Will AMD ever regain the performance crown again?

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: zsdersw

Originally posted by: bob661
I don't think he cares. I sure as hell don't.

That's fine, but when he (and others) say "well, it took Intel long enough.. 5 years" they have to realize that you're not gonna get a totally new chip design in significantly less than 5 years.. from either Intel or AMD.

If you want new chip designs in less than 5 years, hey.. go right ahead and try to do it yourself.

It didnt take 5 years.

Pentium-M Dothan could hold against single-core A64/FX CPU's clock for clock. Many enthusiasts such as myself, choose to go Pentium-M on the desktop.

Core-Duo could also hang with X2's clock for clock.

Intel had a viable option, but choose not to use it in the desktop arena.

 

[Henny]

Everyone needs to remember one minor tibit. The fastest desktop processor is almost meaningless. It's more for show then substance.

Whoever produces the most at the lowest cost, makes the highest margins, and gains the most market share wins.

The enthusiast market is very very tiny.

 

[bob661]

Wasn't .1% of all AMD CPU's sold FX62's? Someone correct me here.

 

[gobucks]

Originally posted by: zsdersw

Originally posted by: bob661
I don't think he cares. I sure as hell don't.

That's fine, but when he (and others) say "well, it took Intel long enough.. 5 years" they have to realize that you're not gonna get a totally new chip design in significantly less than 5 years.. from either Intel or AMD.

If you want new chip designs in less than 5 years, hey.. go right ahead and try to do it yourself.

they didn't design a new chip at all - they took the P6 architecture (basis for Pentium III and Pentium M) added an extra execution unit, faster memory access, unified cache, faster bus, etc. Core 2-ish chips could have been out 3 years ago if Intel hadn't put the P6 on the back burner for years in favor of the now infamous Netbust. Intel got short-sighted and just went for clockspeed since that's all customers understand anyways. The development time for conroe was basically from the time they had an "oh crap" moment after prescott's release about 2 1/2 years ago until now.

 

[dmens]

Originally posted by: gobucks
they didn't design a new chip at all - they took the P6 architecture (basis for Pentium III and Pentium M) added an extra execution unit, faster memory access, unified cache, faster bus, etc. Core 2-ish chips could have been out 3 years ago if Intel hadn't put the P6 on the back burner for years in favor of the now infamous Netbust. Intel got short-sighted and just went for clockspeed since that's all customers understand anyways. The development time for conroe was basically from the time they had an "oh crap" moment after prescott's release about 2 1/2 years ago until now.

it's a new chip. none of the nasty details of what was done to achieve that level of performance is revealed obviously. beyond the fancy presentations on load spec and the new port, fusion, blah blah (which is only responsible for a fraction of perf gain), it's basically a ton of very painful work that took it the extra step beyond.

as for netburst staying in the limelight too long, that is true, but it's not because of clockspeed, that is just the end effect of sticking to netburst style as opposed to the driving incentive. if only the P4 saga were as simple as the pundits say, but that's a long (confidential) story. anyhow, in summary, if p4 wasn't such a pet project, it wouldn't have been around for so long.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: dexvx
Core-Duo could also hang with X2's clock for clock.

Intel had a viable option, but choose not to use it in the desktop arena.

Only because they told all of their loyal dumba$$ followers how they "had" to change over to LGA775 and DDR2, because of how much faster it was than Skt. 478 and DDR. But even the fanboys would have been pissed, if Intel had said, "We were just kidding; dump your LGA775 board and DDR2 for what it's worth (hardly anything two years ago), and get yourself a new $200 Skt. 478 board, and a gig or two of the DDR RAM that we told you was dead, so you can have twice the performance of our fastest EE chip." I don't see that going over too well. What do you think?

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Atheus
Screw microchips - did you know that a rat's brain can be wired up to a parallel port and trained to use a flight simulator?

RESPECT.

I for one welcome our new rat/F16 overlords.

:laugh: ROFLCopter!