AMD in Danger

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Elcs

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Elcs
To take the title on a literal basis...

When has AMD ever NOT been in danger? A small company taking on a giant and his castle. Granted AMD may have held the upper hand for sustained periods over its history and it is in itself massive compared to what it used to be... its still pretty small compared to Intel.

Until AMD close the gap even more, its still going to be in danger. Its R&D department seem to be pulling off miracles that Intels cant.... early reports suggest that AMD's 0.09 venture may be significantly better for the Athlon line then 0.09 was for the P4 line and how big is the difference in R&D budgets?

I think the fact that AMD are continuing to innovate and are able to stay reasonably close to Intel in their dogfight is what is keeping them going and I for one enjoy the competition. Everyone who understands the situation fully always likes the underdog better 🙂

There is a huge Philosophical difference between Intel and AMD, though for AMD it's not entirely by choice. That difference is that AMD relies on others much more and is willing to work with others(IBM for eg) for developement of key technologies. OTOH, Intel likes to do almost everything In-House.

This diffeence allows AMD to concentrate on the Design of their CPUs more and let others work on the Manufacturing Processes and Materials Research. It is the Philosophy that has allowed AMD to be the first to use Cu Interconnects, SOI, and even recognize(so it appears) that MHZ speeds were hitting a wall at approx 3ghz. At the sametime AMD was adopting these Manufaturing Technologies, Intel wasn't adopting them, but rather trying to develop their own version or variations that they could Patent as their own. As long as these 2 Philosophies are adhered to by AMD/Intel, I think AMD will continue to be competitive even though Intel would appear, at first glance, to have the upperhand in R&D.

Well said. I knew AMD outsourced/collaborated with a few companies to cover some of the issues that they couldnt fully fund but I did not realise it was to that extent.

Although Intel alone make AMD look small, AMD's business associations are actually giving them signifigant leverage in their CPU battle? Impressive that such a strategy is being pulled off. It must really show that AMD are quite serious about becoming the dominant force and for large companies to share support, it must show that AMD are showing some good initiative if only in their technological developments.

Personally, Im glad of Intels 'downtime' currently. AMD need to become a bit stronger in the market place with respect to the customer knowledgebase and being pretty much the top-dog by way of performance is a good way to get there imo.

I always get the feeling that Intel has something decent in the works but only time will tell.

Thank you for the enlightenment.

But i still think AMD are in some sort of danger. What they do now could seriously affect their future.

True, AMD is always on the verge of extinction, but that keeps them sharp.

 

[Zebo]

Ed does'nt like the article either:

http://overclockers.com/articles1112/

AMD has two core problems when it comes to seriously challenging Intel, and neither of them have anything to do with technical merit.

The first problem is that the average human being has been brainwashed over the years to think Intel, so the average person buying a computer who neither thinks much nor wants to think much about computers has a built-in Intel bias.

This is the 800-pound gorilla in the whole discussion. Many buy Intel for the same reason they buy Sony televisions; the brand name has been branded into their brains, and buying that requires no additional effort on the part of the buyer.

Those willing to put more effort into the buying process can scream all they like about it, just like Toshiba fans can give all kinds of reasons for buying their product, but these folks aren't around to listen. They're not watching your channel.


....

Problem number two is seen mostly on the corporate side, where AMD sales have been and continue to remain an anchor on the company's marketshare. That is primarily due to the generally held perception that AMD just isn't as reliable or dependable as Intel.

While AMD is trying to change that perception, there's a difference between talking the talk and walking the walk. While there's been some improvements here and there, overall, it still looks like the same old AMD.

Hammer rollout has been a disaster for any party depending on it for their own products. Just to illustrate, imagine if Dell had signed on to the Hammer bandwagon a year ago and decided to make desktop Hammers co-equal with PIVs. AMD couldn't have delivered enough product to Dell, period. True, Intel had problems delivering Prescotts initially, but there was a just-as-good supply of Northwoods available, and Intel did get Prescotts ramped up pretty quickly.

Right now, the product line looks like a junkyard, with products competing more against each other than against Intel's, and it will only get more cluttered in the year ahead.

It's not good enough to come out with a better mousetrap. Corporate buyers consider other factors, too, and this is where AMD has been and continues to be weak.

The geeks all love Opterons, but so far, Opterons are the greatest story never sold. Yes, they've gone from nothing to 7% in a year-and-a-half, and probably will double that in another year-and-a-half, but that still gives you only 15%.

 

[caz67]

This is good for the consumer..Both parties will need to produce more perfromance for less cost to consumers to stay competitve.

Remember the days when AMD , was marketed on being a value for money brand..AMD processors are now as expensive as INTEL..

 

[Zebo]

AMD processors are now as expensive as INTEL.. 🙁

 

[DrMrLordX]

Wow, must be a good processor if it has a price equal to the net worth of a corporation like Intel

. . .

teehee

*ahem* right, um, here's some more food for thought. AMD is starting to make predictions about performance gains from their upcoming dual-core CPUs.

http://www.tomshardware.com/ha...s/20041005_205914.html

30% minimum speed increase, eh? Even though they're gonna be clocked 600-1000 mhz lower? Hmmmmmmm. I think someone ought to investigate this claim with some underclocked 2xx Opterons vs a 1xx Opteron. I mean, seeing as how a duallie Opteron rig should handle about the same as a single-CPU system with a dual-core Opteron. Right?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX
Wow, must be a good processor if it has a price equal to the net worth of a corporation like Intel

. . .

teehee

*ahem* right, um, here's some more food for thought. AMD is starting to make predictions about performance gains from their upcoming dual-core CPUs.

http://www.tomshardware.com/ha...s/20041005_205914.html

30% minimum speed increase, eh? Even though they're gonna be clocked 600-1000 mhz lower? Hmmmmmmm. I think someone ought to investigate this claim with some underclocked 2xx Opterons vs a 1xx Opteron. I mean, seeing as how a duallie Opteron rig should handle about the same as a single-CPU system with a dual-core Opteron. Right?

I don't think it quite works the same as a Dual rig. It may operate as a Single core under some situations, but I'm just guessing.

 

[Elcs]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX
Wow, must be a good processor if it has a price equal to the net worth of a corporation like Intel

. . .

teehee

*ahem* right, um, here's some more food for thought. AMD is starting to make predictions about performance gains from their upcoming dual-core CPUs.

http://www.tomshardware.com/ha...s/20041005_205914.html

30% minimum speed increase, eh? Even though they're gonna be clocked 600-1000 mhz lower? Hmmmmmmm. I think someone ought to investigate this claim with some underclocked 2xx Opterons vs a 1xx Opteron. I mean, seeing as how a duallie Opteron rig should handle about the same as a single-CPU system with a dual-core Opteron. Right?

I don't think it quite works the same as a Dual rig. It may operate as a Single core under some situations, but I'm just guessing.

I dont think anyone has any idea about how it will work thus far. I doubt even AMD or Intel know which way is best for their dual core processors or how to make it easy for software to take advantage of the new chips, be it singularly or in dual capability. Perhaps they will work like the XGI Volari was supposed to work or how the old SLI works (not up to speed on the new SLI), where one processing unit does 1 task and the other unit does another task.

Perhaps it will work in the same way as a dual setup with games/applications specifically written to take full advantage of the new technology. Id shudder to think what will happen with Intel and HT.... 2 physical processors, 2 instances of HT? Theoretically making a 4 CPU system? Realms of fantasy and stupidity collide but its something Id guess will be considered.

 

[packmule]

Same as it ever was.