Thursday, August 03, 2006

AMD fully executing the kill strategy I proposed

AMD changed the rule of the game. It's called x2. On server, the game is 4P, on desktop, the game is 2P. In 3rd world, it's affordable 64 bit (32 bit x2).

1) 4x4 will start well below $1000 and become a main stream platform, which will permanently pin Intel at half the performance. We should be able to get two x2 3800+ or X2 4600+s that will frag Con XE 6800+ by up to 80%, at lower cost. Once we get to K8L, we will have 8 cores cranking. 4x4 will open a new era in personal computing: from 1P to 2P. Just like AMD64 did to server computing: moving the main stream from 2P to 4P, and pushing Woodcrest down to the ultra low end.

2) Major price slash on Socket 754 Semprons (starting at $38) to halt the Celeron flood in the 3rd wolrd

3) we already talked previously about the low cost dual core priced below Intel's ASP.

Well, AMD and Intel execs receive my regular briefings on strategic analysis. Whether they arrived at similar conclusions independently before or after my proposal is another question.

45 Comments:

Blogger mork said...

This blog entry was allmost hilarious to read. So you self admitt that AMD needs 4 core solution to beat a singel C2D X6800.

About that little server remark of yours. You seem to be getting your time frame mixed up (as usual). When AMD introduced its Opteron series Woodcrest didnt even exist on paper. So who you could frag it by default noone but your self can understand.

You still seem to be in huge phase of denial. C2D frags AMD at Desktop, Laptop and 2P servers (yes little shakira AMD wins 4-p).

Arnt you getting tired of writing these bogus claims of yours? We are still waiting for that little proof of your where you claimed C2D couldnt beat A64 @ 64bits (ohhh wrong as usual), the proof on that dual core cpus causes dual explosions, and not to mention your moronic claims on Intel going bankrupt in 7 quaters (or is it 5 now?)....

Btw: 4x4 will not be a mainstream system even in your wetest of dreams. It will be an enthusiast system.

And on a diffrent note. I talked to a friend at Lunds Technical University (sweden). Since you claim your a Ph.D i wondered if it would be possible to have you as a guest lecture. We will ask the council about this :) .. Are you willing to accept if it goes are way?

9:51 AM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous enumae said...

Its nice to see the price come down, but they still say, or have not said otherwise that its still FX only...

"Apparently the concerns were that since it will require Athlon FX processors an entry-level machine would be well over US$1,000, with higher-end varieties running much higher."

Also...

"AMD has made a committment to selling entry-level products based on the 4x4 platform starting "well under $1,000.""

Were your x2 3800+ or X2 4600+, originally designed for the 4x4 platform?

Maybe someone could clarify this for me, thanks.

10:04 AM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous george said...

AMD is levrageing there strengths, because of HT they can pin intel to the wall, because with there FSB they can coppy but at much lower preformance, just like the Pentium D xxx.

10:19 AM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And how will it be in any way good for one company to control the whole x86 CPU market?

"Yes, but an AMD monopoly won't be as bad as an Intel one!" some people might say. To this, I would say that robbing a convenience store isn't as bad as robbing a bank, but that doesn't mean it's okay to go around robbing convenience stores!

11:03 AM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, AMD and Intel execs receive my regular briefings on strategic analysis. Whether they arrived at similar conclusions independently before or after my proposal is another question.

Your 'briefings', eh?

Any grade school smartypants could have decided to price Semprons comparatively with Celerons.

Yet you feel that you've made a fantastic judgement call and that AMD and Intel read your 'briefs' and may even possibly listening to you?

No doubt AMD doesn't even take you seriously. I don't know who you are emailing over there, but I'm quite certain their 'delete' button's paint is wearing off because of you.

I'm cracking up. You are so full of yourself that you're beyond sane. Like the crazy homeless guy that emails NASA about rocket designs from the nearest libraray every day.

Or is Hector your buddy from doctorz skool?

11:13 AM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger Mad Mod Mike said...

""Yes, but an AMD monopoly won't be as bad as an Intel one!" some people might say. To this, I would say that robbing a convenience store isn't as bad as robbing a bank, but that doesn't mean it's okay to go around robbing convenience stores!"

That analogy is f*cking stupid.

11:20 AM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger Pop Catalin Sever said...

Well an 3800+ cost now 161.99$ on tigerdirect.com. Acording to lastest TomsHardware test an X2 3800+ beats an Intel 965EE (Extreme Edition) an some benchmarcs (especialy games) and is in the 5-10% performance range on other tests.

And 965 EE costs 1048.99$ on NewEgg.com (tiger doesn't have it).

That gives AMD an astonishing 650%+ better performa/price ratio in the same performance range. Read that again 650%+ better performance/price on the same performance range CPUs!!!!!!! Now beat that Mr. Intel!

Not only that but AMD has lauched low power variants for their A64's. With a eficient 3800+ having an thermal envelope of 35W (yeah 35 tha's right)

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-energy-efficient.html

Wich gives you an 4x4 system using two X2 3800+ processors with TDP of no more than 70 Watt !!!!
Beat that again Mr. Intel!!!

Bye Bye Intel!!! I for one won't be missing you!

P.S. Apple looking to use AMD procs ;)

http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2006/08/apple_finally_g.html

11:23 AM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

doc, please do another one of those calls between paul and mike. i miss the humors. thanks.

11:55 AM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Wirmish said...

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Energy Efficient:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-energy-efficient.html

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=854&cid=1

Can't wait to see the same test with 65nm CPU !

11:57 AM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Wirmish said...

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Energy Efficient:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-energy-efficient.html

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=854&cid=1

Idle (X2 90nm vs C2D 65nm) -> http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-energy-efficient/cpu-idle-1.png

Can't wait to see the same test with 65nm CPU !

12:10 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We should be able to get two x2 3800+ or X2 4600+s that will frag Con XE 6800+ by up to 80%, at lower cost

Can you stop saying that it's misleading. AMD has said that only special FX processors will be used. Yes you can build a 4x4 system spending less than $1000 for CPUs but thats because AMD is releasing new lower cost, lower-end FXs. No 512k models can be used because they only have 1 HT link. 1MB models are going to be rebranded FXs since they actually do have 3HT links.

1:52 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Idle (X2 90nm vs C2D 65nm) -> http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-energy-efficient/cpu-idle-1.png

Can't wait to see the same test with 65nm CPU !


Yes and as soon as you do anything on the CPU, Conroe uses less power than the 65W X2s and not much more than the 35W X2s. Intel's 65W TDP is much more than AMD's 65W TDP afterall.

1:54 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One thing needs to be pointed out from the Xbit labs test. Consider this:

However, for the dedicated AMD fans I would like to mention a few facts that may change the attitude to the last chart. The thing is that S&M, just like many other tools creating ultimate processor workloads, use special floating-point operations. And it was fine for CPUs on K8 or NetBurst microarchitecture. However, Core 2 Duo processors do not get loaded to the full extent with these utilities. We had to go through a number of different burn-programs to realize that there are a few old ones that do the job much better than S&M, prime95 and others.

That set off alarm bells for me. How do we actually know if they loaded down the Core2 CPU properly in all the tests? I'm not saying they tried to intentionally mislead, but it made the tests suspect.

2:50 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Intel crowd seemed more contrite lately. I thought that daily bad news ongoing for months would give anyone a complex, but not the Intel crowd. Intel is already technologically bankrupt and needs goodwill from the press to compete on paper. I’m very perplexed on how a seemingly educated crowd can read this and other blogs and still make the goofy rebuttals.

If you see most of the best companies on the planet aligning with AMD, why is that? Yesterday Dell announced 1.2 million boxes with AMD’s inside, you should ask yourself why? Intel has 4.3 billion in overstock, why? When you hear things like Intel stuffing the channels, what do you think about? When you hear about exciting technologies like HT and Zram, what are your thoughts? When you discover Intel is years behind (undisputable) in architecture, what are you thinking?

I’m not telling you what to think, I’m just wondering what you’re thinking and why?

3:53 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

"Yes and as soon as you do anything on the CPU, Conroe uses less power than the 65W X2s and not much more than the 35W X2s. Intel's 65W TDP is much more than AMD's 65W TDP afterall."

You shouldn't have reached that conclusion based on just the S&M results.

If you go google around other Athlon 64 X2EE reviews you'll find in almost all cases it consumes less system power than Conroe. (Given the same drive/memory/graphics/network are used, it's the system power that matter here - don't forget that AMD's 65W include its memory controller.)

4:18 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yo PhD imposter and fanboys...

If you see most of the best companies on the planet aligning with AMD

Yes ATI a winning company unites with AMD? DOn't make me laugh. ATI is merging because it can't compete on its own againt nVIDA in graphics nor INTEL in chipsets. Oh.. did I notice they don't make money either. Joining two money losing organzation. A recipe for failure.

Yes Dell another company that has dissapointed for the past 3 quarters as their direct sales model has run out of steam. HP and others have fixed their manufacturing systems and compete well now. Dell has no retail presence. To think somehow offering AMD will fix this is laughable. Anoter company that is no longer viewed as a leader joins with AMD.

Lastly we come to AMD; dropped prices 50%. Ouch tell me folks what does dropping your revenue by 50% do to their profits. I don't recall them making 500 million last quarter. Ouch.. they are headed for a loss. Got to suck capital exansions and absorb the depreciation of their 65nm factory.

AMD just got their benchmark leadership kicked away. They got their power leadership blown away in the same tests. Any questions go look at TOm's review today. Sharikou will claim as always another cheating slight of hand by INTEL and no 64bit. Same old story. He sounds like INTEL did in the old netbust days.

Now the PhD pretender tells how a 4x4 can beat INTELs dual core. How is this suppose to impress me? Its like my boy telling him how he watched four bullies beat up on our neighbors two boys. Sorry not impressed.

4x4 equals twice the silicon area sold at 1/2 the price. Another money losing proposition for AMD.

Not surprising from a company that has a track record of not making money

5:07 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger netrama said...

"I’m not telling you what to think, I’m just wondering what you’re thinking and why?

I think most of the so called Intel fan boys are actually - petty Intel share holders , who are trying their bit to bring Intel out of its death bed. They probably have no clue of even what is discussed here ..a classic example being "The DOCTOR" ..lol

5:10 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

mad cow disease said: "That analogy is f*cking stupid"

WOW man... It pays to go to school.. Just as the Doc!

6:02 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr. Sharikou,

I must have missed the link you posted to your referenced articles by IT Journals.. Could you please re-post them in an article.. I'd love to read your in depth analysis of the IT industry.

Thanks Again.

6:06 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, All IT Fans:

I created a new site for unwinding.. Visit my blog site and drop me a line:


itkitty.blogspot.com

6:57 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That set off alarm bells for me. How do we actually know if they loaded down the Core2 CPU properly in all the tests? I'm not saying they tried to intentionally mislead, but it made the tests suspect.

When I read that passage it actually set off alarm bells for me. That tells you that Core 2 Duo has a lot of spare processing power. A program that fully loads a K8 or Netburst processor doesn't even fully load Core 2 Duos. It just shows how strong the architecture really is.

7:29 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sharikou - I'm surprised to see you are no longer publishing your Newegg Topr indicator to track who's winning the price war; it seems to be such a relibale indicator. The other day AMD had 3 of 5 top slots and today it is 4 of 5.

As when you posted you previous update it was 5 of 5 AMD chips, is AMD starting to lose some ground on the price war?

Or perhaps the Newegg Top 5 is not really a very good indicator and you just chose to use it beacuse it happened to suit your argument at the time?

Just curious to hear some more of your insight in this specific area. Care to opine?

7:31 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger nyx said...

Just like to ask all you guys attacking Sharikou: Are you reading up on current events? Sharikou is posting articles on what is currently taking place, with an explanation as to why he believes such events are taking place. Intel has an alarmingly high inventory it can't dispose of, Intel is losing it's marketshare rapidly with each passing day, Intel is laying off an extraordinarily high number of employees, Intel has situated Fab plants in countries which are now under war and being heavily bombarded (i.e. Israel), Intel's Core2 system infrastructure cannot compete with HyperTransport 3.0 which has a 41.6 GB/s aggregate bandwidth, Intel Corp. has disclosed three security vulnerabilities in its Centrino-based Intel PRO/Wireless Network Connection hardware allowing attackers to exploit these vulnerabilities to execute arbitrary code on a target system remotely to obtain access to wireless network security information or escalate system privileges to kernel level, Intel Core notebooks have been heating to the point of exploding or at least causing severe component damage internally, shared caches as in the Core 2 series perform poorly under heavy system loads in certain raid formations (such as Raid 5), AMD 4X4 destroys Core 2 performance wise, and the list goes on. Intel's current stock price reflects the problems it's facing. To say that people will not buy into AMD 4X4 setup for greater performance results, is just like saying no one will buy into SLI (or Quad SLI or Crossfire for added performance gains). If serious performance gains don't interest you, then you can also buy into an AMD system because it's reliable and affordable. The current price war has made an AMD system very afforadable and they have a proven track record of reliability with their older Opteron lines. It seems that AMD is winning architecturally, performance wise (with 4X4 and the upcoming Socket F 1207 Opterons), price wise (especially on the heavily discounted older lines), reliability wise, and feature wise.

HyperTransport 3.0 supports a variety of new features including AC coupling mode, hot plugging, un-ganging mode and dynamic power management for the support of extended signal transmission distance, typical of backplane and chassis-to-chassis implementations.
These new capabilities reinforce HyperTransport's role as the most flexible, most scalable, highest performance and lowest latency processor-to-processor and processor-to-peripheral interconnect technology the market has to offer and continue the HyperTransport tradition of interoperability with other popular industry technologies.

7:42 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous BigBadWolf said...

Anomymous coward wrote

"Yes ATI a winning company unites with AMD? DOn't make me laugh. ATI is merging because it can't compete on its own againt nVIDA in graphics nor INTEL in chipsets. Oh.. did I notice they don't make money either. Joining two money losing organzation. A recipe for failure"

Oh fanboy you failed to mention the fact that Sun is aligned with AMD , IBM is aligned with AMD.
Sometime ago Henri Richard said , all the eco-system is working with us against Intel.

Perhaps you consider both of the heavy weights as losers
So get the facts straight you Fannie.
BTW you fannies are like a herd of sheep.It's just impossible to tell one Baaaaaaa from another.

8:16 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok, I'm a big fan of what AMD has done in the last few years, but proposing that they fight with Intel on the Celeron front does not add up for me.

AMD does NOT have the capacity, so let Intel produce all the $35 chips, and let AMD fight for the high margin stuff.

If we were talking about a small die like the old Athlon, especially if it were produced at 90 or 65 nm, then yes, AMD could compete for the low end and still make a good profit. (Which reminds me, why did AMD not do a die shrink on the old Athlon, they would be VERY small, use much less current, clock much higher, and still not canabalize the higher end Athlon 64's)

8:28 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

As when you posted you previous update it was 5 of 5 AMD chips, is AMD starting to lose some ground on the price war?

No. Intel reacted and slashed P4D 940 prices and some morons bought. ewegg.com is a very good indicator. I expect AMD to drop X2 4200 price to deny Intel's 940 dump.

8:35 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger nyx said...

zum"This blog entry was allmost hilarious to read. So you self admitt that AMD needs 4 core solution to beat a singel C2D X6800."
You miss the point. AMD has been utilizing multiprocessor boards for quite some time with its server lines (and so has Intel). The added performance gains are obvious. Because of the multiprocessor system's high cost, marketing was mainly directed towards businesses. AMD is offering an affordable multiprocessor system with its 4X4 line (in comparison to what server systems normally cost and not in comparison to budget single processor systems for the average user).
AMD has invested in a HyperTransport layout. HyperTransport is the only CPU-native interconnect the industry has to offer and that enables efficient, high-throughput, minimum latency direct processor-to-processor, processor to-peripheral (via HTX connector standard) and processor-to-I/O interconnects. HyperTransport was designed with processor to processor and processor to peripheral-I/O interconnects in mind. Of course AMD is going to make use of this capability. This has been the current direction within their business market and likewise is now the direction in the rest of their market. AMD's infrastructure with 4X4 destroys the Core 2 and removes the ceiling which gamers, multitaskers, and so on used to experience. I, like many of my friends, have been using multiprocessor systems for over a year now. I have been using a Tyan Thunder K8WE with two dual core Opterons for quite some time now. I also have a few friends who have invested in Iwill and Supermicro multiprocessor Opteron systems. Some even forked out for the beautiful Quadcore PowerPC G5 when it was first released. I think it's great that AMD is going to make multiprocessor systems more affordable so that more people can enjoy the performance gains we have for over a year. I guarantee you won't have to spend nearly as much money as I did when I built my Tyan Thunder system if you buy an AMD 4X4. AMD's direction has yeilded far better performance results and this is evident with the 4X4, but many of us have already bought into this concept last year. Multiprocessor systems, Raided drives through SCSI or SATA2 PCI Express controllers, ample system memory at decent latencies, high end ATI or Nvidia videocards (in SLI if you wish), and so on have destroyed single processor ricer systems and will continue to do so on more levels than I wish to count. If Intel can't see that customers want the performance that businesses have enjoyed at a reasonable price, then that's their problem and they're idiots. Be it playing games, graphic designing, medical imaging, creating 3D imagery (for feature films, interactive games, broadcast graphics and industrial design), encoding, burning, format conversions, realtime encrypting/decrypting, large sized compression/decompression tasks, and so forth, the ability to perform such tasks well and even simultaneously is possible through the use of multiprocessor systems. Rendering at a whole new level as well. Intel can't exactly claim that a system utilizing 4 cores is stupid when the bast*rds are producing a quad core processor by 2007. AMD is releasing a quad core processor as well, yet they will have the framework to allow two quad cores to work in harmony in a single system. Actually, they already support motherboards with up to 4 sockets with their current Opteron lines so 16 core systems will be offered in 2007 I would imagine. It seems as though AMD systems offer less limitations and now at an affordable price.

9:04 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When the Conroe is clearly shown a crown, Intel would have win by pumping Conroe. But still Intel pump its 'INTELligent heater chip' PD like crazy. Looks like immaturity of 65nm on Intel side. They should have woo the world having the 1st 45nm but kept quiet on having very low yield in the back. And kept those monkey worshippers proud that they have better manufacturing.


"So you self admitt that AMD needs 4 core solution to beat a singel C2D X6800."
LOL. Do remember that Intel need to have at least 4MB of cache to be faster than a, oh, 3yrs old chip? Do remember that Intel need to, again, simply slap two die together to have some temporary mockup 4P solutions to challenge 4x4? I just wish Intel good luck.

9:07 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous BigBadWolf said...

Hehe a bad news for Fannies

http://www.informationweek.com/hardware/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=191601574

9:30 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous george said...

if intel had a 4x4 soulution it will be creamed because of the difrenses in archatecture. lets see 2 imc + dedicated chanals in each direction + 4 cores will cream intel, just like opteron creames Woodcrest. 4X4 is just a big change in rules for procsessors. this is BIG.

10:00 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger nyx said...

Unix systems are supposed to be secure. Thanxs Intel for exposing a serious vulnerability in a once very secure system. Well if the MacBook doesn't catch on fire, then one only has to worry about network threats. That is a serious vulnerability when one can "take over any Apple MacBook if its wireless card is turned on, even if the owner is not connected to a wireless network." That's pathetic. Obviously this is going to lead to a list of other vulnerabilities with the Intel line of MACs. I guess Intel is going to try to drag down Apple along with all the other companies it has screwed over. Thanxs for posting that bigbadwolf. That's definitely good to know.

11:21 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger duploxxx said...

Anonymous said...

Idle (X2 90nm vs C2D 65nm) -> http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-energy-efficient/cpu-idle-1.png

Can't wait to see the same test with 65nm CPU !

Yes and as soon as you do anything on the CPU, Conroe uses less power than the 65W X2s and not much more than the 35W X2s. Intel's 65W TDP is much more than AMD's 65W TDP afterall.

no they just start to throttle... so your performance goed down....

11:23 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Yesterday Dell announced 1.2 million boxes with AMD’s"

Dell announced this? I'm not sure that's too accurate...unless Dell now owns the Inquirer.

Before folks start flaming, I'm not saying the story isn't true, but folks around here sure have a creative way of reading through things and interperting how they want.

Inquirer is the same site that had an "inside" contact that talked about reverse hyperthreading, is it not? People tend to believe it when the story favors their company of choice and dismiss it as bunk when they post an article in favor of the other.

I tend to disbelieve anything Inquirer says (regardless of whether it is pro-AMD or pro-Intel) unless they are quoting a more reliable source on the web or person from either company (and not their own "discussions" from unknown sources).

11:43 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Ho Ho said...

if intel had a 4x4 soulution it will be creamed because of the difrenses in archatecture. lets see 2 imc + dedicated chanals in each direction + 4 cores will cream intel, just like opteron creames Woodcrest. 4X4 is just a big change in rules for procsessors. this is BIG.

Well, dual FSB helps with bandwidt but it won't be exactly good solution when you have to go through NB to synchronize caches.

Of cource around the same time as 4x4 ships quadcore Core2's should be released so basically Intel would have the same number of cores but will only need one socket MB and single cooler (==less noise).

Of cource as it will most likely use a single FSB channel it won't have as good bandwidth to all cores as 4x4 with separate RAM for each CPU and it will still have to go through NB to sync the two separate dualcore CPU's.

12:42 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger mork said...

"Do remember that Intel need to have at least 4MB of cache to be faster than a, oh, 3yrs old chip? Do remember that Intel need to, again, simply slap two die together to have some temporary mockup 4P solutions to challenge 4x4? I just wish Intel good luck."

Well since alot of sites report E6300 to be faster then FX-62 in a couple of benchies i dont think the cache is the decisive factor.
And why are you AMD fanbois still jabbering about A64 being 3 years old? Its not the same chip since the introduction you babblering idiot. And if you listen to shakira and madlamermikey in a couple of entrys we all learn that C2D is nothing more then a P3, wich is what? 6-7 years old now?

"When the Conroe is clearly shown a crown, Intel would have win by pumping Conroe. But still Intel pump its 'INTELligent heater chip' PD like crazy. Looks like immaturity of 65nm on Intel side. They should have woo the world having the 1st 45nm but kept quiet on having very low yield in the back. And kept those monkey worshippers proud that they have better manufacturing."

Shows how much you know about corprate world. Just because you introduce new cpu lines you cant stop producing the old ones. Intel has contracts wich forces it to deliver Netburst sheit.

Nyx said
"Just like to ask all you guys attacking Sharikou: Are you reading up on current events? Sharikou is
posting articles on what is currently taking place, with an explanation as to why he believes such
events are taking place."

From a guy that claims he`s a news reporter and and Ph.D at that. Look at any test site on the net little friend. His only sources are sites like Inq wich are known for their bad,and extremly low, quality.
Unless you missed your english classes in school, let my tell the first word that pops into me head when I hear this guys name "BAIS"

Nyx once more said
"Intel is laying off an extraordinarily high number of employees, Intel has situated Fab plants
in countries which are now under war and being heavily bombarded (i.e. Israel)"

So are AMD, or did you just like shakria forgett that?
Btw: Since C2D aint done in Isreal but in Ireland and USA i dont see a problem.

"Intel Core notebooks have been heating
to the point of exploding or at least causing severe component damage internally, shared caches as
in the Core 2 series perform poorly under heavy system loads in certain raid formations
(such as Raid 5)"

Since intel doesnt make laptops i find that very hard to believe. It makes chips for laptops.
Arnt you fanbois getting tired of that "Dual Core equals dual explosion" theory. Its not even possible you lamer. From the reports from dell it was more abvious a problem with lithium batterys. And since alot of mobile phone companys report the same issues with that type of battery it make alot more sence to.
About that raid5 issue. Only Inq reported anything about this, never heared anything from those losers about that again. And it wasnt a cpu issue either, but a chipset issue, or so they claimed.

"AMD 4X4 destroys Core 2 performance wise... bla bla.. "

Really? Care to send me a link on that. I dont think their is one working system with 4x4 A64 out their. Maybe you should change you name to nostrodamus.

3:33 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When I read that passage it actually set off alarm bells for me. That tells you that Core 2 Duo has a lot of spare processing power. A program that fully loads a K8 or Netburst processor doesn't even fully load Core 2 Duos. It just shows how strong the architecture really is.

Alot of spare processing power? Does that even mean anything? Not being able to fully load a conroe is a bad thing - it means that its more difficult to achieve and/or maintain peak IPC. That means that all of that spare processing power goes to waste. Although I suspect that all the newer processors will be similar.

5:00 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

duploxxx wrote:
"Idle (X2 90nm vs C2D 65nm) -> http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-energy-efficient/cpu-idle-1.png"

Wow. You linked an image. Not an article. Not a review. Just a graph, no text, no summary, no conclusion.

I'm tired of seeing all of these random fragments of review that basically claim AMDs lineup is somewhere in the vicinity of being competetive with C2D.

Here's some full length articles, with real analysis done by unbiased (or perhaps slightly biased against Intel, if anything) engineers. No bull, just good ol' fashioned benchmarks:

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/core2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=190400181

http://www.pcworld.com/article/126342-1/article.html

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/07/14/intel_core2_duo/

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1989018,00.asp

http://www.gdhardware.com/hardware/cpus/intel/conroe/X6800_E6700/001.htm

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6153900/p-3.html

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTExMCwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33024

http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3620036__12

All of these are well respected technical news sites. Of course, Sharikou will probably say that they are all biased... It doesn't matter though, the sheer number of reviews, and the number of those reviews that show Intel not simply outperforming, but dominating AMD is very convincing of the truth.

6:35 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger Pop Catalin Sever said...

Yes they are respectable tehnical sites, and C2D top of the line are the best processors of the moment from a performance point of view.

But tell me did all of those respectable sites "where you cand get one"?

It's better allrigt, cheaper, power efficient and its beeing used to hide Intel's previouse crapy performance in the eyes of unawary.

But there's one thing you can't understand, C2D cant't sustain Intel when is only 10% of its total manufacturing capability as declared by Intel(although I suspect less...)

If Intel woud have started with at least 20% of its manufacturing capabilities building Conroes I would have said that AMD's position is in danger. But they didn't they are using their 65nm facilities to manufacture P4's 9xx series using 95 nm ??? Why on eart would theye do that if they could have build Conroes instead? Well I think Intel has a slight yield problem with C2D ... among others ...

12:39 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

AMD fully executing the kill strategy I proposed

YOU proposed :D

3:19 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some idiot writes

But there's one thing you can't understand, C2D cant't sustain Intel when is only 10% of its total manufacturing capability as declared by Intel(although I suspect less...)

If Intel woud have started with at least 20% of its manufacturing capabilities building Conroes I would have said that AMD's position is in danger. But they didn't they are using their 65nm facilities to manufacture P4's 9xx series using 95 nm ??? Why on eart would theye do that if they could have build Conroes instead? Well I think Intel has a slight yield problem with C2D ... among others

You a retard like the host blogger?

INTEL has converted big time most of their 65nm production to Core2 Woodcrest, Merom, Conroe. The cheap PentiumD.. that is stuff already made and probably their old 90nm dual-cores.

If you didn't know.. it takes a quarter or so to push a wafer from starts thru end of fab then you got to assembly it, test it, then ship it to the OEMs.

You think they started ramping before they confirmed all the bugs were gone. Don't think so. You ramp after you've debug.

No idiot would leave 10% of their capacity on something so good.

You think AMD has ramped K8L sight unseen on a broken low yielding 65nm process? No.. they wait till its validated, the OEMs have checked out the chipset, motherboards and qualified it all. Then you ramp.. it you idiots. AMD will be quarters away too. K8L if there are no samples now will be 9months to a year before you see volume.

Make sense idiots?

Let me know if you don't understand and I will educate you idiots. I won't be so high handed and try and hide behind IQ trying to turn lies into reality in my own fantasy world like your's truely PhD... LOL

7:52 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

INTEL IS COLLAPSING UNDER ITS ON WEIGHT AND WILL GO BANKRUPT EXTREMELY QUICKLY. THERE WILL BE NO TOMORROW FOR INTEL!!!!! THEY HAVE THE WORST BALANCE SHEET. I AM SEEING THIS IT WiLL NOT MATTER IF INTEL IS BETTER!AMD IS MORE EFFICENT IN GETTING THINGS DONE AND WILL NOT GO BANKRUPT!!!!!

10:24 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

is it me or AMD mocked intel for having two dual cores chip called kentsfield? Isn't that what they are trying to do with 4x4?

is it me or AMD mocked intel approach to platfromization by stating they are pro-open platform company? Isn't AMD becoming a platform company with the ATI move?

Is it me or AMD is as old as Intel and went into every business that Intel went into?

is it me or Sharikou and his fannies keep comparing Pentium 10 year old procs to last years Athlons?

Is it me or PIII is kicking the ass of the most modern AMD offering?

is it me or sharikou's self proclaimed PhD failed its defense? Yep, I was their when it did not pass!

Is it me or Mad Cow Mike vocabulary is limited to several words?

Is it me or Sharikou got fired by a contract agency for a dumm ass reason?

Is it me or the Khalif looks gay in his picture?

is it me or sharikou is so bitter that his mission in life is to bad mouth Intel from his mommys attic?

I do not think it is me!

1:36 AM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

"I do not think it is me!"

sigh... how sad, you are wrong there (mostly).

9:35 AM, August 05, 2006  
Blogger Mad Mod Mike said...

"is it me or sharikou is so bitter that his mission in life is to bad mouth Intel from his mommys attic?

I do not think it is me!"

Is it me, or are you a f*cking moron? No, it's you.

9:44 AM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

" Anonymous said...

is it me or AMD mocked intel for having two dual cores chip called kentsfield? Isn't that what they are trying to do with 4x4?

is it me or AMD mocked intel approach to platfromization by stating they are pro-open platform company? Isn't AMD becoming a platform company with the ATI move?

Is it me or AMD is as old as Intel and went into every business that Intel went into?

is it me or Sharikou and his fannies keep comparing Pentium 10 year old procs to last years Athlons?

Is it me or PIII is kicking the ass of the most modern AMD offering?

is it me or sharikou's self proclaimed PhD failed its defense? Yep, I was their when it did not pass!

Is it me or Mad Cow Mike vocabulary is limited to several words?

Is it me or Sharikou got fired by a contract agency for a dumm ass reason?

Is it me or the Khalif looks gay in his picture?

is it me or sharikou is so bitter that his mission in life is to bad mouth Intel from his mommys attic?

I do not think it is me!

1:36 AM, August 05, 2006 "

Diferences, kentsfield will be for super high end, I wouldnt be surprised if they are above 1,000 US EACH ONE..

4 x 4, let's say you buy one X2 3800 with dual hypertransport ( let's say in the next versions designed for 4 x4 ) at let's say 180-200 US...
180 x 2 = 360 right?
mobo.. let's say 200 US.. thats 560..
now Kentsfield let's say 1,200 US for it ( maybe even more )
then add the classic super expensive intel mobos ( 250 US )

thats 1450 US :>
no idea how much disipation kentsfield will have.. but man, considering intel... id say you will need watercooling :P

10:27 PM, August 05, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home