AMD posts Barcelona benchmark numbers

[Fendrix]

Some people don't get the point. Companies don't design chips to be overclocked by a consumer, nor do they guarantee any overclockability.

I whole-heartedly agree with this. The percentage of computer owners that overclock their CPUs is absolutely minuscule. The chips run at what the company says they will, and most consumers that buy computers will see that they can get a dual-core chip for cheaper than Intel's, even if it won't ZOMG OVERCLOCK TO 3.6GHZ+ ON AIR!

 

[duby229]

Orton helped oversee his company's merger last year with AMD, and up until now held the post of executive VP at AMD.

According to an AMD statement released on Tuesday, his decision to resign comes as the direct result of that integration process essentially being over.



AMD’s Athlon X2 BE-series processor.

http://www.google.com/products?q=at...official&hs=Pks&um=1&sa=X&oi=froogle&ct=title

Seems like it is available to me. All I did was a single very simple google search. I dont see anybody having any trouble getting any of those chips. As far as Orton leaving, that really has nothing to do with the merger. I think he stepped out with alot of cash, and a good idea of what he wanted to do next.

 

[BinarySynapse]

http://www.google.com/products?q=at...official&hs=Pks&um=1&sa=X&oi=froogle&ct=title

Seems like it is available to me. All I did was a single very simple google search. I dont see anybody having any trouble getting any of those chips. As far as Orton leaving, that really has nothing to do with the merger. I think he stepped out with alot of cash, and a good idea of what he wanted to do next.

It was announced last May but It wasn't until this month that it was available.

 

[enumae]

Seems like it is available to me. All I did was a single very simple google search.

Congratulations, but like Ryan_975 said it was released a little while ago, I believe it was early June, not May and they are just now becoming available.

That is a paper launch.

As far as Orton leaving, that really has nothing to do with the merger. I think he stepped out with alot of cash, and a good idea of what he wanted to do next.

Duby... you claimed that ATI "are still largely running independently from AMD."

That is what I was responding to. Hence, why that portion of the comment was yellow, so please look at it in the context it was meant, also note who said it.

 

[Manny Calavera]

It was announced last May but It wasn't until this month that it was available.

Exactly,and this is just one example.... AMDati have become synonymous with delays and paper launches,and excuses.Not to mention gross mismanagement.Bar the 1.6A northwood,I have purchased 4 AMD cpu's for every 1 Intel cpu.Up until mid summer
of 2006,I was recommending AMD over Intel for years to anyone that asked me what to buy,even when the 1.6A and 2.4C were all the rage on here,this going back to mid 96.

AMD doesn't need enemies like Intel,heck,they have their marketing department doing a grand job of that,only second to the boards of directors.

 

[APOLLO]

I think one of the mistakes that consumers make is they assume that --they-- are AMD's customers... The truth is that they are not. You buy your parts from a retailer, and you are the retailers customer. If you have a problem you deal with the retailer.

That's not an absolute. There are situations where the client has to seek support from the manufacturer. To reply to your initial statement, whenever an individual purchases a product, whether they are an end-user, a company or even a retailer, the purchaser automatically becomes a multiple client. He is a client of the enterprise he purchased from and a client of the manufacturer. This is my firm belief; and I have undergone first-hand experience several times in my life that attests to that conviction. You may disagree, and I respect that.

In the mean time these SI have moved on to DDR2. Why? Becouse it is --cheaper for them-- to buy one type of memry for all of it's product lines. Same reason they use the same harddrive, or the same burners.... So when it comes time to upgrade, they will want you to upgrade to DDR2... --becouse its cheaper for them-- You are there customer.... They are AMD's customer, and AMD will make them happy.

It is almost always cheaper, ie. free, to utilize existing hardware than to purchase new hardware, even if it's the cheapest product currently on the market.

 

[duby229]

Congratulations, but like Ryan_975 said it was released a little while ago, I believe it was early June, not May and they are just now becoming available.

That is a paper launch.

I dont know. I was under the impression they were released a few weeks ago in the middle of june. They are available now in a decent supply. It takes weeks to build the kind of stock that is available today...... Soooo. I dont know how much paper is involved considering that it is available now, it was launched only a handful of weeks ago, and has been available for a handful of weeks already....

Duby... you claimed that ATI "are still largely running independently from AMD."

That is what I was responding to. Hence, why that portion of the comment was yellow, so please look at it in the context it was meant, also note who said it.

The color you choose doesnt so much matter as the content. The content stated that Orton resigned due to the merger.... But the financial reports released to date indicate that the merger is still far from completion. ATi is still largely funding itself, and is still largely managing itself. Orton has himself indicated that he sold out for a better deal. I'm sorry but the facts dont seem to support that view.

 

[duby229]

That's not an absolute. There are situations where the client has to seek support from the manufacturer. To reply to your initial statement, whenever an individual purchases a product, whether they are an end-user, a company or even a retailer, the purchaser automatically becomes a multiple client. He is a client of the enterprise he purchased from and a client of the manufacturer. This is my firm belief; and I have undergone first-hand experience several times in my life that attests to that conviction. You may disagree, and I respect that.

It is almost always cheaper, ie. free, to utilize existing hardware than to purchase new hardware, even if it's the cheapest product currently on the market.

That is certainly a fair position to take.. I dont blaim you for it, and I sort of agree.... However folks like us that build our own computers and replace faulty CPU's are few and far between. There just isnt many individuals that need to deal directly with AMD. I'd be willing to bet that 99.9999% of all AMD's transactions are with channel distributors, and System Builders.... It's distributors and system builders that AMD needs to make happy, and they are using DDR2. So AMD gives them DDR2 support. It really is that simple.

 

[enumae]

I was under the impression they were released a few weeks ago in the middle of june.

TechReport, you decide.

...The content stated that Orton resigned due to the merger.... But the financial reports...

Now you believe the financial reports... Ok, like I said the statement I quoted came from AMD, so you decide who's right.

 

[enumae]

Orton has himself indicated that he sold out for a better deal. I'm sorry but the facts dont seem to support that view.

I wanted to do a quick search to see if I could find anything related to you comment. Turns out that I can't.

I am now going to ask you to point me to an article in which Orton states "that he sold out for a better deal", or something along those lines, otherwise all I can conclude is that my search abilities don't seem to support that view.

Like the color.

 

[BigDH01]

All you have to do is look at the K8 launch. Then look at the K7 launch, and the K6 launch before that.

The exact, and I mean the exact same things your asking and saying now, have already been asked and said then. If you want answers, then look for them. Until then your doing exactly what AMD wants you to do. I'm not going to get suckered into making a "prediction" I've already clearly stated my predictions in past threads. In the mean time AMD needs people to hear the name Barcelona. They need people to hear the word Opteron. They need people talking about this chip. Good or bad, it doesnt matter, as long as the words are used...

Thats my point. I'll not make any kind of prediction except to say that clock for clock Barcelona will prolly be faster then Penryn. Whether it takes the lead is still in doubt, but then again AMD has never taken the lead with any launch product. Not the K8, or the K7, or the K6 before that. The K7 didnt take a clear lead until Thunderbird..... The K8 didnt take a clear lead until later revisions of sledge... The K6 didnt take the lead until K62.....

Nothing more can be said. All we know is what is currently available and all that is available is very little.

LOL, what? I was around for every launch but the K6. However, I built my first machine using a K6-233. The K6's FPU sucked, bigtime. The K6 was marketed as a cheap business alternative to the Pentium line. I owned one as it was pretty fast for general use and it was much cheaper than the Pentium II. SIMD didn't start becoming a buzzword until K6-2 and 3dnow. Take a look:

Here

Now, I could go dig up the reviews of the K7, K8, X2, etc. However, there was a great deal of hype before the K7 I assure you. People were actually very excited as was I. When it was finally released, it was faster than the P3 of the day. I picked up the K7-600 and was excited to have a CPU with a powerful FPU, a drastic change from the K6. People at the time considered the K7 to be superior to the P3. This attitude really didn't change until Coppermine when the P3 once again came close or tied the performance of the Thunderbird.

I also remember really wanting a K8 when it was released. It was definitely considered to be the superior gaming chip with video encoding going to the Northwood at that time. I had a Northwood at 3.5 so I didn't upgrade.

The X2 was clearly considered to be superior than the P-D. I remember people being excited about that as well. Actually, I can't remember an AMD launch having such negative press beforehand.

 

[RamonGTP]

Thank you for taking the time to explain in better detail than I did how The K7 and especially K8 launches were polar opposites to Barcelona.

 

[LstBrunnenG]

Oh really? And how do you know how the Barcelona launch went? IT HASN'T HAPPENED YET.

This bickering is pointless until we have some hard numbers from a reputable site. And even then, if Barcelona is lagging behind, certain people in this thread will be the first to defend it, saying that a magic combination of clock scaling and revisions will make it win eventually.

 

[RamonGTP]

Oh really? And how do you know how the Barcelona launch went? IT HASN'T HAPPENED YET.

This bickering is pointless until we have some hard numbers from a reputable site. And even then, if Barcelona is lagging behind, certain people in this thread will be the first to defend it, saying that a magic combination of clock scaling and revisions will make it win eventually.

Well it really shouldn't be that hard to figure out what we are talking about, but since you're having a hard time, i'll spell it out for you. We are refferring to the news prior to the actual launch. Infact, he actually said...

However, there was a great deal of hype before the K7 I assure you. People were actually very excited as was I.

Hope that clears up your confusion

 

[duby229]

Well it really shouldn't be that hard to figure out what we are talking about, but since you're having a hard time, i'll spell it out for you. We are refferring to the news prior to the actual launch. Infact, he actually said...



Hope that clears up your confusion

Maybe I remember things differently then you folks do. But I clearly remember K6 getting bashed just as bad or worse then K10. I remember K7 getting bashed just as bad or worse then K10. I remember K8 getting bashed just as bad or worse then K10....

For the K6 it was people complaining about FPU, but it with the launch of the K62 it actually outperformed an equally clocked P2. For the K7 it was people complianing about SIMD. But with the launch of the Thunderbird it actually outperformed an equally clocked P3. For the K8 it was people complaining about the clock speed. But with the launch of the C1 revision Sledge it actually outperformed the P4.......

I see this as being no different. And in all of those cases AMD used that hype to its benefit.

 

[Tetrahedron]

Maybe I remember things differently then you folks do. But I clearly remember K6 getting bashed just as bad or worse then K10. I remember K7 getting bashed just as bad or worse then K10. I remember K8 getting bashed just as bad or worse then K10....

For the K6 it was people complaining about FPU, but it with the launch of the K62 it actually outperformed an equally clocked P2. For the K7 it was people complianing about SIMD. But with the launch of the Thunderbird it actually outperformed an equally clocked P3. For the K8 it was people complaining about the clock speed. But with the launch of the C1 revision Sledge it actually outperformed the P4.......

I see this as being no different. And in all of those cases AMD used that hype to its benefit.

I agree with you duby, this is exactly how I remember it too.

 

[Bacillus]

Oh really? And how do you know how the Barcelona launch went? IT HASN'T HAPPENED YET.

This bickering is pointless until we have some hard numbers from a reputable site. And even then, if Barcelona is lagging behind, certain people in this thread will be the first to defend it, saying that a magic combination of clock scaling and revisions will make it win eventually.

Nature abhors a vacuum. In life, the absence of news is usually filled with bitching and moaning.

 

[BigDH01]

Maybe I remember things differently then you folks do. But I clearly remember K6 getting bashed just as bad or worse then K10. I remember K7 getting bashed just as bad or worse then K10. I remember K8 getting bashed just as bad or worse then K10....

For the K6 it was people complaining about FPU, but it with the launch of the K62 it actually outperformed an equally clocked P2. For the K7 it was people complianing about SIMD. But with the launch of the Thunderbird it actually outperformed an equally clocked P3. For the K8 it was people complaining about the clock speed. But with the launch of the C1 revision Sledge it actually outperformed the P4.......

I see this as being no different. And in all of those cases AMD used that hype to its benefit.

I guess I will have to dig up the review. The K7 clearly beat the P3 upon release. AMD even surprised us with a part clocked at 650 when we were only expecting 600. You can start here. The proof's in the pudding.

I don't know where you get the idea that the K6-2 outperformed the P2 or P3's FPU. The K6-2 only introduced SIMD which meant that the K6-2 could keep up with the P2 or P3 in applications that used 3dnow. That was it.

And the Thunderbird went up against Coppermine. You can find pretty comprehensive benchmarks here. You can see that the benchmarks go back and forth between the top clocked Coppermine and Thunderbird. Unfortunately for Intel, the 1 GHz Coppermines had some serious thermal and power issues so it was really a non-issue. Of course, the Thunderbird kept increasing in clockspeed and Intel countered with the first P4s, a complete disaster. I never remember the K7 getting bashed. In fact, I remember nothing but praises for it as it made AMD a real competitor to Intel.

Now I need to dig up the original K8 benchmarks. Benchmarks start here. You can see the two (P4 and K8) trading blows with the A64 taking the cake in gaming and the P4 taking the cake in encoding as I stated above. Then the Prescotts arrive and more EEs and Intel has the lead but only because of their extremely expensive enthusiast part. This was the case until socket 939 was released. Then AMD once again took the gaming lead while slightly trailing in encoding. AMD didn't take a clear lead in most applications until the X2. Benchmarks here. The P-D was no match for the X2 as I stated above.

So, as you can see, the K6 may have been bashed for its weak FPU but it was praised for it's office performance at a much cheaper price. The K6-2 employed SIMD which masked the weak FPU in some cases (patched Quake2 for instance). The K6-3 added on-die cache which made the K6 an office beast for the day at a very reasonable price.

The K7 was released and beat the P3 that it was up against. It won in both games and office apps which is why people were so excited about it. It basically made AMD legitimate on the desktop for all applications. The Coppermine was released and the Thunderbird and Coppermine battled each other while trading blows. The Coppermine topped out early and the T-bird clearly scaled to higher clocks. Then came AthlonXP and P4 which originally performed terribly. This changed with the Northwood.

Then the K8 was released which could actually win gaming benchmarks and some office benchmarks. The Northwood and later Prescott could still win while encoding or sometimes doing 3D rendering. The EE tipped the hat in Intel's favor but that was a really expensive and high-end part. I never owned one and I never personally knew anyone that did. Socket 939 came out along with higher clocked Prescotts which pretty much meant that AMD was the chip to have for gaming while the Prescott was the chip to have for encoding (if you didn't mind the heat).

The X2 clearly changed the game in AMD's favor. Here is a release by AMD that clearly bested Intel's answer. Not much else to say here. However, it did mean that P-Ds were dirt cheap . My 3800+ hit 2.5 with ease and was a great chip.

Then we have the C2D. Not much to say here either. This brings us to the present. I'll let you guys argue about that.

So there. Now you don't have to rely on memory as you have proof. If you need more info, simply go to Anandtech and click on the CPU section. It's chronologically ordered so you can start reconstructing the past.

 

[BigDH01]

I agree with you duby, this is exactly how I remember it too.

And you also remember it incorrectly. See my last post in reply to Duby.

 

[duby229]

And you also remember it incorrectly. See my last post in reply to Duby.

The problem is that your relying on Anandtech to prove your opinions. 90% of Anands reviews were paid for and have an expected outcome. Very few data released by Anand can be viewed as trustworthy, or accurate. Things just didnt happen the way Anand says they did. Anand has been an AMD fanboy untill about 2005, when he screwed AMD on some marketing gimmick. AMD stopped paying him, and he is now an Intel fanboy.

This is all common knowledge though. He always artificially favored AMD untill about 2005, and and now he is artificially favoring Intel.

 

[BigDH01]

The problem is that your relying on Anandtech to prove your opinions. 90% of Anands reviews were paid for and have an expected outcome. Very few data released by Anand can be viewed as trustworthy, or accurate. Things just didnt happen the way Anand says they did. Anand has been an AMD fanboy untill about 2005, when he screwed AMD on some marketing gimmick. AMD stopped paying him, and he is now an Intel fanboy.

This is all common knowledge though. He always artificially favored AMD untill about 2005, and and now he is artificially favoring Intel.

LOL, and this thread just lost any sense of seriousness. So, do you have any evidence that either AMD or Intel has given monetary compensation to Anandtech or is this just an assumption based on which manufacturer has the lead at the time? If you don't like Anand then

here

here

Yeah, I bet X-bit and Ars were both paid by AMD as well, right? You know Duby, when proven wrong your first response doesn't necessarily have to be: "But they were paid to be biased, I know I'm right." You could just admit that you were wrong and take it like a man. In all seriousness Duby, grow up and quit accusing people of crimes for which you have no evidence when you get proven wrong.

Oh, and it seems you just sold your own company downriver. Think about it, you actually believe that AMD paid reviewers to make the Athlon look superior to the P3 when it actually (according to you) wasn't. That paints AMD in a pretty poor light. Paying reviewers to influence their decision resulting in those reviewers lying to consumers? Those are pretty serious accusations, especially when leveled against the company you hold so dear.

 

[visaris]

You know Duby, when proven wrong[. . .]

Show me where he was proven wrong? Last time I read the posts here, no one proved much of anything at all; as usual, they just spewed their own opinion out and called it truth.

your first response doesn't necessarily have to be: "But they were paid to be biased, I know I'm right." You could just admit that you were wrong and take it like a man. In all seriousness Duby, grow up[. . .]

Yeah, because attacking Dubby personally is a logical argument and helps to spread truth and knowledge on the web. Listen, this is simple. If one doesn't have a logical argument to make, please don't make a post at all.

Back on topic, I agree with Dubby about the launch press. I was there, I read the news, and I saw all the bad press first hand. K6, K7, and K8 all had a load of bad press, followed by a few optimistic stories. The K10 launch seems the same, and I fail to see how the current state of internet "news" proves anything about K10, at all.

Further, while I may not be quite ready to agree with Dubby on the specifics of Anand, his overall point is valid: using and trusting third party information completely, the way you seem to do, doesn't prove anything. It may add support to what you are saying, but a proof is much more rigorous, and not as simple as linking to some bloke's website.

 

[Rich Tate]

Personal attacks are not a good way to win a debate. Take a breath and knock it off please.

 

[Shlomo]

I don't really know Tate, if you cannot get ideas through a persons concrete skull, the best way is usually to pound it with a "YUR MOM WEARS COMBAT BOOTZ SLEDGEHAMMER" and then trickle in some truth.

 

[BigDH01]

Show me where he was proven wrong? Last time I read the posts here, no one proved much of anything at all; as usual, they just spewed their own opinion out and called it truth.


Yeah, because attacking Dubby personally is a logical argument and helps to spread truth and knowledge on the web. Listen, this is simple. If one doesn't have a logical argument to make, please don't make a post at all.

Back on topic, I agree with Dubby about the launch press. I was there, I read the news, and I saw all the bad press first hand. K6, K7, and K8 all had a load of bad press, followed by a few optimistic stories. The K10 launch seems the same, and I fail to see how the current state of internet "news" proves anything about K10, at all.

Further, while I may not be quite ready to agree with Dubby on the specifics of Anand, his overall point is valid: using and trusting third party information completely, the way you seem to do, doesn't prove anything. It may add support to what you are saying, but a proof is much more rigorous, and not as simple as linking to some bloke's website.

He said that the K7 wasn't faster than the P3 when it was released. This is false. I posted several sites that backup my statement. My assertion is far more valid than, "Anand's site is wrong because they were paid by AMD." There is simply no evidence for that assertion. Furthermore, I have several sites that provide evidence for my position. Seemingly, none for his. I fail to see how my argument wasn't valid. I said that the K7 was the winner and I provided evidence. So yes, I guess in a way it was an opinion. However, it was an opinion backed by evidence. If you were going to quote my argument as an example of a poor argument, then I fail to understand why you wouldn't also quote Duby's.

I said the K8 won in games and lost in encoding upon launch and provided evidence. I provided evidence that showed that the X2 was without competition when released. I provided evidence for all of these things so you'll need to explain to me how my argument isn't logical.

Furthermore, I didn't just use a third party to say that the K7 was faster upon release, I used several trusted third party sites. I think that's about as proven as I can get on an online chat forum.

I was also there for the launch of K7 and K8. I would say that their was far more optimism before the launch of the K7 than there is for the K10. People were genuinely excited about the core improvements in the K7. Hell, I think I could recite Aceshardware's architectural analysis from memory. I remember people being geniunely excited. In fact, if you read all of Anand's original K7 article you'll see that he was exposed and got to see several benchmarks of early K7. here. It's expected performance was no secret. In fact, the Athlon was faster than the P3 clock-for-clock in beta revisions. This information was known to the community as a whole as well. People were excited.

Duby's point about Anand is not valid. He did not claim that it is poor science to use one source, he claimed that Anand took money from AMD. Those are two entirely different claims. If people here dislike my comments about Duby needing to grow up, then they should be disgusted by Duby's unsubstantiated claims against a reputable hardware site. These claims not only hurt Anand's character but could possibly hurt his business and means of income. These claims were made without evidence. So perhaps you should quote Duby and explain libel.

Oh, forgot to add, I owned a K7-600. I know (or at least knew) exactly how fast it was. I was able to compare it to my now brother-in-law's Pentium 3. I can tell you the Athlon seemed faster and the few benchmarks I ran seemed to verify this. Of course, you have no way of confirming the truth of that statement. Needless to say, it would be more wise of you to take the word of a trusted third party such as X-bit, Anand, and Ars. I would certainly believe them over random statements I saw or made in HardOCP forum.

 

[duby229]

He said that the K7 wasn't faster than the P3 when it was released. This is false. I posted several sites that backup my statement. My assertion is far more valid than, "Anand's site is wrong because they were paid by AMD." There is simply no evidence for that assertion. Furthermore, I have several sites that provide evidence for my position. Seemingly, none for his. I fail to see how my argument wasn't valid. I said that the K7 was the winner and I provided evidence. So yes, I guess in a way it was an opinion. However, it was an opinion backed by evidence. If you were going to quote my argument as an example of a poor argument, then I fail to understand why you wouldn't also quote Duby's.

I said the K8 won in games and lost in encoding upon launch and provided evidence. I provided evidence that showed that the X2 was without competition when released. I provided evidence for all of these things so you'll need to explain to me how my argument isn't logical.

Furthermore, I didn't just use a third party to say that the K7 was faster upon release, I used several trusted third party sites. I think that's about as proven as I can get on an online chat forum.

I was also there for the launch of K7 and K8. I would say that their was far more optimism before the launch of the K7 than there is for the K10. People were genuinely excited about the core improvements in the K7. Hell, I think I could recite Aceshardware's architectural analysis from memory. I remember people being geniunely excited. In fact, if you read all of Anand's original K7 article you'll see that he was exposed and got to see several benchmarks of early K7. here. It's expected performance was no secret. In fact, the Athlon was faster than the P3 clock-for-clock in beta revisions. This information was known to the community as a whole as well. People were excited.

Duby's point about Anand is not valid. He did not claim that it is poor science to use one source, he claimed that Anand took money from AMD. Those are two entirely different claims. If people here dislike my comments about Duby needing to grow up, then they should be disgusted by Duby's unsubstantiated claims against a reputable hardware site. These claims not only hurt Anand's character but could possibly hurt his business and means of income. These claims were made without evidence. So perhaps you should quote Duby and explain libel.

Oh, forgot to add, I owned a K7-600. I know (or at least knew) exactly how fast it was. I was able to compare it to my now brother-in-law's Pentium 3. I can tell you the Athlon seemed faster and the few benchmarks I ran seemed to verify this. Of course, you have no way of confirming the truth of that statement. Needless to say, it would be more wise of you to take the word of a trusted third party such as X-bit, Anand, and Ars. I would certainly believe them over random statements I saw or made in HardOCP forum.

I just want to make clear. I never said that I didnt trust you opinion. I just dont like your assertion that it is fact, when in fact it is not. We can debate over whether or not this chip is faster then that chip or not, but it doesnt matter. I thought I made clear that was how I remembered things... Maybe I'm remembering wrong. The point still holds however that people are still saying the same things now that they said then. This situation truly isnt that much different.

Are you saying that AMD ids going out of business?
Are ytou saying that AMD will sit through this gen?
Are you saying that AMD will be bought out?
Are you saying that AMD pull out of CPU business?

These things that people are saying now are --exactly-- the same things that people were saying prior to the the K8 launch, the K7 launch, and the K6 launch.. Before the K8 launch it was folks saying that nVidia was going to buy AMD. Before the K7 launch it folks saying thta IBM was going to buy AMD. Before the K6 launch it was folks saying that Intel was going to buy AMD... Now it's IBM --again--....

Before the K8 launch folks said that with 800mhz AMD would have no choice but to sit out that generation. Before the K7 launch folks said that with a new FAB AMD wouldnt be able to scale production fast enough, and they would have to sit out that generation. Before the K6 launch folks said that Nexgen would bankrupt AMD and they would have to sit out that generation....

Whether this is faster or that is faster really doesnt matter in the end. AMD has been in this --exact-- situation many times before.

 

[BigDH01]

I just want to make clear. I never said that I didnt trust you opinion. I just dont like your assertion that it is fact, when in fact it is not. We can debate over whether or not this chip is faster then that chip or not, but it doesnt matter. I thought I made clear that was how I remembered things... Maybe I'm remembering wrong. The point still holds however that people are still saying the same things now that they said then. This situation truly isnt that much different.

Are you saying that AMD ids going out of business?
Are ytou saying that AMD will sit through this gen?
Are you saying that AMD will be bought out?
Are you saying that AMD pull out of CPU business?

These things that people are saying now are --exactly-- the same things that people were saying prior to the the K8 launch, the K7 launch, and the K6 launch.. Before the K8 launch it was folks saying that nVidia was going to buy AMD. Before the K7 launch it folks saying thta IBM was going to buy AMD. Before the K6 launch it was folks saying that Intel was going to buy AMD... Now it's IBM --again--....

Before the K8 launch folks said that with 800mhz AMD would have no choice but to sit out that generation. Before the K7 launch folks said that with a new FAB AMD wouldnt be able to scale production fast enough, and they would have to sit out that generation. Before the K6 launch folks said that Nexgen would bankrupt AMD and they would have to sit out that generation....

Whether this is faster or that is faster really doesnt matter in the end. AMD has been in this --exact-- situation many times before.

AMD is not in immediate peril business-wise. I also don't know exactly how the Barcelona will compare with the Penryn clock-for-clock. I simply disagree with the assertion that people thought that the K7 wasn't going to be a killer performer. I think people were expecting a chip that was faster than the P3 and that's what they got. Does the current pessimism about Barcelona mean it will be a poor performer? I don't know, maybe it will or maybe it won't. Does the pessimism about Barcelona's performance now remind me of the pessimism about K7's performance? No, people were expecting a fast chip and that's what they got.

As for your other questions: I really don't know. I'm sure there are some interesting board meetings as of late though.

 

[jhtrico1850]

The problem is that your relying on Anandtech to prove your opinions. 90% of Anands reviews were paid for and have an expected outcome. Very few data released by Anand can be viewed as trustworthy, or accurate. Things just didnt happen the way Anand says they did. Anand has been an AMD fanboy untill about 2005, when he screwed AMD on some marketing gimmick. AMD stopped paying him, and he is now an Intel fanboy.

This is all common knowledge though. He always artificially favored AMD untill about 2005, and and now he is artificially favoring Intel.

LOL

 

[morfinx]

You guys are still arguing about this? Just wait til it's released to settle your differences.

 

[DemonDiablo]

You guys are still arguing about this? Just wait til it's released to settle your differences.

If we waited for "official" information from amd then this forum would have been dead for at least the past 6 or so months. If amd isnt going to feed the birdies then the birdies are going to feed themselves.

 

[LstBrunnenG]

Are you saying that AMD ids going out of business?
Are ytou saying that AMD will sit through this gen?
Are you saying that AMD will be bought out?
Are you saying that AMD pull out of CPU business?

Nobody in this thread is trying to argue any of those points.

You're jumping from "Barcelona may not be a Conroe/Penryn killer." to "AMD BK 2Q'08!"

 

[duby229]

Nobody in this thread is trying to argue any of those points.

You're jumping from "Barcelona may not be a Conroe/Penryn killer." to "AMD BK 2Q'08!"

It's all over this forum. I think these topics are 90% or more of the conversations threse days. Just start countin the threads....

 

[duby229]

If we waited for "official" information from amd then this forum would have been dead for at least the past 6 or so months. If amd isnt going to feed the birdies then the birdies are going to feed themselves.

And that is why it is a good thing. The good ol' stratagizing mind of them ol' birdies....

 

[Manny Calavera]

The problem is that your relying on Anandtech to prove your opinions. 90% of Anands reviews were paid for and have an expected outcome. Very few data released by Anand can be viewed as trustworthy, or accurate. Things just didnt happen the way Anand says they did. Anand has been an AMD fanboy untill about 2005, when he screwed AMD on some marketing gimmick. AMD stopped paying him, and he is now an Intel fanboy.

This is all common knowledge though. He always artificially favored AMD untill about 2005, and and now he is artificially favoring Intel.

You really have fallen down the rabbit hole !!

 

[cupholder2.0]

The problem is that your relying on Anandtech to prove your opinions. 90% of Anands reviews were paid for and have an expected outcome. Very few data released by Anand can be viewed as trustworthy, or accurate. Things just didnt happen the way Anand says they did. Anand has been an AMD fanboy untill about 2005, when he screwed AMD on some marketing gimmick. AMD stopped paying him, and he is now an Intel fanboy.

This is all common knowledge though. He always artificially favored AMD untill about 2005, and and now he is artificially favoring Intel.

Until I read this thread, I did not know this duby character. After reading the above, I can say that he is quite desperate and has run out of BS to use as arguements. He has been proved wrong multiple times by multiple users yet continues his insistent jabbering.

 

[duby229]

Until I read this thread, I did not know this duby character. After reading the above, I can say that he is quite desperate and has run out of BS to use as arguements. He has been proved wrong multiple times by multiple users yet continues his insistent jabbering.

Show me where I've been proved wrong. Quote it. Please. Copy and paste.... If you can do that you get a cookie

I said AMD has been in exactly this same position before and provided examples in the past where they were. The counter argument is that Anand says it aint so... OK......

 

[enumae]

Show me where I've been proved wrong.

Well I don't know about wrong, but I am still waiting for a response to post #169 and #170.

 

[BigDH01]

Show me where I've been proved wrong. Quote it. Please. Copy and paste.... If you can do that you get a cookie

I said AMD has been in exactly this same position before and provided examples in the past where they were. The counter argument is that Anand says it aint so... OK......

I'll give it a shot...

Thats my point. I'll not make any kind of prediction except to say that clock for clock Barcelona will prolly be faster then Penryn. Whether it takes the lead is still in doubt, but then again AMD has never taken the lead with any launch product. Not the K8, or the K7, or the K6 before that. The K7 didnt take a clear lead until Thunderbird..... The K8 didnt take a clear lead until later revisions of sledge... The K6 didnt take the lead until K62.....

Patently false. AMD most certainly took the lead at launch with the K7. I didn't just post Anand's benchmarks. I posted Arstechnica's and X-bit's benchmarks as well.

X-bit

Arstechnica

Ars had the best review IMO, except maybe Aces but that site is no longer up. However, I was able to find the archive via the Wayback machine. Can be found here:

Aces

Some of the graphs don't appear but you can read the text to get a sense of what was on the graphs. It is quite clear from all of these tests that the K7 was indeed superior to the P3 when released. Your statement:

Whether it takes the lead is still in doubt, but then again AMD has never taken the lead with any launch product.

is obviously false. To quote Johan

Bottom line, if you are a speed addict and cannot wait, you should get the 7th generation power of the Athlon. It is the fastest CPU at a fair price.

So either you were wrong or you believe that AMD was paying a lot of review sites for positive reviews. I'm inclined to believe the former.

Also, the statement that the K6-2 took the lead from the P2 (or the P3) is somewhat suspect. The K6-2 performed well in some apps but still really sucked in apps that were FPU intensive and not 3dnow optimized. I already posted Anand's review that had the K6-2 losing in FPU apps and coming close to the P2 in FPU intensive games even with 3dnow. The K6-2 seemed to perform very will in Direct3D tests but failed miserably on the games of the time. And this was from a reviewer that you considered to be an AMD fanboy at the time and a site that you believe was paid by AMD for positive reviews. Aces also had some K6-2 numbers and you'll see that it failed next to a P3 at the same clock speed. Old K6-2 benchmarks are hard to find but I managed to get some from Sharky's as well. The K6-3 was the processor that really sprung that line forward. That processor was extremely fast in anything not FPU intensive. However, it still suffered next to the P2 and P3 in apps that were FPU intensive and not optimized for 3dnow.

As far as the K8 at release, if you were gaming then the K8 was the CPU to have. If you were encoding then the P4 was the chip to have. I don't think there was a "best" CPU at release only the "best" for what you wanted to do. This was different from the K7 release when the K7 was pretty much faster in everything.

Regardless, the statement

but then again AMD has never taken the lead with any launch product.

is false as shown above by many different sites and, frankly, my own experience with the K7. Do I get a cookie now?

 

[Citizen86]

is false as shown above by many different sites and, frankly, my own experience with the K7. Do I get a cookie now?

Cookies all around!!!

Damn Duby, you're just a sucker for punishment, aren't you?

 

[Mat3]

This news was over a year ago:

http://www.hardware.info/en-UK/news/ym6clZqXwpua/AMD_obtains_license_on_ZRAM_Gen2/

Has anyone heard if Barcelona will use Z-ram, maybe for the L3 cache? If it works as well as it's hyped, it could be a pretty big advantage for AMD.