• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

AMD Makes Bold Quad-Core Claims

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
ZDNet has an interesting article about AMD’s upcoming quad-core processor plans. AMD's corporate vice president for server and workstation products lays out AMD’s plans to ramp up performance and go head to head with Intel.

"We expect across a wide variety of workloads for Barcelona to outperform Clovertown by 40 percent," Allen said. The quad-core chip will also outperform AMD's current dual-core Opterons on "floating point" mathematical calculations by a factor of 3.6 at the same clock rate, he said.
Click to expand...
 
Those are some bold claims, but for AMD's (and consumers') sake I hope its true because Intel has been handing it to AMD severely for a while now and if AMD cant pick up the slack I don't see them being as competitive as they were for a long time.
 
Spectre said:
Yeah, and the people who made some bold claims about the original K8......oh wait.
Click to expand...

True....but until they bring the power consumption down they can forget it. Power bills are high enough as it is. I'll be stickin with Intel for awhile.
 
markt435 said:
True....but until they bring the power consumption down they can forget it. Power bills are high enough as it is. I'll be stickin with Intel for awhile.
Click to expand...

AMD's family power consumption isn't a very good arguement against them (as the same arguement wasn't with Intel either). Heat due to power consumption would be a better arguement but power....not really. Get yourself a Kill-a-watt and see how much power you ae really using......I guarentee you will be surprised at how little it really is ;)
 
Just some preliminary/theoretical numbers...

Looking at Tech Reports article for Intel's Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor, page 14.

SiSoft Sandra Multimedia Floating Point x8

AMD = 60,046 Mandelbrot iterations/second

38,842 * 3.6 = 228,174

Intel = 212,862 Mandelbrot iterations/second

212862 * 100 / 228174 = A 7% advantage for AMD on Floating Point.

Now, I am not sure if there is any connection between this test and real world and any details explaining would be great.

Thanks
 
Spectre said:
AMD's family power consumption isn't a very good arguement against them (as the same arguement wasn't with Intel either). Heat due to power consumption would be a better arguement but power....not really. Get yourself a Kill-a-watt and see how much power you ae really using......I guarentee you will be surprised at how little it really is ;)
Click to expand...

lol I wasn't generalizing the K8s...I was talkin about the Quad setup they just came out with not too long ago.
 
AMD stands by its Barcelona engineering decisions, though, including its choice to build a single chip with four cores rather than using Intel's dual-core, dual-chip package approach. AMD calls its approach "monolithic" or "native" quad core.
Click to expand...

This is what I thought AMD did. But it says Intel did it? I thought Intel was doing native quad with the new core 2 quads. Sigh...I can't keep up with this shit any more lol
 
markt435 said:
This is what I thought AMD did. But it says Intel did it? I thought Intel was doing native quad with the new core 2 quads. Sigh...I can't keep up with this shit any more lol
Click to expand...


Current C2Q's are just Dual-C2Ds, Intel should be coming out with native quad-cores soon, but they may skip it because they are going down to 45nm by Q3.

Can you imagine? Quad-Core 45nm....hhhhhmmmmm, good
 
I think that AMD's claims had better be true otherwise their credibility will be shot. That's the last thing they need right now.
 
IntelOwnz said:
Current C2Q's are just Dual-C2Ds, Intel should be coming out with native quad-cores soon, but they may skip it because they are going down to 45nm by Q3.

Can you imagine? Quad-Core 45nm....hhhhhmmmmm, good
Click to expand...

From what I hear, we don't be seeing native quad core this year. Intel seems to be bent on dual die even for the 45nm (saw on vr-zone's intel roadmap)

enumae said:
Just some preliminary/theoretical numbers...

Looking at Tech Reports article for Intel's Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor, page 14.

SiSoft Sandra Multimedia Floating Point x8

AMD = 60,046 Mandelbrot iterations/second

38,842 * 3.6 = 228,174

Intel = 212,862 Mandelbrot iterations/second

212862 * 100 / 228174 = A 7% advantage for AMD on Floating Point.
+
Now, I am not sure if there is any connection between this test and real world and any details explaining would be great.

Thanks
Click to expand...

I higly doubt you can simply multiply AMD's score by 3.6. That's like saying "i have dual core so lets multiply my CPU benchmark numbers by 2
 
Dan_D said:
I think that AMD's claims had better be true otherwise their credibility will be shot. That's the last thing they need right now.
Click to expand...


More then just credibilty will be shot.AMD is in deep trouble no matter how you look at it,with no relief in sight.Read up on http://www.overclockers.com/tips01097 :( 2 Q's of
straight losses,a recent price cut forced on them via Intel this week,another one coming in a few months,Intels 45nm in the fall,only 1 fully owned fab,they have what really is incredible amounts of debt to begin with,and then shoot themsleves in the foot by taking on another large mountain of it with ATI.... I could go on,and this is just the recent stuff.


:eek:
 
its marketecture folks...

Just as Intel has a "mouth" so does AMD and every other company trying to sell you me or anyone else who has money to spend. and AMD's mouth spoke, i think to Wall St. and investors truth be told.

I personally do hope AMD at least comes close to meeting the claim. that means Intel will counter with a better product because they have to stay competitive, not complacent and making improvements as they want/think/feel because they are the only show in town. BUT until it shows up...its vaporware.

AMD v Intel means better stuff fer me. each company has "handed" it to the other, and I still have to give props to AMD for 64-bit CPU's and dual cores on a single die. i do recall Intel declaring that 64-bit x86 was not even a good idea...either way keep it coming. I get a faster system and better gaming :cool:
 
InorganicMatter said:
Ha, ha, ha. Ha.

This coming from the people who produced 4x4. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

AMDs claims may very well be just another case of hot air, but these swings between manufacturers isnt anything new. AMDs K7 came out and originally was somewhat impressive (as far as I can remember). then, years later, the K8... A few years after the K8, amd may come out with something impressive for awhile. Its not like AMD is some volunteer run company reverse-engineering everything trying to out-do intel, to me its just a company, if they happen to make something worth buying, ill buy it.

Im not one for brand loyalty, cars or computers... ive seemed to have just about one of everything from both companies over the years, as long as its fast and cheap I could care less if windbond made it (for those old enough to remember the windbond CPU company).
 
xxGriff said:
I still have to give props to AMD for 64-bit CPU's and dual cores on a single die. i do recall Intel declaring that 64-bit x86 was not even a good idea...either way keep it coming. I get a faster system and better gaming :cool:
Click to expand...


Maybe it wasnt a good idea ? What has it really accomplished on the desktop ? I still
dont see a plethora of 64 bit games out on the shelves at EB,or BB.I bought a copy of
XP Pro 64 ages ago,and that was a waste.
 
AMD needs more media coverage so this is just another way to get people to look at their processors in a different light.
 
Hopefully this isn't them just spewing hot air. I don't pay as much attention to these things as some, but I've rarely heard amd toot it's own horn unless they really has something to toot. If it's all BS too bad, but if they do manage it all the better. Having Intel and AMD duke it out for your buisness is always good for the consumer. May the price and performance wars continue.
 
wtiger said:
Hopefully this isn't them just spewing hot air. I don't pay as much attention to these things as some, but I've rarely heard amd toot it's own horn unless they really has something to toot. If it's all BS too bad, but if they do manage it all the better. Having Intel and AMD duke it out for your buisness is always good for the consumer. May the price and performance wars continue.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Don't forget how much Intel trailed AMD in the P4/K8 era. AMD isn't an CPU amateur; they'll probably get the job done. If not, this will be the first time in recent memory (don't mention the K5 days, please)

Until Barcelona, though, Intels Core design reigns supreme.
 
They better be right. One thing that worries me is this claim, they have shown no rumor to prove that they have a killer processor coming out.
 
Manny Calavera said:
Maybe it wasnt a good idea ? What has it really accomplished on the desktop ? I still
dont see a plethora of 64 bit games out on the shelves at EB,or BB.I bought a copy of
XP Pro 64 ages ago,and that was a waste.
Click to expand...


AMD is not responsible for coding any of the software. and just as in the past, software rarely uses the full capabilities of the newest CPU's, they(software/OS) generally just want more RAM. AMD only produced the K8. would anyone have preferred another 2 years of 32-bit Athlons and Prescots over K8's and now C2D's? my point is AMD has accomplished much, and come along way from their beginnings and provided some competition. that helps drive innovation. if there was only one player... introduction would be at the whim of that single manufacturer. the benefits of 64-bit lay in many factors, not the least of which is addressable RAM, which seems to always be required in larger amounts by OS(ok..i mean windoze), Apps benefit and, yep...games too.

no time to rest on laurels or blow hot air for either company. i still hope the next gen from AMD comes close to the performance talked up.
 
I dont care who makes it. I just look for the best price / performance for the dollar.
 
xxGriff said:
Just as Intel has a "mouth" so does AMD and every other company trying to sell you me or anyone else who has money to spend. and AMD's mouth spoke, i think to Wall St. and investors truth be told.
Click to expand...

True but unlike Intel who hasnt just acquired ATI, are having 2 bad quarters, a pretty good debt, and are just starting 65nm. Intel has the money where a claim like that wont hurt them that much, but for AMD, a claim like that would just seem like a desperate move if they dont deliver since we all know how AMD is doing these days.

Im sure there processor is going to deliver, but how much is the question.
 
Manny Calavera said:
Maybe it wasnt a good idea ? What has it really accomplished on the desktop ? I still
dont see a plethora of 64 bit games out on the shelves at EB,or BB.I bought a copy of
XP Pro 64 ages ago,and that was a waste.
Click to expand...

I am guessing you don't remember the 8-16 and 16-32 transitions?
 
AMD had better catch up by late summer / early fall and the widespread release of quad-cores. That's my next major upgrade time!

I'll get whichever processor is faster, regardless of any personal loyalties.
 
Spectre said:
I am guessing you don't remember the 8-16 and 16-32 transitions?
Click to expand...


I remember it well,I just hoped that the transistion would be faster this time around.For the average home user it seems a waste at this time,and for the forseeable future.AMD
of corse does not write the code.Thats not the point,they and Intel have the power to push the dev community in the right direction,and have not.I could care less that a server out
there somewhere is running 64 bit cpus now or next year.I care about the here and now.
Real tangible day to day things on the computer I use now.As it stands now and for the
near future the 64 bit registers on current cpu dies is a waste of space.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top