Continued from other thread.
Link to page with wattage information on several CPUsHey, I am just talking about what he said.
What he works on is the stuff that won't even be out for 1-2 years.
Right now, he feels AMD is on top.
Intel is suffering from the old IBM disease, NIH (not invented here).
AMD introduces Hypertransport which gives them advantages - Intel rather than license it spend years trying to create an equal but different system.
AMD creates a 64bit extended version of the x86 instruction set - Intel pooh poohs it and then when forced by the market to implement it calls it EM64T and even in their documentation never mentions that it is a clone of the AMD 64bit instructions.
The same happened with DDR memory. Intel wanted to push Rambus. The market didn't want it - too expensive. Intel even tried to market a chipset that would allow the use of either memory type, resulting in a massive recall (one of Intels trips).
Intel knows that AMD has stated that they have designed the Athlon 64 with multi-core in mind but Intel pushes out a "dual core" chip
first to try and reclaim the appearance of a technological and performance lead. Note that when I say Intel pushed out a "dual core" chip it is not a "true" dual core as it is actually 2 chips in one package not 2 chips built as one.
Intel also has the problem that they have been letting marketing drive them rather than listen to the engineers. Intel was in the drivers seat for so long they forgot that they were driving a taxi and people could get off and use the competing line.
What saves Intel right now is the massive production facilities that they have which could supply the entire PC market. AMD on the other hand only has limited production and apparently is selling everything they can make even with a factory that is producing 150% of its rated capacity and another producing at least a little while still under development and supposedly months from official production. A 3rd party foundry that will be producing AMD chips in the coming months has been using a combination of AMD and IBM tech to produce the chips for the XBox 360. That will allow them to debug most of the process at Microsofts expense before they move on to the AMD chips.
When I told him I was thinking of going to AMD he said it is the smart thing to do. Not even a hesitation about it.
And I really hope that the competition stays fierce too b/c, as Nemesis points out, the competition rocks for US.
DH, the whole reason for the conversation in the first place was b/c I am starting to have real issues with today's games.... IE my ATI 9600XT isn't cutting it anymore... and the next card WILL be PCI express... so I need a new mobo...
Right now AMD is the way to go, especially towards the higher end. In spite of long years of AMD having a reputation for chips running hot right now it is Intel that is having heat problems. They are forcing old designs to go in directions (dual core) and speeds never intended with the end result of major heat problems (the Pentium M chips used in Centrino branded laptops are an exception to that).
I would say however that with the planned AMD launch in June/July of new revisions using DDR2 800mhz rather than the current DDR1 400mhz memory waiting is the best choice if feasible. You may have reason to upgrade sooner but I would say hold on for the 1.1 Revision of the DDR2 800 mhz motherboards if you can. The more you push the machines memory access (especially in Dual Core) the more the advantage goes to AMD. AMD has the higher memory bandwidth and lower latency which aids them in those circumstances.
In many ways the nVidea chipset based motherboards do seem to be among the best around. nVideas contract with Microsoft to produce the original XBox on the Athlon allowed nVidea to do most of the development on Microsofts dime before Intel jumped in and made them a better office to use the Pentium III. nVidea wisely didn't scrap the work but completed it as a full function PC motherboard chipset and used it to broaden their market. ATi has recently done the same but I've never tried their boards (except in my Acer laptop).
Link to old "Intel is desperate thread" that you may find of interest.
Note: Edited to fix a typo where I wrote Hyperthreading instead of Hypertransport. I always hated the way those two names were too close.
Topic: Of Proccessers and GHz... (Read 9870 times)