Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:48 pm
Just wondering your thoughts. Wonder what they have up there sleeve.
an arm.
Greg
Page 1 of 2
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:56 pm
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2001 11:10 pm
Lol Nexus
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2001 7:01 am
This is purely speculation, but I think they're waiting to make a big deal about smp systems around Christmas time, along with releasing their 1.4 gigger.
The limit for current athon/t-bird cpus is 1.4 gig I think, so they're gonna play this "apples for apples faster than P4" up some more, and reduce prices even more. They have to design a new processor soon if they want to keep competing. Actually I heard that they were going to make Palomino (current server design) a desktop cpu or something like that.
Meanwhile, intel is supposed to have 2 gig P4s soon.
[Edited by bitSLAP on 04-24-2001 at 08:05 AM]
The limit for current athon/t-bird cpus is 1.4 gig I think, so they're gonna play this "apples for apples faster than P4" up some more, and reduce prices even more. They have to design a new processor soon if they want to keep competing. Actually I heard that they were going to make Palomino (current server design) a desktop cpu or something like that.
Meanwhile, intel is supposed to have 2 gig P4s soon.
[Edited by bitSLAP on 04-24-2001 at 08:05 AM]
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2001 7:18 am
They are going to need those 2gig CPUs to perform as much as an Athlon 1.4 
Atleast if what I read and see about the benchmarks (Athlon vs. P4) are true.
The problem with this is that still the common user will buy this 2gig chip because it's "faster" when all it really has is a label that states it's faster. I wish people would open their eyes to AMD--they are doing some great things and not getting noticed in the general public.
Atleast if what I read and see about the benchmarks (Athlon vs. P4) are true. The problem with this is that still the common user will buy this 2gig chip because it's "faster" when all it really has is a label that states it's faster. I wish people would open their eyes to AMD--they are doing some great things and not getting noticed in the general public.
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2001 8:03 am
The P4 IS faster than the Amd counterpart in every way except floating point calculations. Software can't properly utilize the P4.
Let's not go there, k?
Let's not go there, k?
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2001 8:12 am
I think right now AMD is just trying to get the MP chipsets out so they can start entering the Server market. There is alot more money there as well as the Mobile market. I think you will see them concentrate there for the next 3-6 months, and they will just due small revisions to the actual core until then.
I just heard that the MP boards will support the Duron processor as well. No artificial crippling of the CPU here. Just think for about $500CND you too can have a dual processor Duron and mobo
I can't wait!!!!
I just heard that the MP boards will support the Duron processor as well. No artificial crippling of the CPU here. Just think for about $500CND you too can have a dual processor Duron and mobo
I can't wait!!!!
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2001 9:26 am
I've heard that AMD is tweaking the Tbird core to reduce power consumption and heat output so that they can 1)enter the moble market and 2)have an easier time getting their tbirds up to the 1.7-2.0gig range. Also, Intel is tweaking their P3 so that it will go to higher speeds(1.2-1.7) range I do believe. The P4 blows ass, period.
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2001 3:23 pm
bitSLAP...why Bring somethign UP and then tell Everyoen else Not to talk about it that is totally retarded. Sorry but the p4 is not a viable cpu as it stands at the present time.
Greg
Greg
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2001 3:27 pm
Well the only thing is is that if AMD dont get on with some new tech, and not just new cores, than there going to lose a huge market portion. Most consumers think the more MHz the faster. When intel is at 2ghz and amd at 1.5 or so, many rich consumers will buy intel.
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2001 5:39 pm
Nexus dude, I didn't... 
"They are going to need those 2gig CPUs to perform as much as an Athlon 1.4 Atleast if what I read and see about the benchmarks (Athlon vs. P4) are true. "
You're right though. I shouldn't have said anything.
"They are going to need those 2gig CPUs to perform as much as an Athlon 1.4 Atleast if what I read and see about the benchmarks (Athlon vs. P4) are true. "
You're right though. I shouldn't have said anything.
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2001 6:08 pm
bah! They all suck... /\ Cyrix3 all the way baby! 
http://www.cyrix.com/products/C3.htm
http://www.cyrix.com/products/C3.htmPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2001 1:33 am
If you are a die hard q3 fan and it is your life and you have absolutely nothing else to live for and you are willing to squeeze every last possible framerate out of the game for rediculas amounts of money, then buy the p4, that is about the only thing that it is good for, but then again if the t-bird was at 1.7 gigs it would be woopin' some ass.
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2001 9:15 am
I thought that the P4 had some serious design flaws. I read that it is impossible to keep all of the pipelines continuously fed, etc.
I tend to think the P4 isn't that great, due to a few things. For example:
1) The P4 needs a double-pumped ALU just to keep up. So a 1.5 GHz P4 with a 3 GHz ALU can just barely compete with a 1.5 GHz Athlon. Something seems fishy to me there. I mean, why would such an 'advanced' ALU need to run twice as fast to compete?
2) Assembly loops running on the Athlon and P4 show the athlon winning VERY heavily. This is due to the fact that the P4 has some serious latency issues when doing certain floating calculations. Not optimized, you say? How can you be more optimized than running a continuous loop of floating DIVs and MULs?
I tend to think the P4 isn't that great, due to a few things. For example:
1) The P4 needs a double-pumped ALU just to keep up. So a 1.5 GHz P4 with a 3 GHz ALU can just barely compete with a 1.5 GHz Athlon. Something seems fishy to me there. I mean, why would such an 'advanced' ALU need to run twice as fast to compete?
2) Assembly loops running on the Athlon and P4 show the athlon winning VERY heavily. This is due to the fact that the P4 has some serious latency issues when doing certain floating calculations. Not optimized, you say? How can you be more optimized than running a continuous loop of floating DIVs and MULs?
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2001 9:26 am
Poop,
I would tend to agree with you, but I think Intel is going with the idea that people won't use the ALU as much as they would the SSE2 instructions. I would be interested to see how the P4 competes on that level. I think Intel is ingnoring the regular ALU in favour of the extra instructions, this seems to be confirmed when I see results from test done with P4 optimized code done. If Intel can get the S/W developers to optimize their code with the SSE2 instructions then I think the playing field gets more interesting, and it seems to be going that way.
On, another note, I still want a dual Athlon board though!
I would tend to agree with you, but I think Intel is going with the idea that people won't use the ALU as much as they would the SSE2 instructions. I would be interested to see how the P4 competes on that level. I think Intel is ingnoring the regular ALU in favour of the extra instructions, this seems to be confirmed when I see results from test done with P4 optimized code done. If Intel can get the S/W developers to optimize their code with the SSE2 instructions then I think the playing field gets more interesting, and it seems to be going that way.
On, another note, I still want a dual Athlon board though!