Intel admits defeat to AMD, permanently pulls plug on Speed War and forced to copy AMD chip 10-15-04

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: arsbanned
Ironic that my latest machine is Prescott based. 😀 I've built many Athlon (and Duron before that) machines. But I felt like getting a Dell (dude) this time around.
Agree with "Ain't competiton great? "

An AMD chip paired with an nForceX chipset on a quality motherboard from ABit or ASUS is, ime, every bit as reliable if not moreso than Intel.

There. See? We CAN agree on something. 😉 :thumbsup:

Well, that makes sense. A cold front just moved through Orlando. 😉 😀

Cheers. :beer:

 

[Infohawk]

If most people buy into the Intel brand, isn't it better for people that are willing to buy AMDs? We get better products at cheaper prices. 🙂

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
10-15-2004 Intel pulls plug on 4-gigahertz chip

The long-promised chip was supposed to power the fastest-ever generation of Intel-based PCs early next year. Instead, Intel will release another chip that has fewer gigahertz but is made faster in other ways.

But the public change of tune hints at more problems at Intel, which has struggled with production and inventory. "It's another in a series of eye-opening acknowledgments," says equity analyst Rick Whittington at Caris & Co.

Intel shares fell 2% to $20.51 Thursday.

In recent months, Intel delayed several chips and recalled defective ones. It overestimated demand, creating an inventory glut.

It was forced to hastily copy a popular chip from smaller rival Advanced Micro Devices.
============================================================
Congratulations to all those that have supported AMD through the years.

This gets a great big "Meh, who cares" from me.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

What made you get the AMD to begin with since you have so much loyalty to Intel???

Curiosity and budget mostly, I heard constant comments on AMD's Athlon XP, I needed to move up from a P3 633, and the price was at the time what I wanted to spend as I had other priorities over a computer...plus if anything did tank then my fiancee had my old CPU/mainboard and I could either use her system or revert back...

The install was fairly easy even though the chip itself felt and looked like trash, the system ran hotter than I would have wanted but was below recommended specs, performance was ok for the money....I upgraded just last month to a 2400 which actually runs cooler than my old 1600, I assume due to the much higher quality fan unit included with it, as expected the performance gain was minimal at best...I feel my biggest limitation is my mainboard but again I have no desire to upgrade that when it works fine, supports my current CPU, and if I am to move to a better board then I am turning this system over to the wife and getting a P4 setup for myself....I have satisfied my curiousity and really have no desire to continue using AMD after this setup unless something drastic happens in the industry which I don't forsee.

Well, at least you tried, not 100% Blind Faith.

Interesting how much "stock" you put into looks and feel for something you would only handle when putting together and never "touch" it again.

I'm supsecting somebody has "stock" interest in the behemoth and just tried the other side to see what all the hoopla was about.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674


No I wouldn't. I would get just as pissed at AMD if they ever pulled an Intel/Nvidia stunt.

But Dave, don't you realise that such is the way of business?? and that you are constantly going to be pissed off if you continue with such a mindset?....if AMD does surpass Intel in the chip market they will follow in the path of Nvidia and Intel, they will charge a premium for their product, and they will offer less bang for your buck....it is the way that it works and that it always will work, heck I cannnot think of ONE company that is the public leader in its field that does not have such criticisms leveled against it...not one, Montblanc, Rolex, BMW, Mercedes, Bose, Intel, Nvidia, Harmon Kardon, SONY, MICROSOFT.....all of the big names come under criticism, all of the small brands or underdogs that overtake their rivals eventually become those which are scorned....such is the nature of the beast.

 

[Bumrush99]

I love my 64 system, it smoked the crap out of my old P4 3.0 system.

However, the retail market means nothing, it is the business market that produces the most revenue. As long as companies like Dell refuse to carry AMD, and as long as fortune 500 companies continue to invest on the Intel platform, AMD will lag way behind.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
If most people buy into the Intel brand, isn't it better for people that are willing to buy AMDs? We get better products at cheaper prices. 🙂

For once I agree with Infohawk but always laugh when die hard supporters bitch and moan about Intel...the same is said for any hobbiest community...

Radio Controlled car enthusiasts bitch that Associated Electrics cost a premium over Losi and HPI

Watch fans complain about Rolex and popularity and wish their favorite brand was liked by the masses

Pen freaks complain that Montblanc is all that anyone knows yet the good pens have no recognition

Car enthusiasts moan about BMW prices and MB quality and harp on the Japanese offerings which dollar for dollar are more economical, reliable, and just as sporty.....

YET THEY ALL FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THAT ONCE THEIR FAVORITE BECOMES THE BIG DOG THE PRICE AND THEIR WALLETS WILL SUFFER IF THEY CONTINUE TO BUY....

really makes no sense to me, if anything you should cheer that Intel is number 1 and amd is still trying to compete as prices will be better for YOU, it isn't like Intel will snuff them because the last thing they want is another MS debacle...

For great examples take a look at NVIDIA before they were big, or better yet Polk audio as soon as they started selling in stores such as BB and CC, same can be said for Klipsch....

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Well, at least you tried, not 100% Blind Faith.

Interesting how much "stock" you put into looks and feel for something you would only handle when putting together and never "touch" it again.

I'm supsecting somebody has "stock" interest in the behemoth and just tried the other side to see what all the hoopla was about.

LOL, again Dave way off base with your ASSumption, I have no tech related stock, I had in the past some wireless companies such as verizon, ATT wireless and avya(sp?) but that was as close to the tech industry as I came...oh a little in AOL but that was a mistake by my broker...now most of my money is tied up in Oil and soon to be money market accounts.

With look and feel I was only using that as a quick reference, I also have done alot of work with electronics and such when I was younger, building more than a few "Heathkits" and know my way around a PCB and other components and can tell what is good build and what is not...to me something which is "made well" goes further than something that simply performs well, so while you might only see it for a few minutes during the install, the overall build quality might have lasting reprocussions....I value companies that make a quality product, both in performance and also in design...from what I have seen Intel might not have the best performing product in terms of raw speed but their build quality is much higher.

 

[stateofbeasley]

I have an AMD gaming rig at home. I also think that whoever wrote that article is an idiot who has NO IDEA how long it takes to qualify a processor.

Intel copied the Athlon or Athlon 64? That's laughable.

Hastily copied? Maybe the x86-64 instructions, but it's all cross licensed. and AMD uses SSE/2 in their own processors. It goes both ways.

Dave, you need to get a fscking clue. Prescott had to have taped out in early 2003 or late 2002, meaning that its design was probably finalized in late 2001. There is no hasty copying here.

Less competition at the top means higher prices for all of us. :|

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
10-15-2004 Intel pulls plug on 4-gigahertz chip
...
It was forced to hastily copy a popular chip from smaller rival Advanced Micro Devices.
============================================================
Congratulations to all those that have supported AMD through the years.

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: Bumrush99
I love my 64 system, it smoked the crap out of my old P4 3.0 system.

However, the retail market means nothing, it is the business market that produces the most revenue. As long as companies like Dell refuse to carry AMD, and as long as fortune 500 companies continue to invest on the Intel platform, AMD will lag way behind.

I love my dual Opteron system I just built for home. [evil laugh] Muwahahahahaha!!! [/evil laugh]

As for the business market....I manage the server engineering team where I work....new fiscal year started October 1 and I've already ordered 3 new maxed out Quad Opteron servers from HP/Compaq. They are about to come out with a 2u Opteron based server. When that happens that is all we will be buying. Price difference. The same servers I have ordered in the Opteron config would have been approx $20k more if I had gone Xeon.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Last Intel I bought was my Pentium 60 way back in the day...AMD ever since.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Last Intel I bought was my Pentium 60 way back in the day...AMD ever since.

Sorry you had to suffer through the K6 series....that must have sucked 🙂

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Last Intel I bought was my Pentium 60 way back in the day...AMD ever since.

Sorry you had to suffer through the K6 series....that must have sucked 🙂

Hey! My K6-2/300@350 paired with a Rage128 got almost 40fps in Q2 timedemo. It would have done better but I had the resolution bumped all the way up to 800x600. 😀

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Hey! My K6-2/300@350 paired with a Rage128 got almost 40fps in Q2 timedemo. It would have done better but I had the resolution bumped all the way up to 800x600. 😀

lol, I am not one to talk as I dealt with a P120 for the longest time until I finally moved into a Celeron 300A and bumped it to 450....

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Last Intel I bought was my Pentium 60 way back in the day...AMD ever since.

Sorry you had to suffer through the K6 series....that must have sucked 🙂

I still a couple working K6's in my attic...right next to my Timex Sinclair (sic?) 🙂 I had less problems with my K6 than friends had with their Cyrix chips, though...but yea, I wasn't as happy back then 🙂

 

[LordSnailz]

I wouldn't call this an enormous win for AMD ... you have to remember people out there cares more about "Intel Inside" than anything.

Fo rintel is about timing, if they're able to come up with a 64bit chip quick enough, before people really catch on to AMD's chip, then it would be transparent to a lot of people.

 

[LTC8K6]

If Intel was able to hastily copy the Athlon64 and come up with Nocona, then I'd say it's AMD who is in trouble, since Intel can crank out totally new chips in absurdly short times.

The article is basically claiming that Nocona is a copy of the Athlon64, which is ridiculous. The chips have little in common.

They can't be talking about Dothan, either.

Since Intel didn't hastily copy anything, it's a moot point.

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: daveshel
The king is dead! Long live the king!

I have not used an intel processor at home since 1999. I had to wait several months recently for intel to supply HP with some zeons for some new servers here at work, so I can attest to inventory problems. Glad AMD has gained some more ground - maybe I'll be able to fet Opterons next round.

xeon..saying "zeon" makes you sound like a moron.

Correcting my typos makes you sound like a mean-spirited control freak.

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: daveshel
The king is dead! Long live the king!

I have not used an intel processor at home since 1999. I had to wait several months recently for intel to supply HP with some zeons for some new servers here at work, so I can attest to inventory problems. Glad AMD has gained some more ground - maybe I'll be able to fet Opterons next round.

xeon..saying "zeon" makes you sound like a moron.

Correcting my typos makes you sound like a mean-spirited control freak.

by 'fet' I assume you mean 'get' 😉

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: daveshel


Correcting my typos makes you sound like a mean-spirited control freak.

so do you also mention this to others when they do the same? I know conjur enjoys pointing out spelling errors yet I don't see you bitching about him...again saying "zeon" sounds stupid, even worse when one considers this is a technical forum first and foremost.

 

[LTC8K6]

That article is just FUD written by an Intel hater. The only thing true is that Intel isn't going to put out a 4Ghz Prescott.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
If Intel was able to hastily copy the Athlon64 and come up with Nocona, then I'd say it's AMD who is in trouble, since Intel can crank out totally new chips in absurdly short times.

The article is basically claiming that Nocona is a copy of the Athlon64, which is ridiculous. The chips have little in common.

They can't be talking about Dothan, either.

Since Intel didn't hastily copy anything, it's a moot point.

Actually, Intel pretty much hastily tacked on the AMD64 instruction set to the Prescott and above P4 line after denying that 64-bit computing was even relevant to the desktop.

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: Todd33
I have one P4 and one Barton, I'm going AMD 64 next build. Intel has slipped.

Same here, but I have TBredB along with my P4 3.0C instead of a Barton, next is A64 w/o a doubt.

 

[stateofbeasley]

Right.... so you think that in only a couple months, Intel can redo all the data paths, execution units, etc, and requalify the part for 3+ GHz speeds :roll:

Prescott was an x86-64 processor from the ground up, just like Willamette was an HT processor from the ground up. The big question for Intel was whether to activate the feature.

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Actually, Intel pretty much hastily tacked on the AMD64 instruction set to the Prescott and above P4 line after denying that 64-bit computing was even relevant to the desktop.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: stateofbeasley
Right.... so you think that in only a couple months, Intel can redo all the data paths, execution units, etc, and requalify the part for 3+ GHz speeds :roll:

Prescott was an x86-64 processor from the ground up, just like Willamette was an HT processor from the ground up. The big question for Intel was whether to activate the feature.

I'm not claiming it was done in a couple of months, but Intel basically tacked on Amd's 64-bit instruction set to the existing P4 core by adding a few new GPRs and some more SIMD registers. And they did it by reverse engineering AMD's K8. It's definitely not a ground up redesign.

It's no big deal. The K8 is basically little more that a refined K7 with additional registers as well.