amd makes me sad

H

hotsaucefreak

n00b
Joined
Apr 13, 2007
Messages
10
i never realy been a intel person but i may now switch.ill miss amd but intel is clearly in the lead now.any of ya think amd will make a come back.now i own a amd x2 6000 it is a ok cpu but sucks compared to intels offering.
 
oh no an X2 6000+ not fast enough :( :(

just playin, yeah, of course AMD will bite back :rolleyes:
 
What exactly are you doing that you notice the 6000+ being the bottleneck? Or is it just a few benchies that have you upset?
 
benchamrks of course.lol lame that they concern me but they do.im sure it will do waht ever i want fast enough hell i dont even game
 
so true, only a Q6900 OCed to 4.2ghz should be considered something that doesnt suck these days.

I hear they are putting X2 6000s in cereal boxes now
 
got a decent deal on it i admit i payed 229 usa with a cheap mobo.but it has been very stable.but the heat is insane.but cool and quiet works well useing it on idle its 30 c. but under load its like 67 c
 
Look at this way, there will ALWAYS be bigger faster chips available. The 6000+ is a great CPU and at stock is cheaper than the e6600. If you can't really see the benefit, then why worry about benchies?
 
That heat issue would have me reinstalling the hsf with some new Ceramique and a heavy duty hsf. 67C sounds WAY too hot.
 
A X2 6000+ will bite back. You all act like the performance difference from a X2 6000+ and a 6700+ are 40%. That is simply over hyped BS. And what are you looking for. 32-bit for Intel and 64-bit AMD is the simple anser. More like even in 32-bit and -17% in 64-bit for a X6800. Somehow Conroe loses a great deal of advantage in 64-bit cus of fake instructionsets "Emulated 64-bit" not that great.

2.5ghz is more then fast enough to run whatever I got and more. Apsolutly no bottlenecks in oblivion on max with a high end video card. Smooth 30-60FPS in the most performance stressful game ever created. I have 2.9ghz to mess with. Does it bottle neck in a game after say a virus scan put up to it, with spyware scan, or how about compressions going on in the backround, not yet about 50% cpu useage. Lets put cpu burn ins on there with video running in the backround. Nope then Prime95 in the backround. Hits 100%, go right in a game where I left off and no lag, no skips no nothing but smooth gameplay. Keep in mind thats about 10 software programs running in the backround all at once.

You must be out side your minds to think a X2 6000+ would bottle neck your setup. The X2 3800 screems at 2.9ghz and the thing isn't even a darn X2 6000 with twice the cache. Just stop the BS pro intelers. The jokes off and frankly not very funny. From what I can tell in the real world AMD is the smarter choice. Not very smart to clam otherwise when I seen what AMD's and Intels are capable of 1st hand. So please make me laugh more. I enjoy your entertainment. Really I do.
 
yeah serge.. you bring up some good points, but a lot of things you say are really working against you.


intel does not emulate 64bit. it is just as real as amd's version. afaik, the only problem is the micron and macro op fusion is disabled in 64bit mode, and that's more of a design choice than anything ;)

and your 'this is fast enough for what i do' argument is flawed, as we're talking about who has the performance lead, not which side can't provide enough power for normal use.. if you're worried about the latter, just pick up a $50 sempron and be on your way. :D
 
Serge84 said:
A X2 6000+ will bite back. You all act like the performance difference from a X2 6000+ and a 6700+ are 40%. That is simply over hyped BS. And what are you looking for. 32-bit for Intel and 64-bit AMD is the simple anser. More like even in 32-bit and -17% in 64-bit for a X6800. Somehow Conroe loses a great deal of advantage in 64-bit cus of fake instructionsets "Emulated 64-bit" not that great.

2.5ghz is more then fast enough to run whatever I got and more. Apsolutly no bottlenecks in oblivion on max with a high end video card. Smooth 30-60FPS in the most performance stressful game ever created. I have 2.9ghz to mess with. Does it bottle neck in a game after say a virus scan put up to it, with spyware scan, or how about compressions going on in the backround, not yet about 50% cpu useage. Lets put cpu burn ins on there with video running in the backround. Nope then Prime95 in the backround. Hits 100%, go right in a game where I left off and no lag, no skips no nothing but smooth gameplay. Keep in mind thats about 10 software programs running in the backround all at once.

You must be out side your minds to think a X2 6000+ would bottle neck your setup. The X2 3800 screems at 2.9ghz and the thing isn't even a darn X2 6000 with twice the cache. Just stop the BS pro intelers. The jokes off and frankly not very funny. From what I can tell in the real world AMD is the smarter choice. Not very smart to clam otherwise when I seen what AMD's and Intels are capable of 1st hand. So please make me laugh more. I enjoy your entertainment. Really I do.
Click to expand...


whatever happened to spell check?
 
Serge84 said:
A X2 6000+ will bite back. You all act like the performance difference from a X2 6000+ and a 6700+ are 40%. That is simply over hyped BS. And what are you looking for. 32-bit for Intel and 64-bit AMD is the simple anser. More like even in 32-bit and -17% in 64-bit for a X6800. Somehow Conroe loses a great deal of advantage in 64-bit cus of fake instructionsets "Emulated 64-bit" not that great.
Click to expand...


This has got to be one of the stupidest comments I have ever heard. Intel licensed AMD's 64-bit technology and is using it in their chips. There are some minor differences between the 2, but they are using the same technology.

If you say that Intel is using fake instruction set and are emulating 64-bit, then AMD must be doing the same thing. :rolleyes:

You are just pissed because AMD is bleeding money and is no longer the performance king. Unless there is some great deal, there is no reason to buy AMD right now.

2 years ago our reps from HP recommended AMD based computers/servers across the board. Now they recommend Intel across the board and don't even mention AMD unless you say you want the cheapest option and performance and battery life don't matter. He asked me 2 or 3 times before I signed the leases if I was sure I really wanted to get AMD laptops because Intel's laptops were so much better than anything AMD has.
 
In that case the dude has no clue what he is doing and should be fired on the spot.
 
hotsaucefreak said:
i never realy been a intel person but i may now switch.ill miss amd but intel is clearly in the lead now.any of ya think amd will make a come back.now i own a amd x2 6000 it is a ok cpu but sucks compared to intels offering.
Click to expand...


What programs require a faster cpu? Are you trying to out-do a friend in benchmarks or something? I know plenty of people who would gladly take that slow "cpu that sucks" off your hands for you.
 
brom42 said:
This has got to be one of the stupidest comments I have ever heard. Intel licensed AMD's 64-bit technology and is using it in their chips. There are some minor differences between the 2, but they are using the same technology.

If you say that Intel is using fake instruction set and are emulating 64-bit, then AMD must be doing the same thing. :rolleyes:

You are just pissed because AMD is bleeding money and is no longer the performance king. Unless there is some great deal, there is no reason to buy AMD right now.

2 years ago our reps from HP recommended AMD based computers/servers across the board. Now they recommend Intel across the board and don't even mention AMD unless you say you want the cheapest option and performance and battery life don't matter. He asked me 2 or 3 times before I signed the leases if I was sure I really wanted to get AMD laptops because Intel's laptops were so much better than anything AMD has.
Click to expand...

AMD has never had that great laptop performance. Barcelona will probably change that.
 
[F8];1030913752 said:
What programs require a faster cpu? Are you trying to out-do a friend in benchmarks or something? I know plenty of people who would gladly take that slow "cpu that sucks" off your hands for you.
Click to expand...

None require a faster CPU, we could all still be running 2 Ghz P4, but plenty of programs other than benchmarks take advantage of faster CPUs. After Effects, Photoshop, and Lightwave are three that I use daily that take advantage of any CPU speed you throw at it. People on here always seem to forget that people use there computer for more than just games and other programs do indeed exist.
 
I am still s939 and see no need for more ATM.

I am very happy with my AMD, so someone else can spend the $$ for the better benchmark #s :p
 
My view on this is just because Conroe's are winning the majority of benchmarks doesn’t mean AMD CPUs are bad.

AMD CPUs are more than efficient and powerful enough to perform today's tasks, Conroe's are just monsters. A good CPU is a good CPU; just because something more powerful comes out doesn't mean it is somehow less powerful than it was.

With the price war keeping both Intel and AMD CPU prices close, and if you are a low to mid range user, there really isn't any reason not to go with brand preference and still get good value. Hell there was enough gamers who chose Intel when AMD had the performance crown; personally I am considering post Conroe/AM2 before upgrading since I have already put it off this long.
 
Like I said it depends on what performance range you are in; if you are with Folding@Home then you will probably want something from the high end so you have more excess CPU cycles, else you can be quite happy with a mid price range CPU with today’s games. Obviously it depends on the person and what they do, you don’t 'need' a monster processor to run today’s apps but some people like it.
 
hotsaucefreak said:
i never realy been a intel person but i may now switch.ill miss amd but intel is clearly in the lead now.any of ya think amd will make a come back.now i own a amd x2 6000 it is a ok cpu but sucks compared to intels offering.
Click to expand...

yes im sure they will make a comeback!

ive been reading a lot about this, this week and have formed my own opinion about it.

the way i see it is intel have always had the money/manufacturing advantage and AMD have for a long time been ahead in terms of the better tech. But i think intel is expecting barcelona to do with conroe as conroe did with FX and X2s, thats why there trying so hard to make you buy there chips at nice prices NOW so that when barcelona, agenda, kuma ect finally hit the shelves you all already have a 775 not a
AM2 or AM3 socket.

but according to early leaks and reports Barcelona is 40% faster than clovertown in FP calculations, so thats the servers. but in real world desktops that should translate that Agenda will be about 20 - 50% faster that conroe at the same clock speed. dont forget that the shared L2 cache (along with many other new techs) is what give the core chips a huge advantage. So the next AMDs will have L1 cache L2 cache and a shared L3 cache.

but of course this could all just be a smokescreen. I just think that according to Moore's Law, Agenda should be about 30% faster than conroe. Moores law has held true since 1965 with only tech slowing down these last few years but conroe put intel back on course and i think AMD will also be on course by Q3 of 2007.

Moore said double in perfomance every 18 - 24 months and the chip makers have almost stuck to this.

so the next AMD should be a monster.

but dont hold me to this
 
j1979 said:
yes im sure they will make a comeback!

ive been reading a lot about this, this week and have formed my own opinion about it.

the way i see it is intel have always had the money/manufacturing advantage and AMD have for a long time been ahead in terms of the better tech. But i think intel is expecting barcelona to do with conroe as conroe did with FX and X2s, thats why there trying so hard to make you buy there chips at nice prices NOW so that when barcelona, agenda, kuma ect finally hit the shelves you all already have a 775 not a
AM2 or AM3 socket.

but according to early leaks and reports Barcelona is 40% faster than clovertown in FP calculations, so thats the servers. but in real world desktops that should translate that Agenda will be about 20 - 50% faster that conroe at the same clock speed. dont forget that the shared L2 cache (along with many other new techs) is what give the core chips a huge advantage. So the next AMDs will have L1 cache L2 cache and a shared L3 cache.

but of course this could all just be a smokescreen. I just think that according to Moore's Law, Agenda should be about 30% faster than conroe. Moores law has held true since 1965 with only tech slowing down these last few years but conroe put intel back on course and i think AMD will also be on course by Q3 of 2007.

Moore said double in perfomance every 18 - 24 months and the chip makers have almost stuck to this.

so the next AMD should be a monster.

but dont hold me to this
Click to expand...

Barcelona is more server oriented and a 40% advantage in FP benchmarks which also tend to be bandwidth intensive against Clovertown is actually believable to a certain extent.

Once you head to desktops, the HyperTransport and IMC's advantages weaken alot as your not bandwidth limited in Single Socket systems. So I currently seriously doubt that the Agena would provide 20-50% over Conroe.

A 70% improvement in any case no owing to Quad Core, over current Athlon 64's is very hard to believe. Even Intel only claimed 40% advantage to Core 2 Duo E6700 Conroe over the Presler Pentium D 960.

Cache tends to give more advantages to the server front then the desktop front, so moving to unified LV3 for AMD, the way I see it won't give it that much of a boost. The IMC works against the extra cache here, since the CPU already has a relatively low latency connection to main memory, more cache is only going to produce moderate gains vs an archictecture like Core 2 which has a slower connection to main memory and is somewhat more reliant on faster cache access on die.
 
Serge84 said:
A X2 6000+ will bite back. You all act like the performance difference from a X2 6000+ and a 6700+ are 40%. That is simply over hyped BS. And what are you looking for. 32-bit for Intel and 64-bit AMD is the simple anser. More like even in 32-bit and -17% in 64-bit for a X6800. Somehow Conroe loses a great deal of advantage in 64-bit cus of fake instructionsets "Emulated 64-bit" not that great.

2.5ghz is more then fast enough to run whatever I got and more. Apsolutly no bottlenecks in oblivion on max with a high end video card. Smooth 30-60FPS in the most performance stressful game ever created. I have 2.9ghz to mess with. Does it bottle neck in a game after say a virus scan put up to it, with spyware scan, or how about compressions going on in the backround, not yet about 50% cpu useage. Lets put cpu burn ins on there with video running in the backround. Nope then Prime95 in the backround. Hits 100%, go right in a game where I left off and no lag, no skips no nothing but smooth gameplay. Keep in mind thats about 10 software programs running in the backround all at once.

You must be out side your minds to think a X2 6000+ would bottle neck your setup. The X2 3800 screems at 2.9ghz and the thing isn't even a darn X2 6000 with twice the cache. Just stop the BS pro intelers. The jokes off and frankly not very funny. From what I can tell in the real world AMD is the smarter choice. Not very smart to clam otherwise when I seen what AMD's and Intels are capable of 1st hand. So please make me laugh more. I enjoy your entertainment. Really I do.
Click to expand...

Just wanted to refute your claim about AMD being faster in 64-Bit.

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1095839
 
so after all that what do you see happening?
will AMD take back the performance lead or do you think that intels Core will still be the gamers chip of choice?
 
We simply don't have enough information at this point to make an accurate prediction. We have *no* third parties providing benchmarks of K10. The numbers that are being released about K10 are simple percentages, without any information as to how they were obtained or how to reproduce the tests that were run.
 
j1979 said:
so after all that what do you see happening?
will AMD take back the performance lead or do you think that intels Core will still be the gamers chip of choice?
Click to expand...

I think AMD will be better off in Servers for the 2P and 4P+ sectors, it is likely a wash in the workstation 1P environment.

For desktops I believe Intel will still have the overall lead, but it is likely to be drastically reduced.

For mobiles it is likely Intel will still remain the chip of choice.

Note: This is just what I believe will happen, there aren't any performance characteristics to gauge from now with K8L/K10 Barcelona.
 
Obi_Kwiet said:
AMD has never had that great laptop performance. Barcelona will probably change that.
Click to expand...

Tell me about it. The rated battery life for the laptops we are getting is 2 hours!! The comparable Intel laptop was 4-5 hours. Most of the teachers/staff keep their laptops plugged in 90% of the time so this isn't an issue.

duby229 said:
In that case the dude has no clue what he is doing and should be fired on the spot.
Click to expand...

We have 2 large consulting firms and CDWG all competing to provide us with our HP laptops. All 3 companies recommended getting all Intel machines, and not going with AMD. If it wasn't for the fact that the AMD laptops were $150 cheaper a piece, we would have gone all Intel.
 
It sad too. Considering that you could get at least a few minutes longer battery life, and a much cooler lap on top.

These people recommending Intel show nothing but proof that Intel pays good money to get what they want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top