So what type of performance would the new Intel cpus have to have for us to jump ship?
- Thread starter AkumaX
- Start date
Equal to/better than equivelant in price AMD processors, or very good overclocking potential/more cost than AMD so that you don't spend lots for little performance gain, oh, and not too much heat output either.
It's fairly obvious, when Intel produces something as good as/better than AMD in terms of price/performance, people will jump ship unless they are die hard fanboys.
It's fairly obvious, when Intel produces something as good as/better than AMD in terms of price/performance, people will jump ship unless they are die hard fanboys.
1. If they were equal priced with the Athlon 64s and performed the same, many people would stay with AMD to "support the underdog".
2. If they were faster than the Athlon 64s and were more expensive, many people would stay with AMD because of "the better value".
3. The only scenarios that I can see where AMD users would switch to Intel with the new Pentium would be that either (A) The new Pentiums are faster than the Athlon 64s and cheaper, (B) The new Pentiums are more expensive, but significantly faster, (C) The new Pentiums offer some extremely awesome feature that no one can live without once they have heard of it.
No one can tell what is going to happen, but these new Intel chips do look pretty good from some of the info Anandtech has been reporting on. I myself predict that scenario 2 will happen, and things will stay pretty much the same.
2. If they were faster than the Athlon 64s and were more expensive, many people would stay with AMD because of "the better value".
3. The only scenarios that I can see where AMD users would switch to Intel with the new Pentium would be that either (A) The new Pentiums are faster than the Athlon 64s and cheaper, (B) The new Pentiums are more expensive, but significantly faster, (C) The new Pentiums offer some extremely awesome feature that no one can live without once they have heard of it.
No one can tell what is going to happen, but these new Intel chips do look pretty good from some of the info Anandtech has been reporting on. I myself predict that scenario 2 will happen, and things will stay pretty much the same.
:thumbsup:
Highly likely. It will likely be another "Do you want to pay X dollars for Y percent more performance?" issue. X and Y to be decided.
I actually think that the performance improvement over A64s will be marginal because we're pretty much close to the highest point of performance that can be achieved with current microarchitectures. You can always add more hardware that will only be useful in limited situations (like adding extra dedicated-SSE-units, for example) but the core x86 integer and x87 float performance is pretty close to maxed out. I'd predict that the next few years we'll see both Intel and AMD just throwing hardware at the problem (Like Intel's "AMD's+1" issue width) until there is either a breakthrough in production technology that allows clockspeeds to ram up massively again (yay) or one of the two companies come out with some radical new feature (that cannot be used by the other for some mystical reason) that close-to-erradicates the other (which is what Intel is trying to do... AMD cant 'cause it doesnt have the R&D cash to do so).
I wont upgrade unless I can get 15-20% gain from my current setup. Then it has to be cheaper then the quivalent AMD. Since I will likely have to migrate to an M2 mobo it puts them both on equal footing as both will require a new platform....Other factors ofcourse will be heat, ability to OC, and projected longevity of the new platform....
I may get another X2 before the end of this mobo if OCing yields and prices get better....
Early reports even from INtel fans look like the Yonah will not offer much for me, and I willhave to wait for conroe anyways....
I may get another X2 before the end of this mobo if OCing yields and prices get better....
Early reports even from INtel fans look like the Yonah will not offer much for me, and I willhave to wait for conroe anyways....
It looks to me like the Intel Conroe is going to be an wonderful CPU. Thats my next build.
Conroe a$$ stomper @ 3GHz Crossfire ATi dual R580's maybe R600's Sata 2 HD. Sata optical drivers Blu Ray or HD which ever. 1000 watt Pc power and cooling PS. Watercooling . Custom built case. Now memory Is a huge ?????. I was told by a friend that works at intel that the memory controller may be Rambus architecture based on the X-10 memory controller. As I understand it this memory controller Will work if configured to do so with. DDR DDR2 GDR3 that would be great.
Conroe a$$ stomper @ 3GHz Crossfire ATi dual R580's maybe R600's Sata 2 HD. Sata optical drivers Blu Ray or HD which ever. 1000 watt Pc power and cooling PS. Watercooling . Custom built case. Now memory Is a huge ?????. I was told by a friend that works at intel that the memory controller may be Rambus architecture based on the X-10 memory controller. As I understand it this memory controller Will work if configured to do so with. DDR DDR2 GDR3 that would be great.
Personally, I'd love it if Intel returned to their roots and offered genuine value.
Instead of a new chipset/socket/fsb every 2 months, why not give us a solid and stable chipset (remember the 440BX) and the potential to upgrade the board over -say- two years.
If AMD/nVidia/VIA/ATI can mature an athlon platform, why can't intel mature their CPU platform? I bought my 939 board last year with the intention of upgrading the CPU in a years time. And what do you know, I did. AMD promised that the 939 platform would support dual-core with a bios update, and that is what happened for me.
As for intel, well, I am waiting for them to figure out what they are doing. It doesn't matter what the performance level is, I want to be able to "upgrade" over time. The tech presented at this year's IDF sounds really promising, but what will the end result be? Will intel give us a chipset/socket/cpu/ram standard that is upgradable or disposable?
Case in point:
With the P4, Intel pushed Rambus as the ulimate bandwidth solution (and arguably, designed the P4 specifically for that memory standard) and offered PC133 as the "value" solution. Within a years time, Intel all but abandoned Rambus (much to the dismay of those who bought RDRAM systems *) for DDR and changed the socket. A year later, new socket. Then Intel stuck with the same socket, but changed the chipsets so that only certain chipsets supported certain processors, so to upgrade your CPU you had to upgrade your board. And then Intel changed the memory standard (and the socket) so that to use certain CPUs you had to upgrade your board and your Ram. And then dual-core came out, and (surprise) new chipset...
In that time AMD had 3 sockets, 2 memory standards, 2 families of CPUs. Simple, easy, and upgradable. AMD was also kind enough to migrate their "value" cpus to the elder sockets. Sempron is available in socket A and 754 flavours. Rumour has it that Sempron with appear in 939 guise once the M2 socket is released
If Intel did something similar, I might actual consider buying a setup as their was "value" in the purchase. As it is, I can see intel releasing the new cpu with a chipset using DDR2 in an ATX format. And then forcing the market to move to DDR3 (remember that twit from MS talking about Vista requirements. I'm sure he "spilled the beans" about Intels future plans) and BTX a year later.
As it is, AMD seems to offer the most value. I don't have buckets of cash to spend on a system, so I want to be able to get the most out of what I spend.
* The RDRAM chapter really enraged quite a few CTOs I know. They spent large sums migrating to the new platform only to find that it had no upgrade path. The most common upgrade to a system in the business environment is RAM. RIMMs were rare when the P4 was sold with RDRAM (usually available only in the lowest speed grade). Once Intel dropped support, the supply dried up. It's funny, while you can get PC133 anywhere today, getting RDRAM is expensive and difficult (online only).
Instead of a new chipset/socket/fsb every 2 months, why not give us a solid and stable chipset (remember the 440BX) and the potential to upgrade the board over -say- two years.
If AMD/nVidia/VIA/ATI can mature an athlon platform, why can't intel mature their CPU platform? I bought my 939 board last year with the intention of upgrading the CPU in a years time. And what do you know, I did. AMD promised that the 939 platform would support dual-core with a bios update, and that is what happened for me.
As for intel, well, I am waiting for them to figure out what they are doing. It doesn't matter what the performance level is, I want to be able to "upgrade" over time. The tech presented at this year's IDF sounds really promising, but what will the end result be? Will intel give us a chipset/socket/cpu/ram standard that is upgradable or disposable?
Case in point:
With the P4, Intel pushed Rambus as the ulimate bandwidth solution (and arguably, designed the P4 specifically for that memory standard) and offered PC133 as the "value" solution. Within a years time, Intel all but abandoned Rambus (much to the dismay of those who bought RDRAM systems *) for DDR and changed the socket. A year later, new socket. Then Intel stuck with the same socket, but changed the chipsets so that only certain chipsets supported certain processors, so to upgrade your CPU you had to upgrade your board. And then Intel changed the memory standard (and the socket) so that to use certain CPUs you had to upgrade your board and your Ram. And then dual-core came out, and (surprise) new chipset...
In that time AMD had 3 sockets, 2 memory standards, 2 families of CPUs. Simple, easy, and upgradable. AMD was also kind enough to migrate their "value" cpus to the elder sockets. Sempron is available in socket A and 754 flavours. Rumour has it that Sempron with appear in 939 guise once the M2 socket is released
If Intel did something similar, I might actual consider buying a setup as their was "value" in the purchase. As it is, I can see intel releasing the new cpu with a chipset using DDR2 in an ATX format. And then forcing the market to move to DDR3 (remember that twit from MS talking about Vista requirements. I'm sure he "spilled the beans" about Intels future plans) and BTX a year later.
As it is, AMD seems to offer the most value. I don't have buckets of cash to spend on a system, so I want to be able to get the most out of what I spend.
* The RDRAM chapter really enraged quite a few CTOs I know. They spent large sums migrating to the new platform only to find that it had no upgrade path. The most common upgrade to a system in the business environment is RAM. RIMMs were rare when the P4 was sold with RDRAM (usually available only in the lowest speed grade). Once Intel dropped support, the supply dried up. It's funny, while you can get PC133 anywhere today, getting RDRAM is expensive and difficult (online only).
First thing your right about the Rambus debacle. This was really a good move by Intel. So what happened ? The memory cartel conspired against Rambus and kept memory prices high for RDRAM. This is a known fact now. As for platforms thats what intel is tring to do a universal platform. My system is 3 years old except GPU and it still is a very good performer. Very good. So if when something new comes along and you run out and buy it . Good for you . I get full use out of all my purchases. I get 6200+ in 3Dmark 05 on a 3 year old system . 5700+ in PCmark 04 1300+ in 3Dmark03 and 75000+ in Aqua 3 . So if you make smart purchases to start with your system should be competitive for a long time . I couldn't be more pleased with my intel system. By the time I upgrade it will be 4 years old I am more than happy.
Yeah, Intel may have been burned on that move. The P4 did love rambus, and the performance was good if you paid for the high bandwith version (PC1066?). But can you blame the manufacturers. The Rambus royalty scheme was insane. I understand the need for Intellectual Property protection, but that was too much. Once you added the JEDEC fiasco, it got much worse.
At least Intel is easing into the new memory standard slowly this time. They made sure that the "Dramurai" would support the move, and that memory would be readily available.
Still, I'll wait to see what intel does with this next evolution before I think of "jumping ship".
I'm still holding off on PCI-E until it matures, and a "need to upgrade" arises. Other than the video cards, what other "PCI express" parts are there?
Zap
Elite Member
- Oct 13, 1999
- 22,377
- 7
- 81
As evilharp said, Rambus charged high royalties for manufacturers - the real reason Rambus memory was so expensive. Besides that, the RAM manufacturers and JEDEC have issue with the way Rambus conducted business. Rambus used to be a part of JEDEC. JEDEC helps standardize memory formats, and as we know standards are a good thing. Well, the skinny of it is that Rambus saw where JEDEC was heading and then pulled out of the group. Then, a few years later they started suing everyone saying they own patents on technologies used in DDR memory.
Did JEDEC come to "standardize" patented technology that they discovered independently and after Rambus left, and Rambus have no option except to sue? Did Rambus see JEDEC working on patented technology and pull out with the intention to sue at a later date? Did Rambus intentionally seed JEDEC with patented information and then pull out in order to sue at a later date?
Whatever the real reason, besides charging high royalties, Rambus pulled some shady stuff. The fiasco with SCO suing over Linux? Change SCO to Rambus and Linux to DDR, roll back a couple of years and that's what you had.
for me (gamer) im gonna need to see intel kick amd in their processing nuts before im going to change over. its gonna take a decently faster cpu at excelent prices. from what ive read about intels new cpus there looking up. not sure about amd's. there doesnt seem to be much new comming from them lately but that could be due to it not being released yet. if intel offered a faster cpu at lower prices packaged w/ an org@sim then i think ill change immeaditly.
The low-end model 820 is about the same price as a 3800+ San Diego. Both have similar overclocking potential, but the San Diego is a better single-threaded performer. The Pentium D is better for multitasking (obviously). If I was buying in that price range, I'd go for the 820, and recommend the same to others.
The problem is, that's a very narrow field. If you don't want to spend the extra dough on a dual-core Pentium, then you're left with a Pentium 4 vs. Athlon 64 shootout, and, until Intel drops their prices significantly, AMD will always win in that comparison. If you do a lot of video editing, you might want to consider a Pentium 4, but also remember that the Venice chips can outpace similarly-priced P4s in video editing if you factor in overclocking. So, again, we're left with a very narrow audience which would benefit from choosing Intel.
The 830 and 840, when you factor in the cost of motherboard and RAM, are both as expensive as the X2 3800+, which is just plain out of their league.
If the Pentium Ds and their supporting motherboards fall in price, they would definitely challenge mid-range A64 CPUs. But I doubt that will happen before AMD drops their own prices.
The problem is, that's a very narrow field. If you don't want to spend the extra dough on a dual-core Pentium, then you're left with a Pentium 4 vs. Athlon 64 shootout, and, until Intel drops their prices significantly, AMD will always win in that comparison. If you do a lot of video editing, you might want to consider a Pentium 4, but also remember that the Venice chips can outpace similarly-priced P4s in video editing if you factor in overclocking. So, again, we're left with a very narrow audience which would benefit from choosing Intel.
The 830 and 840, when you factor in the cost of motherboard and RAM, are both as expensive as the X2 3800+, which is just plain out of their league.
If the Pentium Ds and their supporting motherboards fall in price, they would definitely challenge mid-range A64 CPUs. But I doubt that will happen before AMD drops their own prices.
The problem is that AMD is not making any cash. Henseforth their R&D is severely limited. If you look at the last 2 years of quartely reports, AMD has been losing or making VERY little Profit compared to Intel.
Last Quarter report for AMD:
Revenue: $1.260 billion
Operating Loss: $7 million
Net Income: $11 million
Net Income per share: $0.03
Cash position: $1.220 billion
Long term debt: $1.846 billion
Last Quarterly Report for Intel:
Revenue: $9.2 billion
Net Income: $2 billion
Net Income Per Share: $0.33
Last Quarter report for AMD:
Revenue: $1.260 billion
Operating Loss: $7 million
Net Income: $11 million
Net Income per share: $0.03
Cash position: $1.220 billion
Long term debt: $1.846 billion
Last Quarterly Report for Intel:
Revenue: $9.2 billion
Net Income: $2 billion
Net Income Per Share: $0.33
Dude!! It has been that way for years and it didn't stop them from being ar mor innovative then INtel the last 2 years......I dont put much stock in that.....You dont need a big R&D if your ideas get built instead of cancelled like most of INtels lineup the last few years....
Also let me say beware of the company that has to release all the pre-info....They may be trying to build up hype with marketing BS and then they may not deliver 1/2 the power we think they will...I wouldn't doubt it.
If I was AMD I would keep my cards close to me at this point...with the lawsuit and INtel trying depserately to be more innovative (to obviously use as more ammunition in the lawsuit) I would let them launch then perhaps coe out with something new that will shock us.....
I wouldn't doubt any of this...What I have learned in here the last 5 years is hype is hype and I always seem to be a little disapointed...except with my X2 purchase. first time I haven't been disappointed in a long time....It actually delivered more then I expected...
Newly innovative?
Intel was running faster chips with the 10 stage p3 then the old athlon. Yes, they screwed up with NetBurst, but the fact that they are going back to their old archetecture.
Amd has not done anything revolutionary.
-64-bit it was the next step, just a matter of time. (Technically not first to do it either)
-onboard mem controllers-nice idea but not required for nice performance. (we see this from the Dothan)
-HT- relating to the memcontroller, once again, nice idea but not incredible.
-Dual-core-not the first to do that.
I see very little innovation. They have either a. taken ideas that are already there and adapted them or b. took ideas that were the logical next step in computing. The fact that intel is releasing 2 COMPLETELY redesigned processors is a show in R&D prowess alone.
Dont kid yourself, AMD has some nice ideas but none of them cost much to make as they were previous idea's.
Intel was running faster chips with the 10 stage p3 then the old athlon. Yes, they screwed up with NetBurst, but the fact that they are going back to their old archetecture.
Amd has not done anything revolutionary.
-64-bit it was the next step, just a matter of time. (Technically not first to do it either)
-onboard mem controllers-nice idea but not required for nice performance. (we see this from the Dothan)
-HT- relating to the memcontroller, once again, nice idea but not incredible.
-Dual-core-not the first to do that.
I see very little innovation. They have either a. taken ideas that are already there and adapted them or b. took ideas that were the logical next step in computing. The fact that intel is releasing 2 COMPLETELY redesigned processors is a show in R&D prowess alone.
Dont kid yourself, AMD has some nice ideas but none of them cost much to make as they were previous idea's.
I think your answers show which side of the fence you ride....
answers like "technically not first"...hahahaha... intel was doing full 64bit but had not done a x86 variant. Now tell me if they had one already but didn't want to push a cpu for it dont you think they would have at least gave it to MS so they didn't look like fools cloning the AMD version???
That is fine you wave on die memory controller and AMD's direct connect architecture (HTT)...shows you know very little...
Lastly Intel paper launched its P-D version within a week of OPteron but which was available to be pruchased?? Opteron was at time of release...Intel tred the same marketing BS they always do. the ppl in here are samrt enough to see their lame ploy...
OPteron architecture was designed from the beginning to be multicore...Prescot was not as seen by the "slap it together" design they put out.....
Oh you are so laughable.....
I think very few of us can speak of processor innovation. It's easy to label certain technologies, like "Netburst," "x64," or "cool'n'quiet," and call them successes or failures, but precious few of us actually understand the creativity and hard work required to develop each of them. For even the most technologically-inclined consumers to pass judgment on the AMD-Intel situation is absolutely ridiculous. The most we can do is look at product price and performance, but few if any of us understand how they have come to be.
<<The fact that intel is releasing 2 COMPLETELY redesigned processors is a show in R&D prowess alone.>>
No fool...that just shows how foolish they were going with netburst and now doing a 180 turn and goingback to a P3 design platform...where is the innovation there??? If anything I think prowess of R&D and making your money count is coming up with a design that has longevity, adaptability, and leading performance....It seems AMD runs there chips out quite far and doesn't change the chipsets on us every other month....I respect forethought and looking well into the future. Intel did but cancelled most of those plans...They are on plan B now....
No fool...that just shows how foolish they were going with netburst and now doing a 180 turn and goingback to a P3 design platform...where is the innovation there??? If anything I think prowess of R&D and making your money count is coming up with a design that has longevity, adaptability, and leading performance....It seems AMD runs there chips out quite far and doesn't change the chipsets on us every other month....I respect forethought and looking well into the future. Intel did but cancelled most of those plans...They are on plan B now....
You really anger me off sometimes, I am merely stating that AMD has done nothing amazing with their equipment. They have not made new chips or new developments. You are sitting here trying to tell me that since they have to go back that they have no new developments. It was Intels archetecture to start with.
News Flash Duvie, I am keeping an open mind about the future. I am looking at sales data and extrapolating the possibilities for development.
Here is something. Even though Netburst was the biggest mistake that Intel has evermade, they still managed to make 9.2 billion vs 1.2 billion...hmm
2 things, it shows that intel can beat AMD in gaming with old technology clock for clock and it also shows that they are able to take a chip that was considered obsolete and adapt it to make a nice performing cpu that does not require an assload on power to run.
Explain to me the innovation from AMD. I fail to see it!!!!!
News Flash Duvie, I am keeping an open mind about the future. I am looking at sales data and extrapolating the possibilities for development.
Here is something. Even though Netburst was the biggest mistake that Intel has evermade, they still managed to make 9.2 billion vs 1.2 billion...hmm
2 things, it shows that intel can beat AMD in gaming with old technology clock for clock and it also shows that they are able to take a chip that was considered obsolete and adapt it to make a nice performing cpu that does not require an assload on power to run.
Explain to me the innovation from AMD. I fail to see it!!!!!
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 + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter