playmaker29
Not too long ago an eager poster was announcing the death of AMD due to Intel’s new "wonder" chip. A great business technique to leverage risk is to invest in multiple semi-related markets. I.e. AMD may lose this year's Processor battle, but they may win this year's Video Card battle.
Mat
Mat
Inviato Fri 28 Jul 06 @ 3:57 pm
phillydj
I heard about this from Andrew87 about a week ago, sounds like good news for gamers, also Amd still has very close ties to Nvidia so should be interesting to see what comes out of it
Inviato Fri 28 Jul 06 @ 5:36 pm
abnorm
Very interesting news indeed! AMD has made a big blow to Intel with this move.
Inviato Fri 28 Jul 06 @ 6:10 pm
phillydj
This will just mean better prices for us all, I remember when AMD use to be the budget Proc. now it seems there prices are higher than Intel's
Inviato Fri 28 Jul 06 @ 6:25 pm
abnorm
Well Intel's recent price cuts and release of 2 new CPUs was the strategy to take back the regular consumer market. Intel stocks fell because of that, but they are hoping this will bring them back up. AMD is not going to make it that easy for them. :)
Inviato Fri 28 Jul 06 @ 7:04 pm
phillydj
I have always liked AMD but these sky high prices are gonna make me use Intel for my next system, over 800 dollars for just a cpu c'mon. I can find a dual core 3.4ghz on Ebay near the 200 dollar niehborhood, Love AMD but this job is about stability and cost (more cost)
Inviato Fri 28 Jul 06 @ 7:42 pm
TexZK
Wow, ATI bought by AMD... cool! I hope they will decrease prices... the new processor family from Intel kicks ass...
Inviato Fri 28 Jul 06 @ 8:01 pm
Homeboy
Amd bought ATI ;)
Inviato Sun 30 Jul 06 @ 6:45 pm
ConQuest
playmaker29 wrote :
Not too long ago an eager poster was announcing the death of AMD due to Intel’s new "wonder" chip. A great business technique to leverage risk is to invest in multiple semi-related markets. I.e. AMD may lose this year's Processor battle, but they may win this year's Video Card battle.
Mat
Mat
I'll say it again for any misinformed individuals: Intel = AMDead.
The benchmarks are posted, the verdict's in, and the writing's on the wall.
"Intel may have won this year's processor war?! If you thought AMD's butt whooping that it has given Intel for the past 2 years was something, just watch how long it's gonna take AMD to recover from this slaughter that it's about to undertake from Intel. But AMD will recover eventually, they have too... for our sake, so that we get the best products available.
As for now, here's a link to 36 individual reviews of Intel's Core 2, AMD a$$ whooping, lower priced, lower heat emitting, better performing and NOW SHIPPING in WAY more quantitities than AMD could EVER hope to ship, processors:
Intel Core 2 Duo Reviews Ahoy!
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=104147
I didn't read through all 36 reviews because I've been watching this development closely [it's my job... Mac users stay tuned next week for the WWDC introduction of new, upgradeable Mac towers] and have known, and been telling people, that this was the case for months now. They all pretty much come to the same conclusion as this one in the article linked below [from July 14th]:
"Two weeks from now, Intel will release its all-new Core 2 Duo processor. The technical details were made available to the public in March 2006, and first benchmarks made clear that Intel is not joking: Core 2 Duo shall become the undisputed leader in performance and performance per Watt.
It's time to separate facts from rumors...
Conclusion
First of all let me sort the facts: As soon as Core 2 Duo hits the market, it will...
- be the fastest x86 processor (both single and dual core models)
- make the Pentium D and all predecessors look like antiques
- be the clear choice for performance users despite its rather expensive price
- outperform the complete Athlon 64 family (X2 and FX) in all areas, including gaming, where AMD has traditionally - been very strong
- consume less energy than other standard desktop processors
- transform the whole Intel platform from an energy-hungry beast to a reasonable solution that is competitive in terms of performance per Watt."
Here's that article from well respected "Tom's Hardware", with plenty of well laid out benchmarks:
"Game Over? Core 2 Duo Knocks Out Athlon 64: Core 2 Duo Is The New King"
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/core2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/index.html
"A great business technique to leverage risk is to invest in multiple semi-related markets".
That's true, but in the case of AMD, very optimistic. I've heard that reasoning for AMD's acquisition of ATI a lot lately.
Lot's of people just see it as a desperate attempt by AMD to stay relevant in it's core market that it won't be able to compete with Intel in for quite awhile.
Kind of like how Gateway tried to save it's over 200 Gateway Country retail stores by selling self-branded, home electronics components like plasma televisions. They were claiming the failure of the Apple Store retail initiative, when they should have been focusing on saving themselves rather than "predicting" the demise of the stores that are still opening annually at a rate of 30-40 per year, internationally: http://www.apple.com/retail/
How'd that workout for them BTW? Gonna have to look online since all nearly 250 stores shutdown over 2 years ago and the only reason they're still around is because they were bought out by eMachines.
Gateway is online only now.
Like I said, hopefully, AMD will bounce back so that we [the end-users] get the best products through the spirit of competition and the innovation which derives from it.
If they don't, look for "AMD Inside" stickers in the future after Intel buys them and, by proxy, ATI.
Inviato Tue 01 Aug 06 @ 6:18 am
ConQuest
One last thing I forgot to mention... Intel pulled ATI's license when it was purchased by AMD.
Don't get me wrong, I have ALWAYS liked ATI over nVidia. Especially since all of the new Intel Macs use ATI graphics exclusively.
What's not good for ATI though is possibly being killed off by not being able to sell to a MUCH larger Intel customer base, especially now that Intel is gonna be "king if the hill" for a few years to come.
The question now is, will Intel try to buy nVidia? Gawd knows it has the money to do so... WAAAY more than AMD had to buy ATI.
Of interest to me is, what will Apple do with it's current line-up of Intel/ATI Macs?
I don't want ATI or AMD to go away because we need them to keep nVidia and Intel on the cutting edge.
The reason I created my original post and called it "Intel = AMDead" is because I despise misinformation and propoganda [explains my anti-microsoft sentiment as well], which I was getting from some AMD fanboys here on the forums, even though I had proof of Intel's Core processor superiority over ANY and ALL AMD processors.
Don't get me wrong, I have ALWAYS liked ATI over nVidia. Especially since all of the new Intel Macs use ATI graphics exclusively.
What's not good for ATI though is possibly being killed off by not being able to sell to a MUCH larger Intel customer base, especially now that Intel is gonna be "king if the hill" for a few years to come.
The question now is, will Intel try to buy nVidia? Gawd knows it has the money to do so... WAAAY more than AMD had to buy ATI.
Of interest to me is, what will Apple do with it's current line-up of Intel/ATI Macs?
I don't want ATI or AMD to go away because we need them to keep nVidia and Intel on the cutting edge.
The reason I created my original post and called it "Intel = AMDead" is because I despise misinformation and propoganda [explains my anti-microsoft sentiment as well], which I was getting from some AMD fanboys here on the forums, even though I had proof of Intel's Core processor superiority over ANY and ALL AMD processors.
Inviato Tue 01 Aug 06 @ 6:58 am
TexZK
Well, you're right about the performance/cost of the new Intel Core. The problem of new software, developed in a fast way and with cheap ready-to-use objects, is that it isn't optimised. As you said in another post, the main difference is that by default a Mac is much more performing than a Win-based computer (without talking about some Linux distros, which are at the same level of Macs, maybe worse for multimedia but better for nets). With some optimisations, a Win-based computer can perform up to 200% its base performance, but however there are so many things they don't optimise...
Inviato Tue 01 Aug 06 @ 2:47 pm