• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD in 2006 ?

C

clarkey01

Diamond Member
Is there anything new from them next year ? all the hype seems to be with Intel, AMD are as quiet as ever. If there sat on thier ass there about to "penetrated".
 
Don't be foolish, surely AMD has a few surprises up their sleeve.

Last time AMD sat on their arse Intel walked right past. Intel was walked by this year, for the most part. I wouldn't expect either company to make such a mistake in the future, so long as the market remains so competitive.
 
Originally posted by: Bona Fide
M2 = AMD's biggest mistake ever. They're gonna be seeing heavy losses for much of '06 🙁
Click to expand...

Nice prediction Nostredamus, any chance you want to expand on how you came to that conclusion. From what I've read, AMD will be at 65nm early in 2006, and will continue to improve their current designs while adding new tech at faster speeds. They will have higher production capabilities due to a newer, bigger fab with a smaller die process. Unless you're one of those people with unconditional confidence that intel will come out wit da best processa eva next year, I see no reason for such pessimism about AMD's prospects. They still have six months to further penetrate the dual core server space while intel doesn't even have a chip to compete.

Anywho, how about a little more thought than a one liner if you're going to make such bizarre claims (AMD has increased their revenue on processor sales every quarter for a couple years now).
 
This is AMD's roadmap for the next year and a half or so. It shows when the adoption of M2 processors in pritty much every card above the 3500+, the M2 will compete side by side with the s939.
 
I've yet to see a real reason for why people dislike M2 so much. AMD has a great history of making sockets last quite a while (Socket A was neverending and 939/940 got a new lease on life with dual core), what's the beef with finally upgrading again? They let Intel do the hard part with DDR2 and by the time M2 hits we should have cheap fast DDR2, I think it's a pretty good move overall.
 
Originally posted by: MBrown
How much are these quad cores gonna cost. thats like 4cpus. crazy.
Click to expand...

probably over $2000 dollars. they will only be opterons. it will probably be like that for at least a year.
 
Originally posted by: SLIM
Originally posted by: Bona Fide
M2 = AMD's biggest mistake ever. They're gonna be seeing heavy losses for much of '06 🙁
Click to expand...

Nice prediction Nostredamus, any chance you want to expand on how you came to that conclusion. From what I've read, AMD will be at 65nm early in 2006, and will continue to improve their current designs while adding new tech at faster speeds. They will have higher production capabilities due to a newer, bigger fab with a smaller die process. Unless you're one of those people with unconditional confidence that intel will come out wit da best processa eva next year, I see no reason for such pessimism about AMD's prospects. They still have six months to further penetrate the dual core server space while intel doesn't even have a chip to compete.

Anywho, how about a little more thought than a one liner if you're going to make such bizarre claims (AMD has increased their revenue on processor sales every quarter for a couple years now).
Click to expand...

Ever heard of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."???

Here's what I see as "new" developments for Socket M2:

- DDR2 support : Big mistake. DDR2 latencies are sky-high, and the lowest I've seen are 4-4-4-12. If AMD just stays with DDR, they can garner support from the enthusiast companies such as OCZ, Mushkin, Crucial, and even Corsair, all companies that are continuously improving their DDR series. OCZ just came out with its 2x1GB Gold VX PC-4000 RAM. By moving to DDR2, they will be losing support in the enthusiast and mainstream gamer communities, which account for much of their sales, apart from server-grade computers.

- New socket, incompatible with older ones. This is the same reason that so many people initially HATED Battlefield 2. When it was introduced, there was a no-tolerance policy for graphics cards. Either you had an FX5700 or you couldn't play. Many people chose not to buy the game because they didn't want to shell out for a new graphics card as well, when their old one could've perfectly handled it. By moving to a new socket, AMD is forcing people to go out and buy a new motherboard and CPU. Why do you think the X2 processors were such a hit? Most AMD users already HAD their s939 motherboards and now all they needed for dual-core was an updated BIOS. Meanwhile, Intel required an entirely new motherboard with the i925 chipset.

I have yet to see anything GOOD that will come of this, besides 65nm chips, which will probably be implemented on s939 as well.

And if you [or anyone] is wondering, I am an AMD fanboy to the grave. But this is a mistake that not even Hector Ruiz should overlook.
 
Originally posted by: Bona Fide
Originally posted by: SLIM
Originally posted by: Bona Fide
M2 = AMD's biggest mistake ever. They're gonna be seeing heavy losses for much of '06 🙁
Click to expand...

Nice prediction Nostredamus, any chance you want to expand on how you came to that conclusion. From what I've read, AMD will be at 65nm early in 2006, and will continue to improve their current designs while adding new tech at faster speeds. They will have higher production capabilities due to a newer, bigger fab with a smaller die process. Unless you're one of those people with unconditional confidence that intel will come out wit da best processa eva next year, I see no reason for such pessimism about AMD's prospects. They still have six months to further penetrate the dual core server space while intel doesn't even have a chip to compete.

Anywho, how about a little more thought than a one liner if you're going to make such bizarre claims (AMD has increased their revenue on processor sales every quarter for a couple years now).
Click to expand...

Ever heard of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."???

Here's what I see as "new" developments for Socket M2:

- DDR2 support : Big mistake. DDR2 latencies are sky-high, and the lowest I've seen are 4-4-4-12. If AMD just stays with DDR, they can garner support from the enthusiast companies such as OCZ, Mushkin, Crucial, and even Corsair, all companies that are continuously improving their DDR series. OCZ just came out with its 2x1GB Gold VX PC-4000 RAM. By moving to DDR2, they will be losing support in the enthusiast and mainstream gamer communities, which account for much of their sales, apart from server-grade computers.

- New socket, incompatible with older ones. This is the same reason that so many people initially HATED Battlefield 2. When it was introduced, there was a no-tolerance policy for graphics cards. Either you had an FX5700 or you couldn't play. Many people chose not to buy the game because they didn't want to shell out for a new graphics card as well, when their old one could've perfectly handled it. By moving to a new socket, AMD is forcing people to go out and buy a new motherboard and CPU. Why do you think the X2 processors were such a hit? Most AMD users already HAD their s939 motherboards and now all they needed for dual-core was an updated BIOS. Meanwhile, Intel required an entirely new motherboard with the i925 chipset.

I have yet to see anything GOOD that will come of this, besides 65nm chips, which will probably be implemented on s939 as well.

And if you [or anyone] is wondering, I am an AMD fanboy to the grave. But this is a mistake that not even Hector Ruiz should overlook.
Click to expand...

1. All the enthusiast companies have already started announcing lower Latency DDR2, and at a certain point, DDR2 does surpass DDR in every way, low latency or not.

2. So what, they did it with 754 to 939. And alot of people just stayed 754 and some switched, and new buyers bought 939. No big deal, a new socket coming out doesn't mean everyone's 939 stuff is suddenly obsolete.

3. DDR2 will be good by that time, 65nm chips, I gurantee there will end up being other tech only on M2.


Lastly, like I said, if you don't wanna upgrade, it's not like your being forced too, I'm sure there will be a few more processors on the 939 socket before then.
 
Think about it, feeding a quad core chip with DDR is not a good long term strategy. Eventually the bandwidth requirements will start to be outstripped by the additional cores.

It may not seem like much, but on the Anand review for memory bandwidth you can see there is a small gain from 0-10% across various apps. If you think about that a 10% gain on a dual 2.4 chip is giving you an additional "240Mhz" bump across each core. If the chips can scale MHz upwards with the 65nm process, then a move to DDR2, may yield performance gains just on the extra bandwidth to play with.

Though we have yet to see DD2 with an onboard controller, which would give us a nice baseline on how it might scale with AMD.
 
Originally posted by: Bona Fide
Originally posted by: SLIM
Originally posted by: Bona Fide
M2 = AMD's biggest mistake ever. They're gonna be seeing heavy losses for much of '06 🙁
Click to expand...

Nice prediction Nostredamus, any chance you want to expand on how you came to that conclusion. From what I've read, AMD will be at 65nm early in 2006, and will continue to improve their current designs while adding new tech at faster speeds. They will have higher production capabilities due to a newer, bigger fab with a smaller die process. Unless you're one of those people with unconditional confidence that intel will come out wit da best processa eva next year, I see no reason for such pessimism about AMD's prospects. They still have six months to further penetrate the dual core server space while intel doesn't even have a chip to compete.

Anywho, how about a little more thought than a one liner if you're going to make such bizarre claims (AMD has increased their revenue on processor sales every quarter for a couple years now).
Click to expand...

Ever heard of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."???

Here's what I see as "new" developments for Socket M2:

- DDR2 support : Big mistake. DDR2 latencies are sky-high, and the lowest I've seen are 4-4-4-12. If AMD just stays with DDR, they can garner support from the enthusiast companies such as OCZ, Mushkin, Crucial, and even Corsair, all companies that are continuously improving their DDR series. OCZ just came out with its 2x1GB Gold VX PC-4000 RAM. By moving to DDR2, they will be losing support in the enthusiast and mainstream gamer communities, which account for much of their sales, apart from server-grade computers.

- New socket, incompatible with older ones. This is the same reason that so many people initially HATED Battlefield 2. When it was introduced, there was a no-tolerance policy for graphics cards. Either you had an FX5700 or you couldn't play. Many people chose not to buy the game because they didn't want to shell out for a new graphics card as well, when their old one could've perfectly handled it. By moving to a new socket, AMD is forcing people to go out and buy a new motherboard and CPU. Why do you think the X2 processors were such a hit? Most AMD users already HAD their s939 motherboards and now all they needed for dual-core was an updated BIOS. Meanwhile, Intel required an entirely new motherboard with the i925 chipset.

I have yet to see anything GOOD that will come of this, besides 65nm chips, which will probably be implemented on s939 as well.

And if you [or anyone] is wondering, I am an AMD fanboy to the grave. But this is a mistake that not even Hector Ruiz should overlook.
Click to expand...


If this was one year ago you'd be right about ddr2, but check ocz.com and you'll see that basically all of their ddr2-667 has 4-2-2-8 timings. They've also come out with ddr2-1000 at 5-5-5. The increased density, decreased power draw and higher speeds mean that AMD will be ready for ddr2 when ddr2 is ready for prime time. It will be the same price or cheaper than ddr as many of the memory manufacturers are continuing to switch their production lines over. DDR has had its time in the sun (I waited until the 760 chipset came out to build my first system which is still running strong on the other side of my office) and now its time for AMD to show us what ddr2 is really about. I think a lot of the complaints about memory latency will vanish once you see what it can do with an integrated memory controller. I, for one, can't wait to have dual core 3ghz processors with dual channel 1 ghz memory.

Yes you will have to get a new motherboard if you want the latest and greatest cpu, but don't you want the backbone of your system to have some technological updates too (ie new chipsets, better HDD interfaces, etc)? I guess I see socket changes as a sign of progress while you only view it as an inconvenience.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it all pans out.
 
We are only going to see incremental changes to AMD processors until the true next gen (K10) hits. No one short of a time traveler can say for sure if this will be enough for them to keep the performance crown on the desktop and server markets.

To be honest, I am a bit dissapointed in AMD's plans for the next year+. But that is the nature of the business and the reality of each generation of CPU. Intel BETTER come out in 2006 with a line of processors that beat AMD, especially in the server space. Intel's latest generation processor obviously better one-up AMD or something is very wrong.

Either way, the reality is that AMD will continue to hover around 10-15% market share for the forseable future IMO. To really put the screws to Intel, AMD needs to have their next-gen design out soon after Intel, which is not going to happen.
 
I for one never upgrade My pc's other than a new video card in 6months to a year down the road. After that I just build an entirely new pc from the ground up with all the newest hardware. I mean really.....how many people actually upgrade their CPU without changing the motherboard too? and I bet even less would do it more than once.

If You bought say a 3200+ why would You spend money down the road foolishly on say a FX-55 2 years later when that money could be better spent (performance wise) on an entire new pc with new tech. I think You would be much better served saving that money toward a new pc than netting a 10-20%(if that) system wide performance increase with a new CPU that's only a couple bin jumps higher with more cache. I'd like to see the person who went out and bought a x2 4800+ to upgrade from their 3500-4000+ processor lol.

Hell if You are worried about cost goto www.dell.com and get the shiney new $350 dell pc's they sell 🙂

I guess I have more money (or desire) to spend on PC's then most, but some people have children in their family while I have PC's 😛

 
Originally posted by: Lazien
I for one never upgrade My pc's other than a new video card in 6months to a year down the road. After that I just build an entirely new pc from the ground up with all the newest hardware. I mean really.....how many people actually upgrade their CPU without changing the motherboard too? and I bet even less would do it more than once.

If You bought say a 3200+ why would You spend money down the road foolishly on say a FX-55 2 years later when that money could be better spent (performance wise) on an entire new pc with new tech. I think You would be much better served saving that money toward a new pc than netting a 10-20%(if that) system wide performance increase with a new CPU that's only a couple bin jumps higher with more cache. I'd like to see the person who went out and bought a x2 4800+ to upgrade from their 3500-4000+ processor lol.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's that simple. Most people in our group love to tinker but can't afford a complete new system build every year. Particularly if they have to put food on their family.... 😀

Since I'm not a serious gamer, an AGP 6800U should do me fine for a couple years. The next upgrade I do will be an X2 4400 or 4800 in a year or so, when presumably they're going for <$200. There is something to be said for cost-effective upgrading. My next build will probably come in three years or so.

 
DDR2 support : Big mistake. DDR2 latencies are sky-high, and the lowest I've seen are 4-4-4-12. If AMD just stays with DDR, they can garner support from the enthusiast companies such as OCZ, Mushkin, Crucial, and even Corsair, all companies that are continuously improving their DDR series. OCZ just came out with its 2x1GB Gold VX PC-4000 RAM. By moving to DDR2, they will be losing support in the enthusiast and mainstream gamer communities, which account for much of their sales, apart from server-grade computers.
Click to expand...

Wow just wow.

DDR2 timmings are well bellow 4-4-4-12 buddy, what if I told you I can get DDR2 running at 3-2-2 fairly easily.

 
Yeah Corsair has been first out of the block with 3-2-2 stuff at 675mhz - but can be pushed to 709mhz in tests at those timings (with voltage bump).

Pretty good imo, but as yet those sort of chips will be extremely expensive - 6 months time? Well I reckon they'll be much mroe affordable while the more mainstream memory chips should hopefully have caught up to some degree in timings at speed.

However, my 'beef' is that I can't see any major performance increases here. DDR500 currently is sufficient for dual-core it seems so whether DDR500 or DDR700 we are unlikely to see major differences - maybe a couple of % in certain instances. Rarely will you get both cores running full tilt demanding full memory bandwidth at the same time.

Second 65nm, while it will help ramp up clock speed a tiny bit more say an extra 400mhz, it's not going to be revolutionary new performance.

Outside of that we're looking at a few tweaks to the core and memory controller so we might be again looking at a few extra % increase.

However, in all what seems to me is that M2 might provide some performance increase but it's nothing revolutionary and certainly nothing worth spending major $ on a whole new setup (RAM, Motherboard, CPU) which will be expensive as new, immature regards chipset etc. Really not something that can be easily justfied. Maybe if you're looking for a whole new build say you've suceeded and held onto your XP then it might be worth it.

In fact, to put that in context AMD's new Crossfire motherboards were performing upto 5% faster than the fastest nvidia boards in games.

However, one of the downers is having AMD's own hardware implementation. Now while I understand that you'll be able to switch it off, I wonder about such things. Because it wasn't put on there (at the inconvience and cost to AMD) to really benefit us - more at the request of content providers and corps. Really, I begin to see software demanding use of DRM or otherwise activating/using it when not wanted. I look at Apples new computers and see how they aim to use it to secure their OS (and personally identify their user) or DRm as necessary to view HDTV content and I feel uneasy - having DRM on my pc doesn't sit easily with me and is currently something I as yet will look to avoid.

Other than that, there are some questions over whether in fact AMDs M2 chips might run hotter given higher quoted TDP figures - a question mark over that.

In short, the future I see as I'm still holding off with my XP is to wait for ATI's motherboards to develop, mature and come out with SB600 and more PCI-E lanes (given their great base performance and HD audio - DFi to hopefully lower CPU utilisation with their Karajan module) and then buy that with an AMD64 (3000+) and hold off until S939 dual-core is cheaper (and maybe 65nm) and then pair that with some 2 x 1GB sticks of DDR500 at lowish timings capable RAM. PhysX PPU and faster graphics will then follow suit 🙂

I have a plan.
 
Originally posted by: clarkey01
Is there anything new from them next year ? all the hype seems to be with Intel, AMD are as quiet as ever. If there sat on thier ass there about to "penetrated".
Click to expand...

1. Socket M2 (talked about alot already)
2. Socket F - server socket, may include FBDimms with support for over 16GB/dimm
3. 65nm
4. Quad core samples due mid year, shipping in quantity early 2007
5. Probable dual core Turions
6. Pacifica and Presidio (security and virtualization)
 
Originally posted by: Viditor
Originally posted by: clarkey01
Is there anything new from them next year ? all the hype seems to be with Intel, AMD are as quiet as ever. If there sat on thier ass there about to "penetrated".
Click to expand...

1. Socket M2 (talked about alot already)
2. Socket F - server socket, may include FBDimms with support for over 16GB/dimm
3. 65nm
4. Quad core samples due mid year, shipping in quantity early 2007
5. Probable dual core Turions
6. Pacifica and Presidio (security and virtualization)
Click to expand...

Socket F is also rumored to possibly have the PCI-E bus integrated on chip, but i forsee that not happening as it would be very very complex to put the south bridge on a CPU without specific chipset suppport.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top