they "release" (or was it "announce"?) the xp 2400+ and 2600+, but then don't bother to sell them? what did they do build them just so they could say "hey this is what we have, don't buy someone else's stuff because we have better. oh, well we're not letting any out but we have it" lol. just seemed funny to me.
let me see if i have this right about amd
- Thread starter Shadowgate
- Start date
- Nov 27, 1999
- 65,297
- 403
- 126
Shadowgate, what mechBgon posted is the same thing I've read, it will take a little time to trickle down to us end users, hope this helps
Chaotic42
Lifer
- Jun 15, 2001
- 34,553
- 1,710
- 126
Well, I've heard that AMD is having some problems. I don't work there, so I can't say for sure. Anyway, it's always been big companies first, then the little guys.
You don't want to pay the bleeding-edge premium anyway. You'll feel stupid in 2 weeks when it's only 70% of what you paid for it.
NO...You have it right....
I may be labelled as an intel fanboy by the AMD 16 year olds, but OH WELL!!!
It was a paper launch mean to one up Intel and save face for themselves...AMD was having issues with the tbred as seen by the newer 2400 and 2600 chips being rev b's...The 2200+ was a Rev A, and we all now the issues with that. I think AMD could not allow Intel to get p4 2.8 out and push many of the benchmarks to well over 15 percent spreads.
While I agree OEMs may get them first...Usually the oems have them for a bit before most sites start reviewing them and how long does it take to build a system by these oems??? I mean where is the advertisement foe these new machines...Links???
I think they may be having problems but not technology...Just probably the proble, of getting enough of the chips produced....
Intel holds the review sites to releasing the chips until the day they will be formally announced and released to the public...Dell likely had them a few weeks earlier as well....
I may be labelled as an intel fanboy by the AMD 16 year olds, but OH WELL!!!
It was a paper launch mean to one up Intel and save face for themselves...AMD was having issues with the tbred as seen by the newer 2400 and 2600 chips being rev b's...The 2200+ was a Rev A, and we all now the issues with that. I think AMD could not allow Intel to get p4 2.8 out and push many of the benchmarks to well over 15 percent spreads.
While I agree OEMs may get them first...Usually the oems have them for a bit before most sites start reviewing them and how long does it take to build a system by these oems??? I mean where is the advertisement foe these new machines...Links???
I think they may be having problems but not technology...Just probably the proble, of getting enough of the chips produced....
Intel holds the review sites to releasing the chips until the day they will be formally announced and released to the public...Dell likely had them a few weeks earlier as well....
INtel must have been as desperate as AMD is now...I mean amd had a great product in the athlon and intel knew the p3 had its hands full....
Here while AMD is throwing heart and soul into the hammer I think it needs to stay competitive or at least the interpretation it is competitive to keep its marketshare it worked so hard to gain about 1-1/2 years ago from continuing to fall....
Lets remember AMD and its lower prices has really taken a toll on this company financially and for them to have done all of that only to see all those gains lost in the last year has to be a kick in the gut...
I truly hope the hammer will take the lead and be the Amd'S saving grace in the server market. Lets face it...Us here and the pc desktop market alone wont allow amd to rteach the levels it needs to be to really get the respect of the tech world and solidify its position as "intel's thorn"....
Here while AMD is throwing heart and soul into the hammer I think it needs to stay competitive or at least the interpretation it is competitive to keep its marketshare it worked so hard to gain about 1-1/2 years ago from continuing to fall....
Lets remember AMD and its lower prices has really taken a toll on this company financially and for them to have done all of that only to see all those gains lost in the last year has to be a kick in the gut...
I truly hope the hammer will take the lead and be the Amd'S saving grace in the server market. Lets face it...Us here and the pc desktop market alone wont allow amd to rteach the levels it needs to be to really get the respect of the tech world and solidify its position as "intel's thorn"....
Uh, I don't get it, why is it funny? Both AMD and Intel (and most other companies in every field) do this. Remember the new ATI chip? Well Anand reviewed it before you could buy it. And I seem to remember a certain company *cough* Intel *cough* that released their 1 ghz CPU well before you could buy it just to keep up with AMD. It's not like it never happens, in fact it almost always happens. Congrats to Intel for having a release that wasn't like that, but I hardly think it's fair to single out AMD for this kind of action.
i just think the whole idea of paper launches is funny, this just being the latest incident of it so i thought i'd say something and see what you all think.
i mean really tho what's the use of saying "here have a look at our latest product" if you can't get it to consumers? that's not a product launch, that's a product demo.
i've used several different setups from several companies, from cyrix to 486's to k6's to the mac classic to the apple 2 and most things since. i'd had great results from amd in the past as well as intel, so i'm not trying to bash on them too hard, as i understand that they are putting most of their concentration on the hammer product. and i do hope the hammer turns out well. but my opinion on this, is when you launch a product you should be able to supply that product, even if in limited quantities.
"here look how good our product is, don't buy that other brand. what? oh well we won't exactly have any for sale for another 2 months. huh? yeah they'll probably have something faster out by then but hey! we'll pretend we do too"
i mean really tho what's the use of saying "here have a look at our latest product" if you can't get it to consumers? that's not a product launch, that's a product demo.
i've used several different setups from several companies, from cyrix to 486's to k6's to the mac classic to the apple 2 and most things since. i'd had great results from amd in the past as well as intel, so i'm not trying to bash on them too hard, as i understand that they are putting most of their concentration on the hammer product. and i do hope the hammer turns out well. but my opinion on this, is when you launch a product you should be able to supply that product, even if in limited quantities.
"here look how good our product is, don't buy that other brand. what? oh well we won't exactly have any for sale for another 2 months. huh? yeah they'll probably have something faster out by then but hey! we'll pretend we do too"
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter