4 architecture 3 times in 6 years, and providing no huge leap in performance each time.

RAMBUS, ha, I just have to chuckle when I hear that.....
 
Poncho said:
You are missing the point.... those products you listed were all NEW products, whether or not they shared older tech.... they were still new products. AMD releases new steppings of the SAME memory controller, yet they call the core a different name. Everybody raves that this new core overclocks SOOOOOO much better, when they should have realized that they should have gotten that core from the beginning.
Click to expand...

i think your missing the point for some one that works on this stuff

Core rev. are nothing new Intel does it to how many ver. of P4 were then how many DIFFRENT SOCKETS!
then there was the P3 that had minor changes for years this is all nothing new

i dont care about any of that i care about what CPU runs what i wnat to run faster
right now my rig is very fast if Core 2 is as fast and OCs as well as it looks to ill get one
if its not that greater in gaming then ill keep what i have and take alook at the next round
 
Elios said:
never said frist but newer then what intel is using and yes your right DEC had the EVx bus set that was from the now gone Alpha which lives on in the Athlon line
alot of the Athlon was taken from the old DEC Alpha which imo was the best CPU of its time

as to Penryn i havent seen any thing on it yet so i cant say any thign about it i was only commenting on that AMD cpus so far have not needed the bandwith that DD2 can give till thay start needing to feed 4 core ala K8L

but id love to see some hard details on this intel uber cpu

K8L is siad to have its Northbridge on die id like to see what Intel is going to do to counter that and then theres what ever AMD gets out after that

realy what needs to happen is Vista get out get everone on 64bit
then both camps can toss the old x86 out the window and get it cleaned up
Click to expand...



Care to point that NB out to us here is a blow up of the K8L . Now if its not on here than its been recently added. When were you exspecting the K8L release?

http://www.chip-architect.com/news/K8L_floorplan.jpg
 
Elios said:
i think your missing the point for some one that works on this stuff

Core rev. are nothing new Intel does it to how many ver. of P4 were then how many DIFFRENT SOCKETS!
then there was the P3 that had minor changes for years this is all nothing new

i dont care about any of that i care about what CPU runs what i wnat to run faster
right now my rig is very fast if Core 2 is as fast and OCs as well as it looks to ill get one
if its not that greater in gaming then ill keep what i have and take alook at the next round
Click to expand...


Are we talking about processors or chipsets? I'm talking about chipsets BTW, figured you would have know that by me saying IMC and AM2. :rolleyes: How many times does intel step it's MCH after the product has launched? Oh wait... hardly ever. They design a new chipset with NEW features. Has AMD had anything new come out in the past 4 years? I mean really... have they? Looks like the same old tech they had a few years ago... just matured. :rolleyes:
 
Rocco123 said:
I'd have to agree. Intel revised the P4 architecture 3 times in 6 years, and providing no huge leap in performance each time.

RAMBUS, ha, I just have to chuckle when I hear that.....
Click to expand...


Care to explane who's tech AMD is using on AM2 You are aware AMD licensed rambus right.

I am on a P4c 3.2 right now its my web machine. Would you care to run benchies on any game that is dual threaded . I will run against any stock FX 57 out their lets see how this old P4C does.
 
Elios said:
that sounds pretty intel biased to me
Click to expand...

lmfao.. he is the definition of bias. not worth arguing with him, he will tell you intel is better no matter what you have to say.
 
dr_dirtnap said:
What part of rambus are you referring to that AMD incorportated into AM2? Rambus has patents on many technologies.

AMD Licenses Rambus DDR Patents
Click to expand...
You no full well what I am referring to see were it says controllers


LOS ALTOS, Calif. – (NASDAQ:RMBS) Rambus has said that it has signed a five-year patent license agreement with Advanced Micro Devices, (NYSE:AMD) which grants AMD a license to Rambus patents. The license includes Rambus patents used in the design of DDR2, DDR3, FB-DIMM, PCI Express™ and XDR™ controllers as well as other current and future high-speed memory and logic controller interfaces
 
$BangforThe$ said:
Care to point that NB out to us here is a blow up of the K8L . Now if its not on here than its been recently added. When were you exspecting the K8L release?

http://www.chip-architect.com/news/K8L_floorplan.jpg
Click to expand...


all righty then

http://www.vtr-hardware.com/media/images/news/1/8344.jpg

hope that work say "Northbridge" on there to me

btw your pic is just one of the 4 cores that make up the CPU is is missing all the interconnect parts of the die that will surround the cores them selves
 
Poncho said:
Well... look at it this way. Were the initial IMC that AMD released great? Were they as efficient as they are now? Not at all. Bottom line... they don't have the resources to do the proper amount of R&D and Validation on a product so they release it so they can get revenue and then make little changes over time.... getting a little better each time. You are seeing this with AM2. Basically they are using their customers as testers to find bugs in the silicon.
Click to expand...
Software developers do this all the time, so do auto manufacturers and just about any one else who manufacturers products for consumers. Knowledge of how to make something work better comes through constant revision of design specs. I design my subdivisions and submit them to the reviewers and they comment on them. We have to revise the design based on their comments. This makes for a better product (well, sometimes :rolleyes: :p ).
If AMD had known how to go to 90nm SOI right off the bat they would have. If they had known all the tweaks and tricks to get their IMC to operate flawlessly we would have seen it. Evolutionary changes take place in an engineered product, and as has been pointed out, Intel's products have also been evolving. Conroe is a revolutionary new product for Intel. As such it will now be scrutinized and will evolve through engineering revisions as more research reveals unconsidered facets of its design. Should we then criticize the engineering team that did the initial work on it? Not at all. There are things they did not know, or maybe discovered too far into the design to incorporate, so these things will be incorporated in the release of the next revised chip.
I think criticising AMD for improving their product over time is unjustified. Shouldn't we then criticise Intel for not coming out with the P4 back in 1990? Of course not! They didn't know then what they know now. Yes, its an extreme example but to me that's basically what you are saying. Now, had AMD been happy to stand pat on the A64 130nm Clawhammer architecture with rev C0 stepping (which is purported to have a poor IMC) and not do more research, I would join right in the criticism, but the fact remains that they continued to search for better solutions for better performance. Again, better for the consumer, at least IMHO.
 
Poncho said:
Well... look at it this way. Were the initial IMC that AMD released great? Were they as efficient as they are now? Not at all. Bottom line... they don't have the resources to do the proper amount of R&D and Validation on a product so they release it so they can get revenue and then make little changes over time.... getting a little better each time. You are seeing this with AM2. Basically they are using their customers as testers to find bugs in the silicon.
Click to expand...
other people may say that it's progress.

Also, most people in the finance world would say that it's a smart choice -from a risk management perspective- to improve a product gradually, instead of making it 'perfect' before it is released. Positive cash flow is what keeps companies alive. It's true, apparently AMD's pockets are not as deep at Intels, but that doesn't mean that their choices are poor.
 
drizzt81 said:
other people may say that it's progress.

Also, most people in the finance world would say that it's a smart choice -from a risk management perspective- to improve a product gradually, instead of making it 'perfect' before it is released. Positive cash flow is what keeps companies alive. It's true, apparently AMD's pockets are not as deep at Intels, but that doesn't mean that their choices are poor.
Click to expand...

actuly thay are lol intel has much more det to cash on had then AMD iirc intel is losing money over all that inclueds there other branchs wile AMD is actuly in the black for a change
with some 2 Billion in cash on hand
 
Elios said:
never said frist but newer then what intel is using and yes your right DEC had the EVx bus set that was from the now gone Alpha which lives on in the Athlon line
alot of the Athlon was taken from the old DEC Alpha which imo was the best CPU of its time

as to Penryn i havent seen any thing on it yet so i cant say any thign about it i was only commenting on that AMD cpus so far have not needed the bandwith that DD2 can give till thay start needing to feed 4 core ala K8L

but id love to see some hard details on this intel uber cpu

K8L is siad to have its Northbridge on die id like to see what Intel is going to do to counter that and then theres what ever AMD gets out after that

realy what needs to happen is Vista get out get everone on 64bit
then both camps can toss the old x86 out the window and get it cleaned up
Click to expand...



realy what needs to happen is Vista get out get everone on 64bit
then both camps can toss the old x86 out the window and get it cleaned up

Your kidding right After AMD worked so hard to steal X86 from intel you want them to through it out . I didn't know AMD had anything else like intel does LOL LOL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top