Bye bye AMD

"fish" wrote in message
...
about the price of an AMD-51FX.


765$ on newegg
thats' about a 100$ difference.. but the p4ee isnt out yet so who knows

but the basic 3.2 is 616$ on newegg so there is no way that the EE chip will
be equal/less than that any time soon

Toby Groves wrote:
This is AMD's major problem! They are very popular amongst users such
as us because their processors are cheap and can be overclocked, but AMD
can't afford to sell cheap processors anymore. They need people to
start buying the more expensive ones if they are to make any real money,
and as long as you can buy a dirt cheap CPU and overclock the tits off
it, who the hell is gonna buy an A64?

AMD don't seem to think that this is their problem - you think locking thier
processors is hard?

I think you'll find that they made a specific decision to leave their
processors since the Palamino unlocked. I'm not saying they could make it
impossible, but they could certainly make it a whole lot harder.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

Mark Nichols wrote:
Well why haven't Intel done that yet???

'cos they can draw more money out of us by holding back.

Infact why haven't they released the P4EE 3.2Ghz yet???

Same reason, either that or they haven't got the yields high enough.

AMD could ramp up clock speeds the same.... Once yeilds get a bit
higher...

They can't... I suspect that getting yields high enough is the problem. The
current core is practically maxed out.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

Toby Groves wrote:
This is AMD's major problem! They are very popular amongst users such
as us because their processors are cheap and can be overclocked, but AMD
can't afford to sell cheap processors anymore. They need people to
start buying the more expensive ones if they are to make any real money,
and as long as you can buy a dirt cheap CPU and overclock the tits off
it, who the hell is gonna buy an A64?


You can overclock the snott out of an INTEL 2.4c to over 3.6gh,and the price
is fixin to drop on them very soon .

Well I suspect its not at the max of the core....

In fact that a crock of crap...

Athlon XP's run at 2.3Ghz quite easily... They have a pipeline depth of 10.
Athlon 64 has a pipeline depth of 12.

Hence, it should be able to ramp to higher speeds on the same process
technology.
Just like the P4 does (20 staged pipeline) just not to that extent.

And its a better process technology any way, since its using Silicon On
Insulator...
I reckon they can get the core to at least 2.6Ghz by mid-next year when they
switch to 0.09microns

------
Mark

However I do believe yeilds are low....



"Ben Pope" wrote in message
...
Mark Nichols wrote:
Well why haven't Intel done that yet???

'cos they can draw more money out of us by holding back.

Infact why haven't they released the P4EE 3.2Ghz yet???

Same reason, either that or they haven't got the yields high enough.

AMD could ramp up clock speeds the same.... Once yeilds get a bit
higher...

They can't... I suspect that getting yields high enough is the problem.
The
current core is practically maxed out.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

and by then the Pentium will be in the mid 4GHz and over clocking to more
then 5Ghz, I reckon (with a piece of straw hanging from my lower lip).


"Mark Nichols" wrote in message
...
Well I suspect its not at the max of the core....

In fact that a crock of crap...

Athlon XP's run at 2.3Ghz quite easily... They have a pipeline depth of
10.
Athlon 64 has a pipeline depth of 12.

Hence, it should be able to ramp to higher speeds on the same process
technology.
Just like the P4 does (20 staged pipeline) just not to that extent.

And its a better process technology any way, since its using Silicon On
Insulator...
I reckon they can get the core to at least 2.6Ghz by mid-next year when
they
switch to 0.09microns

------
Mark

However I do believe yeilds are low....



"Ben Pope" wrote in message
...
Mark Nichols wrote:
Well why haven't Intel done that yet???

'cos they can draw more money out of us by holding back.

Infact why haven't they released the P4EE 3.2Ghz yet???

Same reason, either that or they haven't got the yields high enough.

AMD could ramp up clock speeds the same.... Once yeilds get a bit
higher...

They can't... I suspect that getting yields high enough is the problem.
The
current core is practically maxed out.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 03:46:38 +0000, fish wrote:

"Mark Nichols" wrote in message
...
Well I suspect its not at the max of the core....

I reckon they can get the core to at least 2.6Ghz by mid-next year when
they switch to 0.09microns

and by then the Pentium will be in the mid 4GHz and over clocking to more
then 5Ghz, I reckon (with a piece of straw hanging from my lower lip).

I've got $10,000 cash money that says they won't. If you care to take this
bet, let me know. We can put the $20,000 in an acount that will give the
total to the winner. Keep in mind that mid next year is only 9 months
away. And I havent looked at the Intel roadmap yet. June 30 will be the
date that they either have a 4.5GHz cpu available on the market or you
lose. I need some easy money.:-)

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.html

Mark Nichols wrote:
Well I suspect its not at the max of the core....

In fact that a crock of crap...

Athlon XP's run at 2.3Ghz quite easily... They have a pipeline depth of
10. Athlon 64 has a pipeline depth of 12.

I'm sorry, I missed the beginning of the thread... I thought you were
referring to the Barton core.

Or course, the new core using SOI will be able to clock much higher.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

For what its worth.....

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11759



On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:15:07 GMT, "Toby Groves"
wrote:

Well having read the reviews of the Athlon 64 & FX today, I have to say
I think AMD are toast

From a performance perspective, the P4EE beats the A64 in most
benchmarks in 32-bit at least, and as 64-bit is total pie-in-the-sky at
present, this is really all that matters.

The A64 is going to be expensive too, as it's costly for AMD to produce.
In this situation, I can't really see why the guy in the street is going
to go for AMD over Intel.

If, and it's a big if, 64-bit turns out to be a winner, then it would
now appear that Intel have hedged their bets and built the Yamhill
extensions into the P4. They obviously don't want to advertise this to
the world, as it will practically kill off the Itanium, but it's there
if they need it.

So basically, AMD's latest and greatest processor fails to even beat the
latest iteration of Intel's old P4, never mind Prescott. Intel will
produce Prescott on a 90nm process using 300mm wafers, whilst AMD are
stuck with 130nm on 200mm wafers and a bloody huge 192mm2 die, meaning
their costs are stratospheric by comparison. AMD don't anticipate
moving to 90nm until the middle of 2004. Not only will this keep the
cost of the Hammer series high, but I suspect it may prevent them from
ramping the speed up much either. By mid-2004, Prescott will be up to
the 4Ghz range, leaving A64 and AFX well behind.

I've been a fan of AMD for a while now, but I'm forced to admit that if
I were buying or upgrading now, I'd be spending money on Intel kit.

I do not gamble, ever. Been to Atlantic City and Las Vegas here in the
states several times and have never even placed a coin into a machine. So I
will graciously pass on the offer.

However, according to the Intel roadmap released in July of this year the
Prescott s478 (3.2GHz - 3.6GHz) will be available before the end of this
year. The Prescott s775 (3.6 - 4.4GHz) will be available before the end of
the second quarter, 2004. Additionally the Tejas s775 (4.4 - 5.6 GHz) will
be available by the 4th Quarter of 2004.
Intel has been on time, so I expect most of this will occur when stated. So
by the end of Q2 (less then 9 months away) Intel will be selling CPUs in the
3.6 to 4.4Ghz range and we will all expect a sizable overclock to the
4.5Ghz - 5.5Ghz range.
I should have taken your bet I didn't make up what I said earlier, I just
read it on the Intel site and a few other techie sites. Not that difficult
to find.

BTW: According to the Intel released roadmap, the Tejas (s775 ?) with the
266fsb (5.6GHz - 9.2GHz) will be available in the second quarter of 2005.


"Wes Newell" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 03:46:38 +0000, fish wrote:

"Mark Nichols" wrote in message
...
Well I suspect its not at the max of the core....

I reckon they can get the core to at least 2.6Ghz by mid-next year when
they switch to 0.09microns

and by then the Pentium will be in the mid 4GHz and over clocking to
more
then 5Ghz, I reckon (with a piece of straw hanging from my lower lip).

I've got $10,000 cash money that says they won't. If you care to take this
bet, let me know. We can put the $20,000 in an acount that will give the
total to the winner. Keep in mind that mid next year is only 9 months
away. And I havent looked at the Intel roadmap yet. June 30 will be the
date that they either have a 4.5GHz cpu available on the market or you
lose. I need some easy money.:-)

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.html