computer components & hardware - Is AMD doing well again?

HardwareBanter (http://www.hardwarebanter.com/index.php)

- AMD x86-64 Processors (http://www.hardwarebanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=37)

- - Is AMD doing well again? (http://www.hardwarebanter.com/showthread.php?t=178990)

Is AMD doing well again?

Rich Billionaire wrote:
I built my current computer in the beginning of 2008.
I went to New Egg today and I was very impressed with their new Phenom
II cpus. They have pretty much every power feature you could want.
So have they restored their reputation with gamers?

They seem to be :)

Is AMD doing well again?

I built my current computer in the beginning of 2008.
I went to New Egg today and I was very impressed with their new Phenom
II cpus. They have pretty much every power feature you could want.
So have they restored their reputation with gamers?

It's clear that intel cpus, especially the latest i7 or whichever cores,
are dramatically faster than any amd offering. That being said, amd's newer
cpus are 'fast enough' for most people -- and most gamers -- fast enough
that other factors like disgust at intel's predatory marketing practices,
nostalgia or inertia, will keep people buying amd. This includes me.

rms

Is AMD doing well again?

I agree with you
"Wes Newell" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 08:46:53 -0600, rms wrote:

I built my current computer in the beginning of 2008. I went to New
Egg today and I was very impressed with their new Phenom II cpus. They
have pretty much every power feature you could want. So have they
restored their reputation with gamers?

It's clear that intel cpus, especially the latest i7 or whichever
cores,
are dramatically faster than any amd offering. That being said, amd's
newer cpus are 'fast enough' for most people -- and most gamers -- fast
enough that other factors like disgust at intel's predatory marketing
practices, nostalgia or inertia, will keep people buying amd. This
includes me.

rms

I wouldn't say they are dramatically faster but they are dramatically
more expensive,:-)

Most people these days need nothing more than a $50 AMD cpu. Spending
hundreds or even a thousand more for some Intel cpu's is just a waste of
money.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
My Tivo Experience http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/tivo.htm
Tivo HD/S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm
AMD cpu help http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

Is AMD doing well again?

"Sexy one" writes:
Most people these days need nothing more than a $50 AMD cpu. Spending
hundreds or even a thousand more for some Intel cpu's is just a waste of
money.

I agree with you

Me too.

I've got an Intel core2 machine at work, and a phenom I machine at home,
and I've benchmarked my most important number-crunching app.

Normalizing the clock speeds, a single core of the core2 is maybe 5-10%
faster clock-for-clock, for pure cpu-crunching using this app (much of
that may be due to the cache size; this core2 has an _enormous_ L2
cache). The core2 _also_ has a faster clock, so overall it's pretty
fast (the phenom has double the number of cores though, so which is
better depends on the situation).

However -- for typical usage (running web browsers, editors, etc), the
phenom _system_ feels far speedier and more responsive. Chiefly, I
think this is because it has more memory, and is much faster at I/O (I'm
not entirely sure why; the hard disks are from the same manufacturer,
and of the same generation, but the difference is quite amazing). The
core2 system, despite the speedy little cpu, often feels like a bit of a
dog, really.

Small differences in cpu speed/efficiency matters to some people, but in
most cases, it's just one factor among many to consider when buying a
system.

-Miles

--
We are all lying in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
-Oscar Wilde

Is AMD doing well again?

On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:03:10 +0900, Miles Bader wrote:

However -- for typical usage (running web browsers, editors, etc), the
phenom _system_ feels far speedier and more responsive.

I have ALWAYS liked the AMD CPUs for their feel in use, even if they
benchmark lower.

I recently built a new system; MSI AM3 MB, Phenom II X3 720 BE CPU,
4 gigs of DDR3 1600 memory, and this thing FLYS are almost everything,
especially things like running QuickPar, WinRAR, and Agent at the same
time. I get WAY more done in less time, and just plain feel better at
the same time.

I also like Google Earths loading and response too!

Is AMD doing well again?

On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 08:46:53 -0600, rms wrote:

I built my current computer in the beginning of 2008. I went to New
Egg today and I was very impressed with their new Phenom II cpus. They
have pretty much every power feature you could want. So have they
restored their reputation with gamers?

It's clear that intel cpus, especially the latest i7 or whichever
cores,
are dramatically faster than any amd offering. That being said, amd's
newer cpus are 'fast enough' for most people -- and most gamers -- fast
enough that other factors like disgust at intel's predatory marketing
practices, nostalgia or inertia, will keep people buying amd. This
includes me.

I agree. I have been using AMD since the K6 days. It has always offered
a better value for me than Intel solutions. I'm not an overclocker or
modder and don't care about having the absolute fastest system
available. I just want a well-priced, well-performing, and reliable
system.

One of the things that Intel's been doing recently, which really bugs me,
is dividing up certain new features simply for market segmentation
purposes:

* Want hardware virtualization? I do so I can run Windows efficiently
under Linux. Some Intel CPUs have it and some don't (http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_vt-
x#Intel_Virtualization_Technology_for_x86_.28Intel _VT-x.29), even when
they're based on the same core... you have to pay more to get this
relatively straightforward feature.

* Want x86_64? I run Linux and have 5gb of RAM. Some Intel CPUs do it,
some don't (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
X86_64#Intel_64_Implementations). Notably, none of the Atom N-series
CPUs support x86_64 (the ones used in netbooks).

* Want DVI or HDMI output on a low-power Atom system? Tough luck! As
far as I can tell, all of the Atom chipsets only have VGA output, because
Intel doesn't want to cut into its pricier offerings. I would like to
build a compact, low-power media center. Atom seems to fit the bill
since you can get a motherboard, processor, and case for $100 these
days. But none of them have DVI or HDMI output. (I would love to be
proved wrong on this!)

To be fair to Intel... I *do* really appreciate the forward-thinking
stance they've adopted in terms of making open-source drivers available
for their graphics adapters. Open-source Linux drivers for Intel
graphics are way ahead of ATI and especially NVidia as a result.
However, AMD has been doing the right thing recently and releasing docs
for their ATI GPUs, so ATI drivers are catching up fast.

Dan

Is AMD doing well again?

On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:18:26 +0000, Dan Lenski wrote:

* Want DVI or HDMI output on a low-power Atom system? Tough luck! As
far as I can tell, all of the Atom chipsets only have VGA output,
because Intel doesn't want to cut into its pricier offerings. I would
like to build a compact, low-power media center. Atom seems to fit the
bill since you can get a motherboard, processor, and case for $100 these
days. But none of them have DVI or HDMI output. (I would love to be
proved wrong on this!)

There are lots of Atom systems with HDMI output. They just don't use the
Intel chipset. The Nvidia ION chipset for one.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
My Tivo Experience http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/tivo.htm
Tivo HD/S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm
AMD cpu help http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

Is AMD doing well again?

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:17:13 +0000, Wes Newell wrote:

On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:18:26 +0000, Dan Lenski wrote:

* Want DVI or HDMI output on a low-power Atom system? Tough luck! As
far as I can tell, all of the Atom chipsets only have VGA output,
because Intel doesn't want to cut into its pricier offerings. I would
like to build a compact, low-power media center. Atom seems to fit the
bill since you can get a motherboard, processor, and case for $100
these days. But none of them have DVI or HDMI output. (I would love
to be proved wrong on this!)

There are lots of Atom systems with HDMI output. They just don't use the
Intel chipset. The Nvidia ION chipset for one.

Yeah, since writing that I found out about the Nvidia Ion chipset, which
is pretty new. There are a bunch of good deals on Zotac boards with this
chipset, apparently (http://forums.slickdeals.net/showthread.php?
t=1504403). The problem is that NVidia has the worst open-source driver
support of the major GPU makers. And with 2D/3D graphics improving so
rapidly for ATI and Intel GPUs, I'm reluctant to go with NVidia.

It turns out that there *are* a few Atom motherboards with the Intel
chipset and DVI output! Here's one, rather pricey at around $200: http://
http://www.jetway.com.tw/jp/IPC_Boar...name=NF94-270-
LF And some mo http://www.google.com/products?q=intel+945gse+atom+dvi
+motherboard&aq=f For some reason, *all* of these use the N-series Atoms
rather than the better-spec'ed single-core 230 and dual-core 330.

So, what's going on here? I've heard it claimed and then refuted that
Intel won't unbundle the Atom from the 945 chipset: http://
http://www.internetnews.com/hardware...nies+Squeezing
+nVidia+Out+From+Atom.htm . Is it possible that Intel leans hard on
board makers not to provide DVI outputs for Atom boards??? Any other
news on this front that I haven't caught up on?

Dan