Thursday, March 29, 2007

Intel's days are numbered

All signs indicate that AMD's 65nm process will show major clockspeed increase. AMD used old transistors on its 65nm node, as a result AMD's 90nm CPUs are having higher clockspeed than its 65nm ones. By now, AMD should have migrated to newer transistors at the 65nm node, and I expect up to 30% clockspeed increase over its 90nm parts.

We all know K10 will clean kill Intel.

FAB30, FAB36 and Chartered FAB7 are cranking.

Athlon 64 X2 3600+ (65nm) boxed CPUs are sold at $64 now.

I expect that the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (2.5 GHZ) will be the lowest AMD chip, the top speed will be close to 3.6GHZ.

31 Comments:

Blogger Bubba said...

I'm really beginning to believe Dr. Nutjob posts this stuff just for fun.

He must be getting a great laugh out of all flame wars his posts start.

After all, no person that has spent an hour studying cpu evolution could actually believe the stuff he posts, including himself.

Just think, we're all actually the butt of his jokes.

4:18 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger Jeeves said...

lol yea, i have been thinking the same thing. i bet after a while he'll put out a post saying it was all a big hoax just to get ppl wound up and pissed off.

really, he must be having a great time seeing the flamewars he starts

lol, good show sharikou

4:22 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger Core2Dude said...

I think he is paid by AMD for number of clicks he gets. Idiots like us keep posting here, while he is packing a fat check from AMD.

That is why I have almost stopped debating "my dad is stronger than your dad".

4:53 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger realgenius said...

Actually Sharikou has a valid point here.
Better still how do you intel fan boys account for the 4 billion dollar decline in intels 2006 sales?
Intels stuff is so good that they lost another 4 billion dollars in sales to AMD.
The ATI purhase cannot account for the intel 4 billion dollar decline in 2006 sales.
AMDs 4 billion dollar increase in sales came directly from the intel 4 billion dollar decline.
It looks like the core 2 is killing intel just as Sharikou said it would.
4 billion is not a small number fanboys.
By the way, have any of you fanboys run ubuntu fiesty on your core 2 systems and checked the system moniter while running various apps.?
I think you will be very surprised at what your core 2s are doing, or should I say what they are not doing.
I predict AMD will have another 4 billion plus banner sales year thanks to intel.

6:15 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger lex said...

Yo Doctor.. go read the update at AnandTech here: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=2955

Yes come tell us they are drinking Patty koolaid.. But you got to admit things are looking pretty interesting on the INTEL side.

Why is it we are months away and AMD got nothing to talk about NOTHING. AFriad INTEL will pull a fast one?

INTEL is so big they couldn't initiate a project and get it done in 2 years. Look how long it took them to recover from Netbust. Sorry the reason you hear NOHTING about Barcelona is there is NOTHING. When compared to Penrym and Nehalem it will be NOTHING. So AMD can't say anythign or the executives would get sued because anythign they showed that was real would be so underwheliming the stock would quickly drop below 8 bucks.

BK in 2008 I say Sharikou.. to bad you picked the wrong company in that race.

6:28 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger lex said...

why did INTEL revenue drop.. because they control 80% of the market and they dropped the price 50%... of course revenue and profits dropped.

What happened to AMD revenue and profits.. they evaporated to NO profits...

PSS. they need about 2 billion for real 45nm development and another 5 billion for the fab. Guess what they got NO money.

BK in 2008

6:30 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger R said...

“Intel’s days are numbered” nope, After Intel teaches the Chinese how to make cpu’s and other state of the art skill sets; America’s days are numbered.

7:42 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger Juan said...

Whatever you happen to be smoking Shakirou, be sure to send me a bit for 420.

7:43 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger Jeach! said...

"All signs indicate that AMD's 65nm process will show major clockspeed increase."

"By now, AMD should have migrated to newer transistors at the 65nm node"


All means more than one! What are the others?

'Should' as in, "I hope they will" or "they better have"?

I'm glad I just recently only bought a few hundred shares... can you imagine those who have a small fortune invested in AMD.

One day I'm content and confident and the next I'm worried about the code of silence. They are driving me F!@#$ nuts!

8:04 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger Gary said...

His statements about a 30% increase in clock speeds is totally false. It is not there, will not be there, and is an all out lie.

8:36 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger Jeach! said...

I endedup falling on this video which is damn interesting. You might enjoy it too, although lengthy!

It is a video of Bob Colwell (processor architect for Intel) doing a lecture.

I got it from this web page: Who are the computer archiects?.

What's most interesting is how he points out all the mistakes Intel is doing... and years later they happened (Itanium failure, Pentium 4's MHz madness, lack of IO development, etc, etc).

Can you imagine, this guy quit because he didn't believe in Intel's vision anymore!!

10:20 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger enumae said...

Sharikou
I expect that the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (2.5 GHZ) will be the lowest AMD chip, the top speed will be close to 3.6GHZ.

Do you have anything, anything at all, to back up your claim?

10:22 PM, March 29, 2007  
Blogger Steve said...

Bubba, after subjecting myself to the mislead writings of this ill-educated wannabe hack for a while now, I've come to the conclusion that this site is, infact, satire.

And it's upon concluding this that I actually start to find it funny. So now when I read these pages, to put it in simple terms, I no longer think "WTF"; I think "LOL".

Entertaining stuff.

1:35 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Ho Ho said...

sharikou
"I expect that the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (2.5 GHZ) will be the lowest AMD chip, the top speed will be close to 3.6GHZ."

I wonder when will AMD make that K10 killer move and release 3.6Ghz K8's. Or are those fast clocks needed since CK10 is no where near being released yet?



And yes, this blog has become one of the pages I visit when I need a laugh. Too bad our beloved host doesn't do anything else but post new stories. It would be much more better when he would respond to our questions.

2:00 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger LeeCooper said...

:)hm, how many of Intel fanboys are there, or Intels workers?

K10 will be 45% faster than x5355

Penryn will be around 25-30% faster than x5355 most because of the higher clock speeds
so
K10 will be 15% faster than Penryn

Nehalem will be 10-15% faster than Penryn
so
Nehalem will be close to the K10
but
there will be in 2008 Socket with HT 3.0
so
10% boost over Nehalem

They are coming!!!

LOL

3:59 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Juan said...

To the above poster, you base this of of what, a couple of slides? not a benchmark in sight. And please note that AMD said, "40% better than Clovertown, in selected applications. There is no "40% better" across the board.

4:45 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger netrama said...

By the way, have any of you fanboys run ubuntu fiesty on your core 2 systems and checked the system moniter while running various apps.?
I have used a few Core-2 machines and all this perceived performance/ speed cannot be seen at all in lower end Core-2's that are in the ball park of K8 or even lesser than K8. Core2 + Intel marketing machine just made sure that they dont loose any more market share. Thanks to some paid idiots in the media , who spinned a "40% advantage over Netburst " to something like "40% advantage over AMD ". Now what, with the new processor announcement, it clearly shows , how scared Intel is.
I am sure AMD is selling all it can make , ofcourse at reduced margins , since their financial survival is threatened.
Intels action says that they dont want any competition,they just want it gone. Companies like Intel best operate when they are a monopoly , and this is where they want to be , it is not about a good processor desing and manufacture. Just think of all the rush jobs Intel has done to react - P3 that was recalled, PentiumD (glueing 2 cores), why ..I even found some Pentium-D logo laptops the other day..scary :-))

7:27 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Jeach! said...

So now when I read these pages, to put it in simple terms, I no longer think "WTF"; I think "LOL".

You must have a problem if you took ANY blog seriously. Actually, if it wasn't all LOL since day one, why would you even keep coming back :)

It would be much more better when he [Sharikou] would respond to our questions.

See, here is a clear example of someone not having fun anymore... probably some emotional breakdown or something. Come back to us Sharikou... we're with you :)

And please note that AMD said, "40% better than Clovertown, in selected applications. There is no "40% better" across the board.

Here, let ME put a doze of reality back into all of your sad little lives:

1. Barcelona will some day get released... with all the little features which made Core2 better and should beat Core2. By how much, I don't know and it's not my place to make a guess, because that's all it would be.

2. AMD will gain some market and revenue share with Barcelona (and ATI).

3. Penryn will be released in order to balance things out.

4. Nehalem will come thereafter, which will include all of the same features AMD had for years (HT, on die mem controller, etc), plus a few enhancements.

5. So now with the K10 and Nehalem out, both processors should be roughly on par in terms of performance, power and power/performance metrics.

6. The war will then lead to a few years of various 'little' advantages:

a) Production - Intel advantage
b) Process - slightly for Intel
c) GPU integration - AMD wins
d) Virtualization - both win
d) Co-processor - AMD advantage

7. There are only a few things which can happen that will break the balance from being 'on par':

a) A process/production error - For example, AMD's transition to 45nm is much more risky.

b) Processor bugs - Complexities of processors are escalating and yet time frame for development is shrinking... expect a new FOOF!

c) Innovation - Some company pulls out an 'Ace' and the other company didn't see it coming.

So please, everyone, stop saying mine is bigger than yours... it's childish!! Both companies will keep being successful to the exception of point 7... which no one can predict!

7:28 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Jeach! said...

Thanks to some paid idiots in the media , who spinned a "40% advantage over Netburst " to something like "40% advantage over AMD ".

You have a great point Netrama! A lot of people here will throw distorted facts and numbers without even knowing what they are saying!

-----

P.S. Who are the damn programmers of this freaking blog? Have they not realized that the 'Word Verification' never works on first attempt?

7:35 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger lex said...

Some monkey said..
a) Production - Intel advantage
b) Process - slightly for Intel
c) GPU integration - AMD wins
d) Virtualization - both win
d) Co-processor - AMD advantage

WRONG WRONG WRONG..
a) Production - INTEL huge advantage like 4:1
b) Process - INTEL huge advantage they have a year + node advantage and even at 65nm their silicon is far superior to AMDs.. oppos IBMs best. Sure IBM got a few more layers because they need the extra interconnnect.. That costs process cost, yield and complexity ..
c) GPU.. draw.. both will have it on the next generation
d) Virtualization.. draw
e) Co-processing .. AMD

For the common consumer and the need to supply hundreds of millions of CPUS to the general public.. its no question.. INTEL wins. Like Boise State against the Big Ten or Pac 10.. Sure they won ONE match.. perfect alignment.. in a 3/4 games they would lose the other 3.

GAME OVER AMD.

7:40 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

WRONG WRONG WRONG..
a) Production - INTEL huge advantage like 4:1


Dude, half of Intel's CPUs are still produced in 90nm, AMD on the other hand is largely 65nm now.

8:58 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Ho Ho said...

Yay, Sharikou is back!

sharikou
"Dude, half of Intel's CPUs are still produced in 90nm"

Ok, but how many AMD CPU's are produced on 45nm?

9:06 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Only AMD said...

Don't you just love this site. Best place for venting the anger of intel employees & all the intel fanbois who just can't take it that AMD is here to stay...DOH!!!!

9:35 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

Yay, Sharikou is back!


I am here, folks.
0% of Intel chips are 45nm, AMD FAB38 will be cranking out 45nm chips by 2008.

10:15 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger enumae said...

Sharikou
Dude, half of Intel's CPUs are still produced in 90nm, AMD on the other hand is largely 65nm now.

Nice try Sharikou...

If you listened to the Morgan Stanely Technology Conference March 5 - 8, 2007, you would have heard Paul Otellini say "Technology sells from the top, so a 100% of our output this year is on 65nm, except for the part that will be on 45nm, were not doing anything on 90.", when asked about global capacity for microprocessors.

10:18 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

Technology sells from the top, so a 100% of our output this year is on 65nm, except for the part that will be on 45nm, were not doing anything on 90."

Why is Intel building a 90nm FAB in China?

10:24 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Ho Ho said...

sharikou
"0% of Intel chips are 45nm"

Knowing that Intel will start selling 45nm chips quite soon I'm quite sure they are already piling up some chips. Sure, they are not mass producing them yet but they did have 3.2GHz quadcore to show just a few days ago.


"Why is Intel building a 90nm FAB in China?"

Chipsets and other non-CPU parts

10:29 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger enumae said...

Hell if I know, but I doubt it will be for Microprocessors.

10:30 AM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger LeeCooper said...

:)

Enumae,

your post is the best!

Crawl AMD,

we are waiting for you!

LOL

8:50 PM, March 30, 2007  
Blogger Only AMD said...

Is Intel copying AMD?


http://www.tgdaily.com/index.php?option=com_
content&task=view&id=31428

2:23 PM, March 31, 2007  
Blogger lex said...

Yo Pretender Phd

"Dude, half of Intel's CPUs are still produced in 90nm, AMD on the other hand is largely 65nm now."

LOL.. where are you back in 2006. Its 2007, go do some research. You did learn how to do research even pretend research earning that PhD of yours.

INTEL CPU is all 65nm and all chipset is on 90nm with a few exceptions... You need to bone up there Doctor

5:18 PM, April 01, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home