Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,111
Prolly not still P4's but almost certainly something in the Netburst family. I also doubt 64bit would have advanced to where it is now either.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Intel's gonna win!
- Thread starter william_fontaine
- Start date
Prolly not still P4's but almost certainly something in the Netburst family. I also doubt 64bit would have advanced to where it is now either.
It's going to take a couple of miracles for AMD to survive through the next process round. The US AMD lawsuit is not a slam dunk, and that's not going to be resolved for at least 6-7 more years. AMD as we know it may have less than 2 years left.
I'm just glad there's no more ridiculous talk like AMD is only "3 months behind" on 45nm. Even though AMD will ship 45nm over a year after Intel, it's with an inferior process that won't get the same benefit as Intel did with HK/MG (lol @ "option" AMD uses, like AMD has a choice... AMD will get it some time after IBM figures it out for the 32nm node).
I'm just glad there's no more ridiculous talk like AMD is only "3 months behind" on 45nm. Even though AMD will ship 45nm over a year after Intel, it's with an inferior process that won't get the same benefit as Intel did with HK/MG (lol @ "option" AMD uses, like AMD has a choice... AMD will get it some time after IBM figures it out for the 32nm node).
What Intel has done is to get huge fanboyism by spending a lot on marketing. Also all these review sites may sometimes use software that is optimized by the compiler for intel processors.
There are a lot of people that will be a bit disappointed on their computer this winter when games arrive that scales more to threads and are using much more graphics. I/O and scaling is the main weak areas for Intel processors (C2D and C2Q)
Intel knows this also, they didnt create the phenom replica Nehalem for fun.
The next 790GX chipset and with one phenom (or the next deneb) will perform much better playing very demanding games on high res.
Intel users will notice lagging more and more as the games evolve to more threading and more graphics.
Intel monopoly will lead to even lower prices.
Intel's cpu are so fast that no one needs to upgrade anymore, so they have to come up with even faster and/or lower priced cpu to keep on selling them and stay in business.
sarcasm i assume? : )
Sort of like the self perpetuating engine..
790FX is also good, but you will get even faster hypertransport with the 790GX and also integrated graphics. New GPU's can handle a lot of I/O
Actually, monopoly can lead to lower prices. Especially when the monopoly competes with itself for future sales. See Microsoft for a great example, despite what many people thinks, software prices are far lower in every market that Microsoft entered into, and they stayed that way even after a monopoly is achieved.
Intel's best competitor is not AMD, but rather, Intel itself. Just try to sell people a new CPU when they already run Nehalem at 16 cores.
I bet you it's a very hard sell.
Intel's best competitor is not AMD, but rather, Intel itself. Just try to sell people a new CPU when they already run Nehalem at 16 cores.
I bet you it's a very hard sell.
If you're trying to preach integrated graphics, you may be in the wrong place. Not many (if any) use integrated. Discrete has been the weapon of choice for oh say ten years now at least.
I think generally, everyone knows monopolies lead to higher prices - hence laws to prevent such situations. I do question your logic. Intel does have a competitor in AMD, its just limited at the lower product range - which at least keeps them honest in that range. As far as MS - Linux and Apple with Leopard has made great inroads. It's not exactly like AT&T 40 years ago.
Monopoly does not always lead to higher prices. In fact monopoly are simply the most efficient form of organization. They lower the cost for a sector significantly.
It is only when the monopoly is capable of exploiting that monopoly to raise profit when monopoly becomes a problem.
In Intel's case, it is simply not possible to exploit that monopoly as they compete with themselves.
Also, look for the EU to open up the X86 liscense for everyone and their mom for a song. It will happen shortly after AMD is gone. (What EU have done to MS will be done to Intel as well, and every other tech monopolies)
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,111
Monopoly does not always lead to higher prices. In fact monopoly are simply the most efficient form of organization. They lower the cost for a sector significantly.
It is only when the monopoly is capable of exploiting that monopoly to raise profit when monopoly becomes a problem.
In Intel's case, it is simply not possible to exploit that monopoly as they compete with themselves.
Also, look for the EU to open up the X86 liscense for everyone and their mom for a song. It will happen shortly after AMD is gone. (What EU have done to MS will be done to Intel as well, and every other tech monopolies)
Monopolies are generally exploited by the companies that have them. It is very difficult not to,(people are greedy). Even a regulated monopoly almost always results in higher prices, with product stagnation tossed in as an unwanted bonus.
The EU has not forced MS to license anyone to make their own version of Windows. They raided MS's piggy bank, restricted bundling and ordered MS to allow token access to code claiming it was to improve interoperability. The piggy bank was their primary target. Now it's the Intel piggy bank they want to crack into for a little bit. I doubt it will lead to licensing of x86. And even if it does, whoever picks up that challenge will have to compete with Intel and Amd. Even with the preferential treatment the EU gives corporations based inside it, that will be difficult.
LuminaryJanitor
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2005
- Messages
- 2,340
So what? Right now it's the inferior product. Buying something based on hypothetical performance in a non-existent application is stupid. Why not just go for the heavier one, on the off chance you some day want to bludgeon someone with it?
EDIT: Though in that case, I think I'd take the Phenom anyway. You could really fuck someone up with those pins.
SatTech
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
- Messages
- 3,381
I want the benchies!!!! Screw the $200 quads, gimme some $25 P4's for my next high end build..Gonna rock an nVidia Geforce 256 for some crazy AA/AF!
Oh, and Intel WILL exploit their monopoly if they get one...They have no competitor at the high end but themselves and still charge $1200+ for their Extreme line...
Oh, and Intel WILL exploit their monopoly if they get one...They have no competitor at the high end but themselves and still charge $1200+ for their Extreme line...
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,111
MS was a precedent? Are you kidding? A precedent for a money grab maybe.
What technology was MS forced to license?
MS was forced to let some code out so that software and hardware makers could make things work better with Windows. Or at least on an equal footing with MS's own similar offerings. It was not so they could copy Windows, use that code in their own products, or create a competitor of Microsofts's OS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoperability That is what interoperability is.
Anyway we are off topic, so later.
The pure ignorance and lies in this post are ... delicious. It's like sucking down a nice root beer float on a hot, disgusting day, except we're all being forced to suck down your bullshit and lies.
Wait, no, how is that delicious.. never mind.
How would I build a CPU that would interoperate with socket 1366?
How would I build a chipset that would interoperate with Nehalem?
How would I build a CPU that would interoperate with the "X86 platform"?
This is where the EU is going. And they will save us from the Intel monopoly after AMD ceases to exists.
Just imaging a thousand X86 clones from China. It will truely be a sight to behold.
How would I build a chipset that would interoperate with Nehalem?
How would I build a CPU that would interoperate with the "X86 platform"?
This is where the EU is going. And they will save us from the Intel monopoly after AMD ceases to exists.
Just imaging a thousand X86 clones from China. It will truely be a sight to behold.
you mean like all the GREAT SNES clones >.> and other bootleg CRAP they turn out
the Z80 was an open standered and see how well that lasted its still use in a few things but it never was evolved like the x86 line did
also intel used to lease out the x86 look at who made a 286 and 386 chips for a wile GASP AMD
soo yea i dont think AMD is going any were atm
WOW......The original post is a profound revelation.
I've owned just as many Intel Systems as AMD. They've both made awesome chips and total Sh*T.
I truly feel sorry for any Intel fanboy that doens't want Amd in the market(heard so many idiots saying they wish Amd would just die....ok......lol) as Intel will charge an Arm and a leg.........nuff said.
I've owned just as many Intel Systems as AMD. They've both made awesome chips and total Sh*T.
I truly feel sorry for any Intel fanboy that doens't want Amd in the market(heard so many idiots saying they wish Amd would just die....ok......lol) as Intel will charge an Arm and a leg.........nuff said.
KillaChaos
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2008
- Messages
- 351
LMAO Perfect response.
I really hope AMD has some 10Ghz CPU under wraps, as I will really hate it if Intel milks Nahelem for the next 3 years.
Besides I don't think intel wins until we introduce Quantum CPUs. VIA is still there...
I'm with you! I'm so looking forward to the end of moore's law and cpu prices going up 50-100%.
THIS gets my vote for the funniest thread on [H]ard- i almost spewed my coffee back in the mug.
but lets get cereal for a monument
we need AMD. we need need a 2nd man in the ring -
I was a long time Intel guy PIII./celeron 600 era,
then a long time AMD guy Thunderbird to 754/939 era
now is the era of C2D/quads.
the competition is good for Hardguys like us. look how great the video card game is now that AMD is back in the ring
I say "CLEAR!!!!" and zap life back into AMD - welcome back to the land of the living.
but lets get cereal for a monument
we need AMD. we need need a 2nd man in the ring -
I was a long time Intel guy PIII./celeron 600 era,
then a long time AMD guy Thunderbird to 754/939 era
now is the era of C2D/quads.
the competition is good for Hardguys like us. look how great the video card game is now that AMD is back in the ring
I say "CLEAR!!!!" and zap life back into AMD - welcome back to the land of the living.
high end cpus are only really relevant for data processing centers... I don't see the point of getting new ram, cpu and motherboard for a 15% increase in processing power. I went from a 2.5GHz clocked AMD x2 to a 3.4GHz clocked core2quad... next upgrade should be around a 5GHz 8 core processor... they won't make 'em for a couple years, probably.
Reality is, Intel has lots of competition at the low end from AMD and VIA. The high end is more $$ per processor but less overall profit because the market is so small comparatively.
Why d'you think Intel and Via are spending R&D on making Atom and Nano processors?
Reality is, Intel has lots of competition at the low end from AMD and VIA. The high end is more $$ per processor but less overall profit because the market is so small comparatively.
Why d'you think Intel and Via are spending R&D on making Atom and Nano processors?
silentwolf
n00b
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2005
- Messages
- 39
I don't think AMD is going anywhere. Sure they have been producing less powerful chips then Intel has for awhile now, but that does not mean they have not been selling chips at all. I still see a lot of low end desktops and laptops running AMD based processors.
I used to work at an electronics store, and I sold a lot more low end computers then I did high end ones, and most of those were running AMD chips. Truth of the matter is right now, the power users choice is Intel, hands down, but for most people, its still a toss up. I doubt the average PC buyer knows what the difference between an Intel and AMD chip is.
AMD is going to struggle, but they are not going to die. Look at Apple, people thought they were going to die, but they re the third largest PC manufacturer now. Companies turn around, and AMD is going to do just that soon.
I used to work at an electronics store, and I sold a lot more low end computers then I did high end ones, and most of those were running AMD chips. Truth of the matter is right now, the power users choice is Intel, hands down, but for most people, its still a toss up. I doubt the average PC buyer knows what the difference between an Intel and AMD chip is.
AMD is going to struggle, but they are not going to die. Look at Apple, people thought they were going to die, but they re the third largest PC manufacturer now. Companies turn around, and AMD is going to do just that soon.
Which processor would you buy?
One single core processor running at 3 GHz
OR
One dual core processor running at 1.5 GHz
The single core processor would win almost all tests and it would win big, but how would a user experience the processor? One single core processor that is running one demanding application and that is using some heavy task for a second, what happens to other applications then? They will be slooow
This is the difference between AMD and Intel, AMD is built for a better user experience. Intel is built to be good at performance tests that evaluate the processor speed.
The latency for Intel when it communicates with other hardware is big and that makes it a bit less responsive. Also it is not as smooth when running threaded games because it has some bottlenecks. Why do you need to OC a Intel You need to decrease the latency for the FSB.
AMD doesnt have these bottlenecks, it is very good at multitask and it has very good speed when it communicates with other hardware.
Intel users read on a paper that their computer is fast.
AMD users feel that their computer is fast en responsive.
One single core processor running at 3 GHz
OR
One dual core processor running at 1.5 GHz
The single core processor would win almost all tests and it would win big, but how would a user experience the processor? One single core processor that is running one demanding application and that is using some heavy task for a second, what happens to other applications then? They will be slooow
This is the difference between AMD and Intel, AMD is built for a better user experience. Intel is built to be good at performance tests that evaluate the processor speed.
The latency for Intel when it communicates with other hardware is big and that makes it a bit less responsive. Also it is not as smooth when running threaded games because it has some bottlenecks. Why do you need to OC a Intel You need to decrease the latency for the FSB.
AMD doesnt have these bottlenecks, it is very good at multitask and it has very good speed when it communicates with other hardware.
Intel users read on a paper that their computer is fast.
AMD users feel that their computer is fast en responsive.
this may have been valid 2 years ago but its not now
1. you would be hard pressed to find a single core any thing thats not VERY low end
2. most dual and quad core CPU are of similar clock speed with in a few 100 Mhz
3. i would over clock the dual core and have best of both
edit
also to the bandwidth and latency thing i just when from a A64 3800+ X2 OCed to 2.5Ghz to a Core 2 duo E7200 thats stock 2.53
even at stock the E7200 blows the A64 X2 out of the water and OCed to 3.6 i have over DOUBLED my frame rates
heres the thing even with low latency if the CPU cant push the data to were it needs to be in time your going to starve the GPU
yes a the A64 was that slow compared to my new E7200
all the bandwidth in world cant save you if your IPC is lower
look at the A64 vs. the P4 back 3 years ago a 2.0 A64 bear a 3.0+ P4 becouse the A64 had much higher IPC
this box i have now has 1600Mhz FSB and DDR2 1000 ram when over clocked
that more then makes up for the lack of an IMC and now that intel is adding one there chips will be even fast
but the bottom line is you need the raw CPU power behind it all to make it work
Sniper_Merc
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2004
- Messages
- 1,037
I think this guy must be maleficarus's little brother or something.....
Note, if you don't know who im refereing to, http://snipershide.us/mm/mm_updated.txt
Bandwidth isn't what's important, it is latency that needs to be low. If you understand how the computer work and calculates how the processors work then you will get some interesting numbers.
Running databases bandwidth is of course important.
Remember that Intel only has one channel transferring data. AMD Phenom has three if you add that it can read and write memory data at the same time.
Processors today spend most of the time waiting for data
jonneymendoza
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2004
- Messages
- 6,395
haha likewise
Bandwidth isn't what's important, it is latency that needs to be low. If you understand how the computer work and calculates how the processors work then you will get some interesting numbers.
Running databases bandwidth is of course important.
Remember that Intel only has one channel transferring data. AMD Phenom has three if you add that it can read and write memory data at the same time.
Processors today spend most of the time waiting for data
first off you table is bad
you cant compare any thing on that other then frame rate
seeing as the that we have 3-4 diffrent GPU clocked all over the place
that top AMD got there from brute force and even then its at the BOTTOM of the rigs with 8800Ultras
the lower one same deal
the other thing is the amount of system ram is missing so theres now way to tell if the systems that lower AMD beat out had the same or less ram
but its also near the bottom of the list for the 8800GTs
also using your same data set
note the 2.4 Q6600 that beat the crap out of that lower AMD cpu >.>
if it really was all about latancy then there should be know why a lower locked C2Q would beat it that bad
try again
oh and Crysis at settings like that is GPU limited
???
That depends on what conclusions you are trying to make. What you can see on that table is that the speed of the processor isnt that important and also that one cheap AMD is up and competing with all other Intel quads. Also remember that single threaded games love cache (crysis is almost single threaded)
Latency is important when you are running many threads or many applications that is working.
One thread and the 4-6 MB cache does wonders for Intel
and /facepalm
Crysis is VERY VERY heavily multi-threaded it can easly tap out 2 cores if not 4
go look up benchmarks for Supreme Commander
all that table proves is that a faster GPU is better in a game thats GASP GPU limited
-.- sigh
you really dont get do you
as much as i hate 3dmark; there CPU tests are pretty damn good a proving what CPU is better
In your dreams
it is using more than one thread but almost all work is done in one thread. test crysis on a quad and check hos much of the cpu that is used
............................................________
....................................,.-...................``~.,
.............................,.-...................................-.,
.........................,/...............................................:,
.....................,?..................................... .................\,
.................../..........................................................., }
................./......................................................,:`^`. .}
.............../...................................................,:...... .../
..............?.....__...................................... ...:`.........../
............./__.(.....~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_....~,_........~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......=,_.......-,_.......,.-~-,},.~;/....}
...........((.....*~_.......=-._......;,,./`..../............../
...,,,___.\`~,......~.,....................`.....}......... ...../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\
................................`:,,........................ ...`\..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_\..........._,-%.......`\
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`\
fun quote i found
one of the Devs for Crysis
With a statement like that I just have to ask, what the **** are you doing in [H]forum.