Thursday, August 03, 2006

No demand for Core 2 Duo

Opteron 265: 1021 backordered. Con E6400: 231 backordered. Con E6600: 708 backordered.

Athlon 64 X2 AM2 stock level: 21781. Note, this is the stock level in national warehouses. You can check other drop shippers, they also show the same stock level.

Conclusion:

1) Demand for Conroe is less than the demand for 2P Opteron.
2) Intel yield on Conroe must be extremely low.

65 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

One site can't be indicative of overall demand, especially a nice site like this one
*rolls eyes*

9:19 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

Well... from another point of view, doesn't that imply that demand for AM2 X2 3800+ isn't that high??

I think the sales number, in addition to current stock/backorder number, is needed in order to have a full picture of the yields and demands.

9:26 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

One site can't be indicative of overall demand, especially a nice site like this one

Dude, this is not one site. The site is just a drop shipper. The stock level is national.

Well... from another point of view, doesn't that imply that demand for AM2 X2 3800+ isn't that high??

No. A high stock level+ high incoming rate means demand is very high.

In the case of Conroe, we can prove demand is very low. There was nothing in stock, and very low backorder.

10:25 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger Dr Blog said...

Sharikou,
Here's a freebie from the DR.

Intel headed for $9 per share
http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/press.asp?rls_id=371&cat_id=6

10:39 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

Intel headed for $9 per share

I think Intel will be delisted from NASDAQ in 5 to 7 quarters.

10:50 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger nyx said...

Power6 chip will run at speeds of 4-to-5 gigahertz!
Damn Apple. They just had to drop IBM and go to Intel. They miss out on Cell Processors and dual core PowerPC processors capable of speeds ranging from 4 to 5 GHz. That really sucks. Apple claimed IBM couldn't reach the 3 GHz mark within satisfactory time and that their processors generate too much heat. So Apple switches to Intel and what do they get: Intel JUST NOW releases a Woodcrest Xeon 5160 (Intel's fastest highend server Core2 chip) processor which runs at 3 GHz and Apple is plagued with heating issues with their current Intel generation of computers. Meanwhile, IBM releases a Power6 line of processors to take the place of the previous Power5 and they run between 4 and 5 GHz without the heating issues of the previous line. Just great Steve Jobs, just fu*king great. Way to screw up a once beautiful system.

10:53 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

Power6 chip will run at speeds of 4-to-5 gigahertz!

Expect K8L to run at 4 to 5GHZ too. AMD and IBM share the exact same process. They joint develop process tech.

10:55 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Randy said...

I can believe it. A lot of people are cautious on Conroe. They don't want to take another shafting like Netbust. As soon as P4 hit the market they should have worked to a better design, instead Intel lengthens the pipeline(shaft) and gives us Prescott. And if they can't excite buyers with Ghz now. I believe the Who said it best "Won't Get Fooled Again."

10:58 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can I suggest a 3rd conclusion based on X2 AM2 with 21781 excess stock, Opteron 1921 backordered.

C) AMD's sales and marketing folks are unable to accurately forecast demand to their factory production folks and because of this they are not efficiently producing the right mix of parts?

11:02 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"In the case of Conroe, we can prove demand is very low."

We = Sharikou? The product has been out all of what now, ~7 days?

11:04 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sharikou, you said Core2 duo wouldn't beat K8, and AT was lying. but how come they are still leading the chart???

11:04 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

Can I suggest a 3rd conclusion based on X2 AM2 with 21781 excess stock

No. This is the right amount of stock. The X2 3800 is in high demand. The warehouses have to stock a lot of them to meet demand. Similarly, Intel's Pentium D 805 also has a high stock level.

11:04 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

The product has been out all of what now, ~7 days?

7 days, 700 orders, 100 order per day, that's close to 0 compared to other parts.

you said Core2 duo wouldn't beat K8, and AT was lying.

AT is a paid pumper. We made a finding of fact on that.

I expected Core2 and K8 to be within 10% of each other in terms of IPC. Instead of 40% claimed by Intel and its pumpers.

11:09 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Before you start talking about availability - I would wait for tosee if the chips come in according to their ETA's (which for many of the models is tomorrow)w.

If they don't come in then or within a day or two of the estimate, then you can start talking about poor availability. Of course once they come in and are in stock you will just twist the facts again and post an article stating "no demand for Intel Conroe chips - look at all of these chips they have in stock"

Ever try politics? you seem to be able to spin data extremely well.

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

It is impossible to sell conroes on ebay as a reseller. I can't even get the bloody item to the customers. This is the last time I try to sell anything from intel. They are and always have been a failure. Conroe will destroy my business.

They are impossible to even get. Intel can't make enough. They have no fab space and all of it is full of unwanted netcrap. What a joke. I get much better sales off AMD's. Nobody can say anything to make intel look good. Intel is a damn failure and they can't even do anything about it. Even with their so called saving grace.

AMD matches them in performance with price. Conroe whats that? You can't even get them from anywhere. Reduculess and talking about what conroe can do in the real world. Its a joke, you can't tell the difference atleast I can't. Maybe it only works with Intel boys. It sure is a big upgrade from networst.

This is silly-ness. I can't even run my buisness because of intels crap fab capailities and conroe availibility. They given me 4 ETA's and they all went buy aready with waiting customers. I have lost so much money because of intels delays. Its AMD all the way now. I won't mix a inferrior product with a better quality one and with a company I can actouly rely on for CPU's to get to me when the costomers need them. Intel is not the company it use to be.

11:12 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Before you start talking about availability - I would wait for tosee if the chips come in according to their ETA's (which for many of the models is tomorrow)w.

If they don't come in then or within a day or two of the estimate, then you can start talking about poor availability. Of course once they come in and are in stock you will just twist the facts again and post an article stating "no demand for Intel Conroe chips - look at all of these chips they have in stock"

Ever try politics? you seem to be able to spin data extremely well.

11:16 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Instead of 40% claimed by Intel"

Still waiting for that link where INTEL stated Conroe would be 40% better than FX-62. Never could find it could you? Because it doesn't exist! Intel never stated this, several review sites and Intel fans did, but not Intel.

11:21 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Intel headed for $9 per share

I think Intel will be delisted from NASDAQ in 5 to 7 quarters.

You do realize that Intel made $900M profit last quarter, a lot more than AMD's $100M right?:)

I expect AMD to continue their little run, with the Dell deal and all, but they can only go so far, and the problems addressed in the $9 INTC almost also applies to AMD except the inventory.

11:32 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Intel headed for $9 per share

I think Intel will be delisted from NASDAQ in 5 to 7 quarters.

You do realize that Intel made $900M profit last quarter, a lot more than AMD's $100M right?:)

I expect AMD to continue their little run, with the Dell deal and all, but they can only go so far, and the problems addressed in the $9 INTC almost also applies to AMD except the inventory.

11:33 PM, August 03, 2006  
Blogger Dr Blog said...

Sharikou said;

"I think Intel will be delisted from NASDAQ in 5 to 7 quarters."

I fell like your advancing your agenda over replying to my post.

Irony is not without a sense of fate, Or perhaps its fate, that’s not without a sense of irony.

Intel's only prayer is to buy AMD, but that's not going to happen.
There’s too much bad blood here, and too many knifes in AMD's back.
(I think they are starting to enjoy the approaching "Judgment Day".)

My point was this;
"Intel must drop to $9 share" BEFORE it can be delisted, right?

I'm only showing you the progression to that which is inevitable Sharikou.(I thought it would make a good post for you.)

Conclusion: The Intel Corp. may make billions of dollars next year, or file bankruptcy, I don't know. But I do know this: July 31 2007 Intel will no longer be in the microprocessor business.

Thus say's the Doc.

11:55 PM, August 03, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is this a joke..

The board is boring...

I will leave you with this.

No amount of beating can the PhD produce a real erection.

INTEL Core2 rules every benchmark currently.

INTEL makes more money. Even in a price war INTEL will make money while AMD loses. THey have the bigger bank account, ecnomoies of scale, a superior silicon technology ! No amount of beating his meat can Sharikou and you fanboys change that.

INTEL will always be bigger, always have more profits, will always have more MS. Craig Barret really tried to screw up the company with his missmangement, Paul is trying to. But they can't keep the big company down.

Having Dell doesn't change the situation. Buying ATI doesn't change the situation.

Sorry boys... it sad I know to be rooting for a loser.

12:11 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger nyx said...

"Expect K8L to run at 4 to 5GHZ too. AMD and IBM share the exact same process. They joint develop process tech."

You're right about that. If AMD releases K8L at speeds of 4 to 5GHz it will flat out annihilate the entire Core2 line. Any comparison at all between the two will be ridiculous. Intel's only hope of a rebound is the Core2. If the K8L is released even at 4GHz, Intel won't stand a chance in hell of recovering. They would be better off finding another niche in the market. Intel's only hope is to beg IBM for mercy and pray that IBM persuades AMD to back off a little. I don't see IBM going lenient on Intel though.
Not to mention, IBM is still barreling ahead with future breakthroughs such as:

Staff at IBM Research have created structures on a processor measuring 29.9nm, using a form of deep-ultraviolet optical lithography.

"According to an article on ZDNet, IBM has come up with a way to slow light to 1/300 of its normal speed. While this has been done in laboratories before, IBM has found out how to do this using standard materials, which opens the possibility of mass production. This means that the dream of having optical based CPUs may be closer than previously thought."

"The chip, called a photonic silicon waveguide, is a piece of silicon dotted with arrays of tiny holes. Scattered systematically by the holes, light shown on the chip slows down to 1/300th of its ordinary speed of 186,000 miles per second. In a computer system, slower light pulses could carry data rapidly, but in an orderly fashion. The light can be further slowed by applying an electric field to the waveguide."

http://news.zdnet.com/IBM+slows+light,+readies+it+for+networking/2100-9584_22-5928541.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=zdnn


and for the near future:

"The Cell chips in the system on display at CeBit were running at 2.4GHz. According to IBM, the commercial unit would run at between 2.4GHz and 4GHz. The company also revealed plans to use a manufacturing process lower than the currenlty used (90-nanometer) for the chip, in order to increase its performance."

http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=16543

12:18 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous george said...

same difrence

12:23 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, Its too early to underestimate market and power of Conroe, which is just born baby, after painful long period, I'm sure It'll do much better once low cost MB and chipset available. A tiger just doesn't hop, waits for chance...

12:30 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Ho Ho said...

In the case of Conroe, we can prove demand is very low. There was nothing in stock, and very low backorder.

So you say that the low backorder and stock numbers are in no way related to the almost non-existent availiability? Perhaps those warehouses simply won't order those because they know it's nearly impossible to get them.


Just out of curiosity I ask what can you read out from the FX62 availiability of 1 (one) item in stock?

http://www.shopblt.com/cgi-bin/shop/shop.cgi?ACTION=thispage&thispage=011003000502_BJ70892P.shtml&ORDER_ID=354317267

12:49 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous BigBadWolf said...

Dell is going AMD in a bigger way than expected.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33462

So is IBM with its recent set of offerings.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33391

And so are HP and Sun.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33439

So what does it indicate?
It means they have confidence in AMD and its productline and future.
Heavy weights like them do't fall for a short busrt of glory aka woodcrap.They need to have platforms and can look beyond pumped-up benches.

With all this ever rising demand lets see who is gonna have the excess inventory glut to deal with.

12:59 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger Bruno Dieter Chan said...

For yo conroe hungry and core 2 duo desperate some of us Malaysians already got some of the chiplets.

They are currently benchmarking them now at:

http://forum.lowyat.net/index.php?showtopic=320359

2:01 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This reflects realworld situation for me I sell one top end fx60 per 100 or so 3800+ all good for Amd sad for Intel..maybe some viagra can get those conroes up.

2:30 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger Bruno Dieter Chan said...

"Instead of 40% claimed by Intel"

I love you Intelfanbois so much because you have still to master googling.

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71467-0.html

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33049

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/06/04/intel_conroe_performance_preview/1.html

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/11/intel_makes_its_core2extreme_gaming_case/

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/video/conroe.html



Maybe Intel meant 40% faster than their fastest P4?

2:40 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger mork said...

This has to be the most ridiculus and bogus claim that you yet have been able to cum up with.

Here`s a tip for you. Give overclockers.com.uk a call, they have stores in 2-3 countrys, or komplett (sweden, norway, holland uk etc) and ask wich cpu is the most wanted today. Not to mention newegg. But something tells me your to shitless scared to something like that.

On a diffrent note, dont you find it a little strange that X2 5000+ wich is one of the most competive cpus atm cant be found anywhere in europe, strangly enought it dissapeared the day before AMD slashed their prices. Could it be the fact that AMD can barely scratch a living at those low prices?

2:55 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous BigBadWolf said...

Could THIS be the clue to the mystery of EXPLODING laptops??

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=30863

Well looks like Intel Processors have a poor inbuilt thermal protection and sometimes it fails to kick in hence the short circuited processor darws massive amouts of currents overloading the battery.

Any thoughts?

3:38 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous ForD the Hammer said...

Sharikou, you fail to realize the number of conroes coming in for both the E6400 and the E6600, for the E6400 there are about 5,000 of those processors being shipped, and for the E6600, there are about E6600, there are about 3,000 being, that doesn't look like the shipments of a processor that is in low demand. Furthermore, I would expect the backorders on conroe to be low, as everybody knows they're back ordered and does not want to tie up their money in something that may or may not be shipped soon.

You also mention the operteron 265, which as you said is a chip for 2P servers, and as a result, there should be about twice as many of them being sold because they are going to be paired up together, while the conroes are not server class and are less likely to be selling at more than one per person. On a final note, notice how the operteron 265 only has about 2,000 incoming shipments.

3:57 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

AMD is able to invest more (e.g. ATI, opening new fabs) in these hard times. Meanwhile with Intel oh-so-great-best-chip-in-the-decade Conroe, Intel is still cost cutting, layoffs and ironically still crazy pumping up heaters to its inventories. Intel is the best. (Super)Pie for Intel.

4:55 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

According to a distributor that I deal with here demand for conroe far outstips anything they have ever seen. This distributor does roughly 5 billion a year in the U.S. market. Here is a nice breakdown of quantity on order and waiting to arrive at the distributor

Core 2 Duo 1.86GHz 2MB 1066FSB LGA775 On Order : 9975 units
Core 2 Duo 2.13GHz 2MB 1066FSB LGA775 On Order : 4630 units
Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 4MB 1066MHz 4MB LGA775 On Order : 4190 units
Core 2 Duo 2.67GHz 4MB 1.66FSB LGA775 On Order : 3850 Units
Core2 Extreme 2.93GHz 4M 1066FSB LGA775 On Order : 1580 Units

That is roughly 25,000 retail boxed CPUs from one distributor that are needed for customers. We currently have orders into this distributor ourselves for roughly $20k of CPUs with customers waiting impatiently for them.

We all know intel can't make these fast enough and with allocation going mostly to tier 1 companies like dell, hp, alienware, etc the average resellers can't get them even if they somehow become available.

I do feel the AMD product is a better one for our customers but it's supply and demand - the customer demands these processors and we need to supply them or lose the business.

5:33 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think you forgot the third conclusion that can be drawn from this data:

3) Sharikou is a f*%king idiot.


What other conclusions can one draw from this data?

5:39 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger Entrophos said...

"Instead of 40% claimed by Intel"

Still waiting for that link where INTEL stated Conroe would be 40% better than FX-62. Never could find it could you? Because it doesn't exist! Intel never stated this, several review sites and Intel fans did, but not Intel.


But Intel paid the reviewers that did hype it as being 40% faster. Like Anandtech, for example.

Sharikou did a nice little expose on Anandtech's testing methods that proved that they went out of their way to pick a test suite and setup that actually relied on some known bugs to skew results in favor of Intel. They also picked a hobbled platform, comparing a single channel workstation board (AMD) vs a server board (Intel) and did a couple other questionable things that probably further gimped the AMD platform.

They then published the results and Intel actually quoted them to stockholders!

Go back through his archives and you'll find it. It was very imformative.

5:51 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger Mad Mod Mike said...

"Still waiting for that link where INTEL stated Conroe would be 40% better than FX-62. Never could find it could you? Because it doesn't exist! Intel never stated this, several review sites and Intel fans did, but not Intel."

twice I've said it, and twice you've ignored it. You sir, are a f*cking moron.

7:29 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Your Daddy said...

Still waiting for that link where INTEL stated Conroe would be 40% better than FX-62. Never could find it could you? Because it doesn't exist! Intel never stated this, several review sites and Intel fans did, but not Intel."

I'm sorry... Did you say something? Oh damn, well looky here! =^D

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/11/intel_makes_its_core2extreme_gaming_case/

http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/5114/53/

http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/en/home/News.asp?id=40193&cid=11

Well, as it seems that if you don't agree with facts just deny, deny, deny. Remember, denial is not a river in Egypt.

7:49 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

40% was one interpretation of the first conroe performance demo for media, the button pushing one

basically saying 40% is saying "intel pretended perfomance was higher than it is" since now performance could be said to be ~10% higher clock for clock

the other interpretation for 40% is apparently intel said conroe was 40% faster than netburst, that probably wasnt what sharikou was talking about in this case

8:03 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, Intel $9.00 share. The shorts will be all over this one.

8:09 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

"the other interpretation for 40% is apparently intel said conroe was 40% faster than netburst,"

No, Intel said 40% faster than "competition".

9:26 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Edward, from a link posted here it clearly compares to Netburst:

The Intel Core 2 Duo processors are built using 65-nanometre silicon process technology. The desktop PC version of the processors also provide up to a 40% increase in performance and are more than 40% more energy efficient versus Intel’s previous best processor.

http://www.itwire.com.au/content/
view/5114/53/

9:48 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous enumae said...

Your Daddy said...

Article...Intel claims 40% performance gain with new Core 2 Extreme processor

"The company rented out a conference room to itself at this year's E3 Expo, where it showed off Core 2 Extreme-based desktop and mobile PCs that were clearly cranking out pixels at faster speeds than their predecessors - according to Intel, about 40% faster."

Where does it say Conroe would be 40% better than FX-62?


Article...Intel unveils 10 new dual-core products

"The desktop PC version of the processors also provide up to a 40% increase in performance and are more than 40% more energy efficient versus Intel’s previous best processor."

Where does it say Conroe would be 40% better than FX-62?

Article...Intel unveils Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme with release of 10 models

"Intel says the desktop PC version of the processors also provide up to a 40 per cent increase in performance and are more than 40 per cent more energy efficient versus Intel's previous top-of-the-line processor."


Where does it say Conroe would be 40% better than FX-62?

In all 3 of your links I can not find where it is said that Conroe would be 40% better than FX-62, nor in the 5 links submitted by Bruno Dieter Chan... seems you have still yet to master googling... J/K

10:16 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger pointer said...

Bruno Dieter Chan said...
"Instead of 40% claimed by Intel"
I love you Intelfanbois so much because you have still to master googling.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71467-0.html
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33049
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/06/04/intel_conroe_performance_preview/1.html
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/11/intel_makes_its_core2extreme_gaming_case/
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/video/conroe.html
Maybe Intel meant 40% faster than their fastest P4?


May be you need to brush up your reading skill. as the link you provided did indicate it was compared to the predecessors

showed off Core 2 Extreme-based desktop and mobile PCs that were clearly cranking out pixels at faster speeds than their predecessors - according to Intel, about 40% faster. quote from http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/11/intel_makes_its_core2extreme_gaming_case/

anyway, the number varies base on platform, be it server, desktop or mobile. There is a slide with bar graph on it. I guess you must be able to google it right? :)

the same goes with all the rest of that cannot read -entrophos, edward, your daddy, mad mod.

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

Expect K8L to run at 4 to 5GHZ too. AMD and IBM share the exact same process. They joint develop process tech.

Your stupidity is stunning, even after all this time during which you've proved it over and over.

You think that if two processors share the same manufacturing process they will also have similar GHz rates?

You are a joke.

10:31 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger Bruno Dieter Chan said...

Yeah I guess I missed out the part where I put "Maybe Intel meant 40% faster than their fastest P4?"

Oh wait I didn't. But anyone I don't what's worest; that I can't find that statement you want or Intel fanbois screaming this:

Intel fanbois 1(IFB): 40 per cent faster, 40 per cent less power!!

Intel fanbois 2(IFB): 40 per cent faster, 40 per cent less power!!

Intel fanbois 1(IFB): 40 per cent faster, 40 per cent less power!!

Intel fanbois (IFB): Than a Pentium D 950!!

** Sudden Silence **

10:57 AM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger pointer said...

Yeah I guess I missed out the part where I put "Maybe Intel meant 40% faster than their fastest P4?"

Oh wait I didn't.


be an adult, act as one and admit that you are wrong, instead of leaving fanboy style remarks. it's bad to cover your hole as you sarcastically saying people cannot google.

and with your (AMD) fanboy style remarks ... do i need to remind you that the current C2D beat the current AMD CPU by tens % (<40% in desktop) almost across the board?

*highlight* i said current, I have no way to predict future, i'm not as good as the fanboys here

11:24 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Core 2 is available in DIY here in Asia but not in branded retail. It looks like Intel has given first dibs to the un-branded channel in Asia which makes sense because they have over 50% of the consumer desktop market out here.

11:36 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous enumae said...

Bruno Dieter Chan said...

"Maybe Intel meant 40% faster than their fastest P4?"

I read your comment and part of my point is that it should be obvious that it is compared to the P4, "Oh wait", it is obvious... J/K

Your Daddy said...

"Remember, denial is not a river in Egypt."

I forgot to mention this... thats some funny sh!t... lol

11:37 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Your Daddy said...

Holy crap I underestimated you Intel zealots, I give you far too much credit in the cranial department! Sorry! *sarcasm*

Okay geniuses, it doesn't take a rocket science degree to figure out that when Intel announces a 40% improvement over thier previous generation, it's safe to assume THAT INCLUDES THE COMPETITION'S EQUIVALENT OR PREVIOUS GENERATION.(that being the K8) Is this concept a little to hard for some of you to grasp or should I "Sesame Street" it further down for you to understand?

When Intel likes to boast about new, shiny things, they always like to imply things indirectly with AMD as they don't even like to acknowledge thier existance as a competitor. Try reading a little harder between the lines when you read thier "propoganda", it's subtle but very evident.

12:17 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous enumae said...

Your Daddy said...

"...it's safe to assume THAT INCLUDES THE COMPETITION'S EQUIVALENT OR PREVIOUS GENERATION."

Maybe I am the only one, but I try not to assume anything, I read whats in front of me, and it is clearly stated...

"Intel says that the Conroe chip is about 40 percent faster than the Pentium D while consuming 40 percent less power."

Thats taken from your link.

1:10 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Your Daddy said...

"Maybe I am the only one, but I try not to assume anything, I read whats in front of me, and it is clearly stated..."

Hey you know what? You're welcome to believe whatever you want to. I just laid it all out on the table for you to follow, whether you grasp the concept or not is up to you. Truth be told, Intel has a masterful marketing team that borders on the verge of soviet-style propoganda.(with the kind of money they pump into it compared to AMD's marketing budget I wouldn't expect anything less!) This is not hard to agree with by any means, as their logo is plastered nearly everywhere that has to do with computers and Intel is basically a household name.

As it stands most Intel zealots I try to reason with simply do not have the capacity to grasp this concept that they think Intel would never resort to those kinds of tactics or for them to think for themselves it seems. Instead of continuously drinking the "Intel coolaid" like most sheeple buying a computer at Office Depot, ever stop to think WHY you never hear them refer to AMD in thier ads or public marketing, or why time and time again I find thier performance claims either busted or overexaggerated?

EXHIBIT "A"

Prescott release anyone?
The Intel Pentium 4 processor with HT Technology Extreme Edition at 3.40 GHz delivers the highest Microsoft Windows XP* desktop processor performance as measured by SPEC CPU 2000 (compared to other Microsoft Windows desktop processor results published at http://www.specbench.org/cpu2000/results/ as of Feb. 1) with a SPECint*_base2000 score of 1666 and a SPECfp*_base2000 score of 1546.)

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20040202comp.htm

Intel's Prescott, Intel's Extreme Edition, and AMD's Athlon 64 3400+

http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=04/02/02/1654234

This is fairly old and outdated by now, but sufficent evidence of the horsepoop Intel flings via thier marketing when it's back is against the wall and they no longer hold the performance crown. Even now when Intel holds the performance crown on the desktop they still have to resort to shady marketing tactics,(IDF mystery boxes anyone?) WHY?!! What are they afraid of if Core 2 is "light years" ahead of the K8???

So far I have yet to read of this kind of behaviour as much from AMD surprisingly.(when in Rome do as the Romans do I say, bravo to AMD for having some morality it seems) Even when AMD does actually say something you can bank on it happening too.

The defense rests.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. So be it. Sorry, but your claim(s) still do not make my observation any less credible in light of Intel's past history IMHO. NEXT!

3:00 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Benchmarks are only for show. In the real world its a whole different ball game. Heres a cpu that can beat a conroe its called the saturn core. Just kills it.

Think conroe is that good. Try it agenst a military grade A cpu then lets see what conroe can do after that. At best conroe matched AMD. But not for long. 65nm's and K8L cores will make the gap 3 years behind just like its always been ever since the A64. When AMD launched the A64 it destroyed intel for 3 years put them way behind.

Agenst 3 year old tech AMD is still that close and still kicking ass. Benchmarks are so over rated. But what isn't is you all forget AMD used the same arc's for 3 years. Now its time to do the same all over again. K8L will put intel behind by that much again just like history repeats itself. K8L in 2007. K10 in 2008. Wow thats really killer. Not to mention K11 a year after that.

Says it on roadmaps that are accelerated. Don't beleave what you see anymore in roadmaps. Things are coming out earlyer then ever before. 65nm samples are aready out. Look on the web. 4 core amds in about the same time as intels. And when it happens don't say I told you so. Just like when the P4 days where numbered agenst the A64 how did it feel to be 2nd best from a 1st class company? The underdog destroies intel.

What makes you think a conroe is going to be that big of a deal. All it has going for it is performance. AMD's features and chipsets are better. Only to intel fans maybe. You should stay on the dark side because it will always when. The smaller company with the more advanced tech can always beat the bigger company. Doesn't matter how big you are, the company with the better tech and higher quality parts will make the bigger you are the harder you fall company go down the hill.

Been doing that for the past 3 years. Intel won't be here for much longer give them till 2010. They aready lost more then half of their profits to AMD and you can't say otherwise. Intel is pretty much alone.

Oh but intel has apple. In all they would only be 40 billion at best. AMD is much larger. They have sun, hp, dell, ATi and afew others. Nobody is bigger then IBM they are worth 80 billion. But with AMD compine with all these other companies it is a hell of a lot bigger then Intel.

AMD is worth around as much as IBM or more. Everybody thinks AMD is going broke. Its more like intel. AMD has 5 or so companies to back them up with. Intel only 1. The real truth is AMD is stronger then intel despite its size. AMD has friends and together are bigger then intel but not in the same way. 1 can not beat a crowd that backs them up until the end.

Nobody sees that thats all with intel. They just don't get it. They can't beleave their presious company is slowly dieing and the conroe is a mistake at best. They can't even get it out the door to save them because of out of date poor fabs full of P4 crapola.

Sad way to go really chapter 11. AMD is fine they have 7 billion from the ATI takeover. They have more money now then ever combined with the others as well.

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

To the Above that was talking about conroe. Intel finally has conroe. A core that can match a Aathlon 64 by 10%. Conroe only that much faster in the real world. The Aathlon 64 is really 4 years old man.

But think about it. If Intel just got here. And when K8L comes out wow it will just like you said be that big of a improvment like the athlon 64 was agenst the pentium 4. Conroe is agenst the athlon 64 a aged out of date core. But its 4 years old. Your point is good, conroe just came out. AND the athlon 64 could always do close to this kind of performance for that long.

That convinces me K8L will just put conroe on a game wall from how you make it sound and I beleave it too man. These new cores have been talked about for a long time and now they are about to finally come out. This will just put AMD way ahead.

5:15 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes the Opteron 265 is a stinker, as usual AMD can't deliver and we end up with boxes that can't ship because of CPU shortages. And this is on a how old CPU?

Luckily the Woodcrests are comin in in quantity now so we only sell AMD to the religious belivers...

7:25 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous enumae said...

"As it stands most Intel zealots I try to reason with simply do not have the capacity to grasp this concept that they think Intel would never resort to those kinds of tactics or for them to think for themselves it seems."

Ok, whats your problem?

You point to a link that states very clearly that it compared to Pentium D, and now I don't think for myself?

When I read what is printed and do not assume like you do, all of a sudden I am a fanboy?

"Instead of continuously drinking the "Intel coolaid" like most sheeple buying a computer at Office Depot, ever stop to think WHY you never hear them refer to AMD in thier ads or public marketing"

Your joking right?

If I was marketing I would not mention the competition, WTF, why the hell would you, to let people start to focus on something other than what your selling?

"or why time and time again I find thier performance claims either busted or overexaggerated?"

By all accounts of this discusion with you, I would have to believe you to be an AMD fanboy.

You are looking for their claims to be exagerated, or bust.

If you look hard enough and long enough you will find it, and you will end up like Sharikou, Ph. D, constantly searchinng for anti Intel material. I guess we have found your graceland.

Sharikouland!!!

"So far I have yet to read of this kind of behaviour as much from AMD surprisingly."

Because you are not looking for it, as I am not either, but if you did, there would be someone, a nemisis to Sharikou.

8:04 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"twice I've said it, and twice you've ignored it. You sir, are a f*cking moron."

I have not ignored you, you have yet to supply a link where Intel stated that the Conroe was 40% better than an FX-62 (unless you count yourself as a link?) I asked for one link where Intel (not a review site, not an Intel "fanboy") has stated 40% better than FX-62.

You can keep calling me an idiot and a moron, but that doesn't change the fact that you can't back up your own (BS) statement and your only wqay out of it is to say well it was a review site and as such they are all paid off by Intel so it's the same thing.

I'm not disputing review sites have wrongly stated 40%, but Intel has never stated this. Please point me to something that Intel directly stated and prove me wrong.

Or you can continue to call me a moron and show people that you can't back up your own statements. You claim Intel lied - prove it! I didn't ask you to provide a link where Anand or THG lied...

9:00 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Edward said...

"Edward, from a link posted here it clearly compares to Netburst:"

Yes I know. Intel used to have that 40% over competition on its website. Now of course it changed the claim after everyone knows about it lying.

I'm not asking you to believe it, just telling you what I saw. I know even if you saw it with your eyes you'll have excuses for Intel. Maybe it's talking about SuperPi, you know, or maybe it's comparing the X6800 with X2 3800+; maybe this and maybe that, but the Intel god may not be wrong!

10:54 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

AMD has 3 year old technology. Intel finally catches up with AMD like it was 2003 but wait conroe is in 2006. Oh wait AMD only has previous gen cores agenst a 10% faster conroe, thats sipose to be next generation? Sounds more like its 2003 to me.

Conroes kind of late.

Doesn't this mean Intel is 3 years behind. Because AMD is about to launch K8L won't that put intel back afew years all over again like it was 2003.

lol Ironic isn't it. A64's are old. Took intel to get this far just to catch up 3 years later they finally just about match AMD. Bout time to leave Intel in the dust again.

11:12 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seems like Intel is furious about AMD/Dell deal and don't want to ship some C2D to them...

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/08/04/whats_causing_dell_xps700_delays/

10:27 AM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I think Intel will be delisted from NASDAQ in 5 to 7 quarters."

And your readers all think you have a degree... Hahahahahahaha,

good one!

12:06 PM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Expect K8L to run at 4 to 5GHZ too. AMD and IBM share the exact same process. They joint develop process tech"

That is true.. And it proves the talent AMD or IBM has by itself is not enough to combat the talent Intel has!

12:11 PM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous Your Daddy said...

"Ok, whats your problem?"

If you can't pick that up by now you're really even more dense that you make yourself out to be. I have a problem with a monoplisitic mega-corporation that flaunts it's influence whether legal or not to secure it's monopolistic behaviour. Not too hard to figure out bright boy.

"You point to a link that states very clearly that it compared to Pentium D, and now I don't think for myself?"

Well HELL! You sure seem pretty slow on the rest of my points, as I stated, I had to "Sesame Street" it down for you sadly! What else do you want?

"When I read what is printed and do not assume like you do, all of a sudden I am a fanboy?"

HEY! Here's a revelation for you! EVERYONE IS A FANBOY! Some people just choose not to be so blatently obvious about it.

I'm not afraid to say I'm proud of AMD, I'm a loyal customer, big EFFIN deal! I'm not so blinded to say AMD isn't winning the performance crown on the desktop right now, so what? I'm also not so blinded to see the BS Intel pushes in thier marketing and business practices! One can be a fan of something and remain objectionable contrary to popular belief, but it's obviously impossible for most people. Bottom line is I cut no slack for AMD or Intel and yes, AMD has done it's fair share of flubbing up in the past.

"Your joking right?"

No, ARE YOU?

"If I was marketing I would not mention the competition, WTF, why the hell would you, to let people start to focus on something other than what your selling?"

It's not stopped some companies, granted ones not in the semi-conductor industry. Touting yourself superior to your competition's current offerings and it being a fact is a strong basis for some great, effective marketing. But moving on...

"By all accounts of this discusion with you, I would have to believe you to be an AMD fanboy."

Haha! No kidding! And you're a Intel fanboy, imagine that! I'm so glad we've all gotten this out in the open. Here's your award Captain Obvious! ;^D

"You are looking for their claims to be exagerated, or bust."

Yep, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. I look for the same in AMD's claims as well buddy, as I stated NEITHER AMD OR INTEL are exempt. I would roast AMD for false claims as easily as I would Intel. No consumer ever likes getting lied to, when blatant, overwhelming facts are shown.

"If you look hard enough and long enough you will find it, and you will end up like Sharikou, Ph. D, constantly searchinng for anti Intel material. I guess we have found your graceland. Sharikouland!!!"

A man who accepts anything without question pertaining to anything he is buying is a fool, plain and simple. You do your research and you study, you "do your homework". It's just like car, boat, house, or TV shopping. Anything of value you plan to buy and keep for a long time you learn to buy wisely.

"Because you are not looking for it, as I am not either, but if you did, there would be someone, a nemisis to Sharikou."

Oh but I have. AMD has have it's fair share of problems with chipsets during the K7 days,(rectified during the K8 series and thanks to Nvidia) thier fab problems,(or the lack thereof, now well on it's way to being solved) thier lack of product penetration in the notebook sector. However all of these things are either solved or almost there to being solved. The AMD/ATI merger was probably one of the last key to fixing thier chipset/notebook solution problems. As I said, I'm not so blind to see AMD's problems either.

Anywhoo I'm done busting your chops today, I've figure you've had enough ASSuming about me enough. Again, feel free to believe or say whatever you want, but know I too will feel free to counter any BS claim you make too. See ya around sonny boy! ;^)

5:55 PM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous enumae said...

Your Daddy said...

"If you can't pick that up by now you're really even more dense that you make yourself out to be."

Ok, I am trying to keep in the context of the claims that you stated of Conroe beating an FX62 by 40%, so now I am dense for doing so... lol

"I have a problem with a monoplisitic mega-corporation that flaunts it's influence whether legal or not to secure it's monopolistic behaviour."

As do I, hey we agree on something :)

"HEY! Here's a revelation for you! EVERYONE IS A FANBOY!"

I do not believe so, hell look at Sharikou, Ph.D...J/K.

Product loyalty is not fanboyism, just as you are happy with AMD, which, by the way 4x4 looks f'n sweet, I am happy with my Intel.

I understand it is not as fast as AMD K8, but price, and the DDR2 I had at purchase made it an easy transition, had AM2 been out I may have gotten that.

"No consumer ever likes getting lied to, when blatant, overwhelming facts are shown."

I agree again.

I am not trying to beat a dead horse here, but "I" never saw Intel state 40% over FX62, that I guess was my point, while you and others had been claiming they had, there were no links supporting your claims.

"Oh but I have..."

Thats very smart.

I have not looked into AMD to find false claims, or exageratd statements.

I will admit up until about 4 months ago I had not been that into processor technology, I had understood K8 beat P4, so when Conroe came out I wanted a different perspective so I could understand the claims. I do not want to hear Intel rocks, I want to know why its good or bad, and what problems it will face.

"...As I said, I'm not so blind to see AMD's problems either."

I am skeptical about that merger/purchase and here is why...

I as do you have no knowledge of the performance of either the 65nm or K8L processors. We could speculate, but that is not definitive.

Only AMD and there engineers truly know.

I am not saying anything negetive about AMD, but they are in a price war, they have taken a large loan, and Intel, as of now, have the price/performance/power lead.

Until AMD has some engineering samples or release there products I will remain skeptical.

On a side note I would not be suprised if 65nm and 4x4 are released at the same time, they are releasing a new line of FX for 4x4 and 65nm may be it.

I will not claim to know everything, I am here to learn, and debate what I have learned. Reading your post has made me start to think a little more about Intel, and I thank you for that.

I sure hope you read it all...lol

10:23 PM, August 05, 2006  
Blogger George said...

i could not help but laugh at 40% over fx62 they must be on serious drugs, or have big bribe money.

10:33 AM, August 07, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home