"AMD: We Innovate, Intel Copies"

In my first reply here I probably should have been a bit more specific regarding the "firsts" in that I meant in regards to the more significant things. Or rather, the areas of the technology that are more noticeable/memorable.

Regarding significant advancements that were first on Intel's side in the recent past, the only things that I can think of right off the top of my head are hyper threading and higher clock speeds.

Maybe it would be interesting for someone who is very knowledgeable in this topic to create a side by side comparison of major advancements coming from each company since the year 2000 or so.

AMD really has no choice in regards to innovation, though. If they cannot differentiate in at least some ways that are attractive to their potential customers, then all they will become is a cheap alternative to Intel (which is what I believe AMD was 10+ years ago).
 
Tabs said:
So we can have zero competition and massive price fixing? No thank you...
Click to expand...

Joint venture doesn't mean merging together into one company, a venture is simply two companies working together on a project.

Definition of Joint Venture: A joint venture is an entity formed between two or more parties to undertake economic activity together. The parties agree to create a new entity by both contributing equity, and they then share in the revenues, expenses, and control of the enterprise. The venture can be for one specific project only, or a continuing business relationship such as the Sony Ericsson joint venture. This is in contrast to a strategic alliance, which involves no equity stake by the participants, and is a much less rigid arrangement.

It would be more feasible if Intel did it with the ATI dept, sweet ass GPU's FTW! :)
 
Wasn't there a frankenboard that could run both AMD and Intel CPUs at the same time? One CPU was on the mainboard like normal, and the second CPU was on a riser card with its own DIMMs.
 
LstOfTheBrunnenG said:
Wasn't there a frankenboard that could run both AMD and Intel CPUs at the same time? One CPU was on the mainboard like normal, and the second CPU was on a riser card with its own DIMMs.
Click to expand...

Two on the same board, yes, running at the same time I don't believe so. I believe asrock did this although I am not sure, I don't know if it ever went into production. It was an LGA775 board with a 754 riser card, there were plans to go to 939 soon after, but obviously that didn't happen.
 
dajet24 said:
And if Intel made cars we could all drive the same high priced low mpg cars with new models coming every 5 years instead of every year. :D
Click to expand...


more like if intel made cars, we'd have to change the engine out every year to accomodate some different type of fuel.
 
Manny Calavera said:
It seems the amount of innovation is going to take a nose dive soon.

http://download.amd.com/Corporate/MarioRivasDec2007AMDAnalystDay.pdf
Click to expand...

I'll admit i chuckled slightly that AMD's "customers are responding" slide (#4) when they point out that 5 years later Sony and Apple are "now" using AMD graphics/chipset products...wow great job AMD, they were using they five years ago, they were just called ATI :p

As an aside, In slide 25 with the entusiast platform roadmap, what is "AMD-V" in the 45nm chips? I assume some substitute for L3 cache since it's not present in the roadmap?
 
Its supposed to offer answers,but only makes for more holes and questions.It reminds me
of swiss cheese.
 
didn't tell me anything interesting, granted I dont know what AMD-V is.

"R6xx"

RV 670 and it LOOKS like we might have a semi modular chip called R680, allegedly its going to be announced at CES in January, we shall see. Two dies on a wafer. I onno. hope it hauls ass, because ATI needs it, but my hopes arn't high, multi GPU solutions have always been ugly.
 
jstnomega said:
Dear Hector, Innovation is no substitute for performance.
Click to expand...

I was left speechless by this

Innovation means they think of ways of making the chips work faster, Not like their trying to think of ways to make them slower, even AMD isn't that basackwards.
 
conscript said:
more like if intel made cars, we'd have to change the engine out every year to accomodate some different type of fuel.
Click to expand...


How many sockets has AMD done vs intels in the last years....


socket 4** something for a few months, 478 to socket 775...

754 /939 /am2 /am3 coming
 
MrGuvernment said:
How many sockets has AMD done vs intels in the last years....

socket 4** something for a few months, 478 to socket 775...

754 /939 /am2 /am3 coming
Click to expand...
That's the main drawback to an IMC. More frequent socket changes and the use of older memory.
 
Simpson5774 said:
I was left speechless by this

Innovation means they think of ways of making the chips work faster, Not like their trying to think of ways to make them slower, even AMD isn't that basackwards.
Click to expand...

And that innovation has turned to... What... exactly this generation of chips?
 
this statement is true for its pushing of sse, pushing of dual core, pushing of 64 bit for desktop, and of course, the on die mem controller. also, intel will be fusing cores after 4 cores as performance drops badly after 4 cores non integrated.

intel just does it this round better. too bad the ceo's of AMD are assholes. their underlings who arent making 100million dollar bonuses for getting fired (read about it!) wont have time to bring up a new chip before the big ol sell off.

if stock drops a lot more, it doesnt matter what anyone thinks, it's gone.
 
APOLLO said:
That's the main drawback to an IMC. More frequent socket changes and the use of older memory.
Click to expand...
I disagree with the view that Intel's sockets are more stable. The heatsink mounting has stayed the same, but that's it- Tech Support pointed out to me that anything short of Conroe architecture is incompatible with P35/G33. I was getting crashes using a PD820 on a P35 board, that disappeared by dropping in a Celeron 420. Voltage regulation and even chipset compatibility play a huge part.
s478 -> s775a (865-975) -> s775b (P31/G31+)
s754 -> s939 -> AM2
 
Arcygenical said:
And that innovation has turned to... What... exactly this generation of chips?
Click to expand...

The phenom isn't that far off from kentsfield for IPC clock for clock. If they had gotten 2.8-3.0 ghz out by now, they would atleast be in the game.

AMD is innovating, I actually think they work harder than intel with what they have, intel is a powerhouse though.

But then again, I just got done with reading that PDF from AMD, I have never seen a more bright and sunny looking report from a company which is getting hammered.
 
MrWizard6600 said:
hehe, exactly.

its in the cards man, nehalem! You should know that! It's next (once penryn is ramped into full speed)!
Click to expand...

I am aware of that. It will happen some day but not until Intel feels that they are ready to release it.

MrWizard6600 said:
Seems like you, like me, are itching to see a cost sheet per core and total manufacturing costs of a phenom vs a kentsfield.
Click to expand...

I really would. I'd bet that Intel can actually manufacture parts cheaper than AMD can. I also wouldn't be surprised if the margins were higher.

MrWizard6600 said:
What do you mean by "smithfield vs presler"? both of those are intel chips, the former based on two prescotts on a single wafer :eek: and the latter based on two ceader mill's on a single wafer. Smithfield was nasty... I mean really, REALLY nasty.
Click to expand...

I was comparing the slapped together dual core against the native dual core processor. I was illustrating that the whole "native" approach is a bunch of bullshit.

MrWizard6600 said:
oh god, netburst in 2007? Thats a nasty thought. Maybe they'd finally be at the 10Ghz they promised us tho... probibly not :p
Click to expand...

Screw that. I would hate to see the heat output and power usage of such a chip. What would that be? A 300watt TDP processor? :rolleyes:

MrWizard6600 said:
If that were true, wouldn't OEMs and end users looking for an upgrade flock to asrock and there massive lineups of multiple ram type supporting mobos (I still dont know how they do it but I bet its an ugly ass bridge)?
Click to expand...

It's nice for Intel. They don't have to work hard to keep up with memory technologies. That was my only point there.
 
Simpson5774 said:
But then again, I just got done with reading that PDF from AMD, I have never seen a more bright and sunny looking report from a company which is getting hammered.
Click to expand...

But wait, they're going to have 45nm high-k ramped up in H12008! Didn't you know that? Ahahahaha. http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=9995

I literally laughed out loud as I read that. Does anyone pay any attention to what they say anymore? Serious credibility gap.
 
Manny Calavera said:
Well Mario Rivas said January 08 for first cpu samples I think... :confused:
Click to expand...
I find that a little hard to believe considering all the problems they have with the 65nm process, not to mention the cost of updating to 45nm manufacturing. If that's the case, great, but still difficult to believe.
 
MrGuvernment said:
How many sockets has AMD done vs intels in the last years....


socket 4** something for a few months, 478 to socket 775...

754 /939 /am2 /am3 coming
Click to expand...

Yep, I used AMD for years and recently switched to Intel. I was thinking about all the socket changes AMD has had over the last 8 years.....462/754/939/am2....am3 coming like you mentioned. Intel has stuck to 775 for quite some time now.
 
number69 said:
Yep, I used AMD for years and recently switched to Intel. I was thinking about all the socket changes AMD has had over the last 8 years.....462/754/939/am2....am3 coming like you mentioned. Intel has stuck to 775 for quite some time now.
Click to expand...

In 1999 or 2000 Intel had socket 423 which didn't even last more than a year. Then Intel switched to socket 478 and stuck to that socket for some time. It wasn't until about 4 years ago that Intel switched to socket LGA775 which they've been on ever since. The Xeon has also had three sockets in that time 603/604/LGA771. Though socket 603 was compatible with socket 604. However newer 604 processors wouldn't operate in older socket 603 motherboards.
 
number69 said:
Yep, I used AMD for years and recently switched to Intel. I was thinking about all the socket changes AMD has had over the last 8 years.....462/754/939/am2....am3 coming like you mentioned. Intel has stuck to 775 for quite some time now.
Click to expand...

But Intel changes chip sets every six months. Now I give them credit for backwards compatibility but I'm not going to buy a $200 mobo for my P4 550 as a upgrade path just to have Intel release a new chip set for the CPU I want. (Got burned when 925XE didn't support the PD) and the new boards don't even claim support for the P4 so. Yeah its the same socket. But is it the same thing.
 
DeChache said:
But Intel changes chip sets every six months. Now I give them credit for backwards compatibility but I'm not going to buy a $200 mobo for my P4 550 as a upgrade path just to have Intel release a new chip set for the CPU I want. (Got burned when 925XE didn't support the PD)
Click to expand...

Yes that is most annoying and I agree with you. Intel does release chipsets far too often now. The last chipset we really had for any real length of time was the i975x chipset.
 
DeChache said:
But Intel changes chip sets every six months. Now I give them credit for backwards compatibility but I'm not going to buy a $200 mobo for my P4 550 as a upgrade path just to have Intel release a new chip set for the CPU I want. (Got burned when 925XE didn't support the PD)
Click to expand...


But you have to buy a new board anyway if you want a AMD processor with new features that uses a new socket...so I guess we're in the same boat.
 
number69 said:
But you have to buy a new board anyway if you want a AMD processor with new features that uses a new socket...so I guess we're in the same boat.
Click to expand...

My point is that even though Intel hasn't changed socket you still have to buy a new board with each generation. So I guess I don't the complaining about AMD switching sockets ever 18 months or so. Its no different in my mind than Intel changing chip sets.
 
DeChache said:
My point is that even though Intel hasn't changed socket you still have to buy a new board with each generation. So I guess I don't the complaining about AMD switching sockets ever 18 months or so. Its no different in my mind than Intel changing chip sets.
Click to expand...

I got ya.
 
DeChache said:
My point is that even though Intel hasn't changed socket you still have to buy a new board with each generation. So I guess I don't the complaining about AMD switching sockets ever 18 months or so. Its no different in my mind than Intel changing chip sets.
Click to expand...

Yet my 2006 vintage Asus P5B Deluxe supports the latest 45nm CPUs... ;)
 
Dan_D said:
They have to redesign their processors and most likely change sockets everytime new memory technology becomes available.
Click to expand...
No longer true. The AM3 motherboards will have the same socket as the AM2 motherboards, just as the AM2 motherboards have the same socket as the AM2+ motherboards do now. The only thing that will prevent you from using an AM2 processor on an AM3 board is if there are no DDR2 memory sockets.
 
Dan_D said:
Yes that is most annoying and I agree with you. Intel does release chipsets far too often now. The last chipset we really had for any real length of time was the i975x chipset.
Click to expand...
At least the Xeon chipsets don't change as frequently.
 
number69 said:
I got ya.
Click to expand...

Cool I just wanted to make sure I was clear on my point.

harpoon said:
Yet my 2006 vintage Asus P5B Deluxe supports the latest 45nm CPUs... ;)
Click to expand...

I'll give Intel credit they have been pretty good since the C2D release. :cool:


IONO I've been burned by both companys in the last 3 years. I built my first comp on a 925X board with a P4 550 that all but burst into flames when something broke and it decieded it wanted to run at 120C(yes I do believe it got that hot. I should of taken pictures of the burns from the heat sink on my hands when I made sure that it was seated right)

Then I went to AMD with a Opty 170 that I'm still using albeit with a new Ebayed mobo (Though thats more of a beef I have with the Nforce4 chip set.). Then about 3 months later AMD announced that 939 was end of life.

I think I'm going to wait till fall and jump on the nehalm bandwagon and hope it has the 2 years of support that the C2D has had.
 
Nobu said:
No longer true. The AM3 motherboards will have the same socket as the AM2 motherboards, just as the AM2 motherboards have the same socket as the AM2+ motherboards do now. The only thing that will prevent you from using an AM2 processor on an AM3 board is if there are no DDR2 memory sockets.
Click to expand...

...or if it doesn't have proper voltage regulation, or if the flash chip chosen doesn't have enough capacity for the BIOS, or if the motherboard manufacturer decides that they'd rather sell you a new motherboard instead of updating the BIOS of their older boards for proper support... :rolleyes:

Need I continue?
 
Mr. Bluntman said:
...or if it doesn't have proper voltage regulation, or if the flash chip chosen doesn't have enough capacity for the BIOS, or if the motherboard manufacturer decides that they'd rather sell you a new motherboard instead of updating the BIOS of their older boards for proper support... :rolleyes:

Need I continue?
Click to expand...

Voltage regulation? I'm sure if they have the slots for the memory they'd have the right voltage for them as well. The flash chip better have enough capacity for the BIOS, because if it doesn't there's something seriously wrong(Or are you talking about the old boards? If so, see the next point.). As for the older boards, you would have to buy a new one anyway, because they don't have DDR3 slots. You can, however, use the old processor in the new boards, if it meets the requirements I stated above.

Did I leave anything out?
 
Old thread... but I'll add my 2 cents too.

Intel has had something for years that AMD never had -- Intel chipsets. Other than the i810/820 crapfest, Intel has been solid. None of the AMD partners make any good chipsets. Yes, I'll dare to say it again. None of them.

Back when the most rampant AMD fanboys were touting the superiority of AMD CPU's, they had to be humbled by AMD's main partner VIA. Whatever happened to them....

Robert
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top