Shanghai now shipping

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Good day Viditor. You have to know that am aware that INtel has more than likely broken the commerace laws. I am noy stupid. SO has almost every company out there. Some have broken More than Commerace laws. There are alot of these . Intel probably fits in this area. SO does AMD.The differance is INTEL is consider a Monopoly. Its like affiritave action man . I see nothing wrong with a monopoly and they should be allowe to function exactly like any other company out. You think Intel is going to be king for ever. NO way. Somebody will come up with a new better process . That will change the industry. There IS only One company IN USA I am aware of that constantly does the same thing Intel does and They are Not considered monopoly. This cimpany has also commeted High crimes. This company is untouchable. Until this company is brought to justic . I consider everthing else laughable. This company has sinned against both God and Man. This company AIDED Hitler in the murder of millions of Jews , Gypse and other groups. This companies business practices have been criminal. Get these guys first .
AS for what you said about Fab capacity for AMD I agree. I am also insulted and almost every member here should be. I asked you if AMD could supply the EU and you said easily. Viditor all of us are aware of recent AMD Intel history. AMD 64 Had AMDs fabs maxed we know 30% is about all they can handle. Now 1 FAb is A shell. Also do you think AND would give up THE world market For the EU.

Intel would be foolish not to do this. They are accused of wrong doing by the Beast. IF intel did nothing differant. Than any other company has done and those are legeal practices. IF intel feels they have done nothing wrong. Than and only than . Should intel tell the Beast to kiss off. NOW thats harball. Its Also Intels Moral obligation to do exactly that. If Intel has to operate under affiranative action like conditions . They should just tell the Beast they can't function under those conditions. So they will no longer do business with them. Because INTEL can not comply to your standards . Its that simple. YOU can argue that its not that simple . But it really is.
The EU would buckel under. Besides that . Until the Company that helped MURDER millions of EU members is brought justice . They are A joke with the postion they of taken with Intel and MS.

Viditor I like your internet self. Because I know your internet self. Your the type that would applaud China accussing Intel of practicing poor business practices. You know this is true Viditor. If you really stopped to think about it should piss ya off.

:shocked:

 

[Nemesis 1]

Looks to me like If your a gamer. AMD platiforms will be just fine. @45nm. I am going to buy one. I bought a 65nm. Its a good platiform . Gaming is on par with Intel In multi threaded Games. If you want bragging rights Intel . If you want a good gaming . Both Intel /Amd are fine.

 

[Keysplayr]

Would I be able to drop a Shanghai or Deneb CPU in my M3N-HT Deluxe? It's AM2/AM2+. Right now I have a PhenomX4 9550 in it.

 

[Martimus]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Would I be able to drop a Shanghai or Deneb CPU in my M3N-HT Deluxe? It's AM2/AM2+. Right now I have a PhenomX4 9550 in it.

You should be able to. At least that is the plan for these new processors.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Would I be able to drop a Shanghai or Deneb CPU in my M3N-HT Deluxe? It's AM2/AM2+. Right now I have a PhenomX4 9550 in it.

You should be able to. At least that is the plan for these new processors.

I thought Shanghai was the server version - Socket F or whatever, not AM2/AM2+. (Could be wrong, been a while since I read up on it)

 

[Martimus]

You are right, but the Deneb version should be compatible. It may not be, considering the recent past with Phenom support, but I feel it is more likely since it has lower power requirements than the original Phenom. It is scheduled to be released in January.

 

[SolMiester]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: harpoon84

Back on topic, Shanghai vs Harpertown. Place your bets.

Since we're talking server chips, I'd say Shanghai, easily. Current Optys are already very competitive against Harpertown.

depends on the harpertown, and who has both systems.

My friends harper which i helped him aquire would gobble shangi like no tomorrow.



http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=416916

Think 4 x E8600 on 1 machine overclocked.

Interestingly there is no SSE4 instructions on the Xeon?....

 

[nyker96]

I want some benches of this thing!

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Would I be able to drop a Shanghai or Deneb CPU in my M3N-HT Deluxe? It's AM2/AM2+. Right now I have a PhenomX4 9550 in it.

You should be able to. At least that is the plan for these new processors.

ah, but would it perform well...

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Great reply but could you link that please . As I recall . that 50% is in fact 20% .

Intel/AMD contract

AMD doesn't own 50% or more of whatever they'll be calling this company that they've sold their fabs to, though. And since they won't own 50%, they'll be in violation of the contract you linked.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Great reply but could you link that please . As I recall . that 50% is in fact 20% .

Intel/AMD contract

AMD doesn't own 50% or more of whatever they'll be calling this company that they've sold their fabs to, though. And since they won't own 50%, they'll be in violation of the contract you linked.

What is interesting is the atypical contract terms they went to by establishing AMD has having <50% ownership but precisely 50% voting control and making TFC a subsidiary of AMD for reporting purposes.

To me this is clear proof that AMD interprets the contract with Intel as hinging on AMD controlling the owner of the fabs that are producing the majority AMD's chips and not hinging on AMD actually owning the fabs. (or a majority stake in the business that does)

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Great reply but could you link that please . As I recall . that 50% is in fact 20% .

Intel/AMD contract

AMD doesn't own 50% or more of whatever they'll be calling this company that they've sold their fabs to, though. And since they won't own 50%, they'll be in violation of the contract you linked.

What is interesting is the atypical contract terms they went to by establishing AMD has having <50% ownership but precisely 50% voting control and making TFC a subsidiary of AMD for reporting purposes.

To me this is clear proof that AMD interprets the contract with Intel as hinging on AMD controlling the owner of the fabs that are producing the majority AMD's chips and not hinging on AMD actually owning the fabs. (or a majority stake in the business that does)

Exactly...the contract specifically states "(50%) of the outstanding shares or securities entitled to vote for the election of directors".
While it's true they have less than 50% ownership, they do have 50% of the voting rights...

 

[taltamir]

i am sure it was combed over by contract lawyers before being signed...

 

[ashishmishra]

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: nyker96
i7s are simply too expensive for majority of people current company included. If AMD has a decent quad on hand I think it would be cheaper for me to upgrade to it ffrom my dual core wolf. that of course is taking into account keeping of DDR2s, selling off the board+cpu etc costs.

I wish they "leacked" some benchs for this thing. Since they normally 'leak' when they think they got a superior product on hand.

Screw the leaking, bring on the actual performance reviews. They got nothing to lose.

If Deneb performs like Phenom then it won't matter whether folks have confirmation of this now or on Jan 9.

If it performs like Yorkfield or Nehalem then it helps AMD and hurts Intel to broadcast this data now even though the release date is Jan 9 as a competitive Deneb will convince some would-be Nehalem/Yorkfield buyers to delay avoid purchasing Intel and delay a few months to buy AMD.

I agree, and disagree at the same time. What they have to lose is current sales of Phenom processors for people who will just wait for the updated version. Of course they don't have that many sales of current Phenom processors, so it may not be a big deal - but that is the crux. They need that little business they currently have and can't afford to take any dip in income, since they are in such finacial disarray. So I can see both sides of it. Release good benches now to lower sales of the competition and increase sales for yourself when the product is released; or keep good performance under wraps to try to keep from bleeding too much from the potential loss of sales in the meantime. If they were in a better position, I think the first option would be a no-brainer, but sometimes you have to go into survival mode. Of course, the processor could just be a dog as well.

I would disagree, most of current AMD sales are based on a price/performance perspective, low cost or OEM computers, enthusiasts are the ones that primarily hunt for leaked benches etc. Remember Conroe, when the benches leaked the enthusiasts started drooling and waiting. It hurt the sales of Athlon 64 X2's but not Pentium D's.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: ashishmishra

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: nyker96
i7s are simply too expensive for majority of people current company included. If AMD has a decent quad on hand I think it would be cheaper for me to upgrade to it ffrom my dual core wolf. that of course is taking into account keeping of DDR2s, selling off the board+cpu etc costs.

I wish they "leacked" some benchs for this thing. Since they normally 'leak' when they think they got a superior product on hand.

Screw the leaking, bring on the actual performance reviews. They got nothing to lose.

If Deneb performs like Phenom then it won't matter whether folks have confirmation of this now or on Jan 9.

If it performs like Yorkfield or Nehalem then it helps AMD and hurts Intel to broadcast this data now even though the release date is Jan 9 as a competitive Deneb will convince some would-be Nehalem/Yorkfield buyers to delay avoid purchasing Intel and delay a few months to buy AMD.

I agree, and disagree at the same time. What they have to lose is current sales of Phenom processors for people who will just wait for the updated version. Of course they don't have that many sales of current Phenom processors, so it may not be a big deal - but that is the crux. They need that little business they currently have and can't afford to take any dip in income, since they are in such finacial disarray. So I can see both sides of it. Release good benches now to lower sales of the competition and increase sales for yourself when the product is released; or keep good performance under wraps to try to keep from bleeding too much from the potential loss of sales in the meantime. If they were in a better position, I think the first option would be a no-brainer, but sometimes you have to go into survival mode. Of course, the processor could just be a dog as well.

I would disagree, most of current AMD sales are based on a price/performance perspective, low cost or OEM computers, enthusiasts are the ones that primarily hunt for leaked benches etc. Remember Conroe, when the benches leaked the enthusiasts started drooling and waiting. It hurt the sales of Athlon 64 X2's but not Pentium D's.

Precisely.