![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Bulldozer Possibly Pushed back till October
- Thread starter kinjo
- Start date
I'd like you to explain to the class why this is. I think it would not be a simple answer, but there may be a few key points why this is done. Something to do with parallelism, power, and replacements...
...some of which probably do matter in the desktop PC add-in market which our kind forum is a part of...
A 10% difference in CPU speed is negated by network latency, drive latency, other bottlenecks, etc. so you don't really see it at the application layer as much.
And cores really matter a lot more because the workloads are parallel.
Would you rather have a dollar once an hour or a dime every minute? The dollar is much bigger, right?
We had a financial customer who was doing financial transaction processing. They were really interested in the xeon x5698 because it had a 4.4GHz clock speed. Sounds pretty impressive until you realize that it had only 2 cores. That is 168 cores per rack. With 12-core AMD Opteron processors you could get over 1000 cores in the same physical floor space.
So, while they could do those individual transactions faster, we could do almost 8X more transactions in the same power, and floor space - at a lower cost.
So, if you are trying to manage a data center, which is the most expensive floor space in the company, you get much better ROI out of density and efficiency. And that is why someone chose a 2.3GHz processor over a 4.4GHz processor. Speed isn't anything, it has its place, but in most cases you'd rather get more work done at one time than get less done faster.
For that same fact, it is hard to justify the high end processors. We have them because there is some slice of the population (~5%) that will pay the price for that level of performance, but most are looking at the best balance of performance with either price or power. ~70% buy standard power parts, for better price/performance. ~25% buy low power parts for better performance/watt. ~5% buy the fast stuff.
And if you are a CIO, you are measured by keeping the business running and keeping the costs in line. You generally are not measured by performance.
And how does that lower cost today affect the performance of the system tomorrow? Does buying cheaper today allow them to upgrade sooner, and/or more often? Would that, too, be considered to increase performance in the long-term?
Really? Did they give a reason? Cause current evidence is pointing towards a late Sept/Oct release.
I kind of agree. I'm still using my X4 965 and it hardly feels slow. Now, my hard drive and my Radeon HD 5870, those could use another upgrade
What if it is lower price but same or better performance?
Refresh cycles tend to be consistent for companies, Some are 2 years, most are 3-4 years, some stretch it as long as 5 years. Typically they are 3-4 years as companies wait until products come off of lease or the warranties run out. The prospect of buying faster today so that it will last longer is a fallacy for most companies. Consider that each bin speed is ~3-5% faster at the CPU level, so that becomes maybe 1-3% faster at the platform level. That extra performance won't be noticed down the road, but when you get 3-4 years out, you'll see new technology is 50%+ faster. THAT is noticed.
In addition, consider that upgrading servers is a hassle and has lots of cost involved, so doing upgrades is not welcomed, it is a necessary evil.
Upgrade cycles have so much more to do with financial costs than anything else.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
That's all true but first you need those products with same performance.
So far you guys simply don't exist above $100 price point.
So far you guys simply don't exist above $100 price point.
Pieter3dnow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,784
You live in Australia ? coz tomorrow is the 31st ?
AMD Bulldozer to ship ‘within the next week or so’
AMD Bulldozer to ship ‘within the next week or so’
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2011/08/26/amd-bulldozer-to-ship-within-the-next-week/1
I am in the server business and we do quite well competitively, thank you.
Nobody at hot chips would have been authorized to make that statement.
OFaceSIG
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2009
- Messages
- 4,062
I run a Datacenter and everything JF-AMD says is absolutely right. It's hilarious when people try to argue with him.
I still disagree completely. Brand recognition becomes increasingly more important on products that people have a small knowledge about how they work.
Most consumers do not care how a computer works, or even whats inside. Yes, they care about more Ram, HD, and even larger and bigger product numbers (Nvidia renames their same product all the time for example and its "better" in many consumer's minds). Many people will make a buying decision without asking someone who actually knows... they aren't always going to have an enthusiast around to get a good concrete answer.
Just go into a box store, and ask the employees which machine is better (even when AMD had the performance crown) and they will tell you Intel 90% of the time. Most people will believe what the salesperson says. When it comes to computers and laptops, Intel is well know as the processor that is fast and works best, and AMD is either unknown or known to be slower regardless of the current situation. This is important for OEM sales, where AMD gets much more sales compared to enthusiast small percentage from enthusiast purchases.
JF-AMD said earlier that people don't care about the engine of a car, they just want it to work. However, i disagree when it comes to computers because right on the tower or laptop it says Intel and they know that means good, and if it says AMD, they really have no idea what it means.
The branding is so unknown or skewed in a bad manner that the general consumer would compare an AMD processor to a KIA car, and Intel to a Mercedes - it makes them feel "special" to have the Intel sticker on that product. By the way, I drive a Kia Soul, best 250 dollar car monthly payment I've ever spent, and the Warranty can't be touched
I have had to tell preach to people and convince them that AMD is better in certain segments, such as the brazos vs atom, and the Phenom x4 vs a Core i3.
Screw Tv Commercials, get your sticker and brand placed in TV and Movies so the general public can see it and drink the Koolaid. They want to feel "good" about their brands. Its working very well for Apple products.
InternationalHat
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Messages
- 1,481
I still disagree completely. Brand recognition becomes increasingly more important on products that people have a small knowledge about how they work.
Most consumers do not care how a computer works, or even whats inside. Yes, they care about more Ram, HD, and even larger and bigger product numbers (Nvidia renames their same product all the time for example and its "better" in many consumer's minds). Many people will make a buying decision without asking someone who actually knows... they aren't always going to have an enthusiast around to get a good concrete answer.
Just go into a box store, and ask the employees which machine is better (even when AMD had the performance crown) and they will tell you Intel 90% of the time. Most people will believe what the salesperson says. When it comes to computers and laptops, Intel is well know as the processor that is fast and works best, and AMD is either unknown or known to be slower regardless of the current situation. This is important for OEM sales, where AMD gets much more sales compared to enthusiast small percentage from enthusiast purchases.
JF-AMD said earlier that people don't care about the engine of a car, they just want it to work. However, i disagree when it comes to computers because right on the tower or laptop it says Intel and they know that means good, and if it says AMD, they really have no idea what it means.
The branding is so unknown or skewed in a bad manner that the general consumer would compare an AMD processor to a KIA car, and Intel to a Mercedes - it makes them feel "special" to have the Intel sticker on that product. By the way, I drive a Kia Soul, best 250 dollar car monthly payment I've ever spent, and the Warranty can't be touched
I have had to tell preach to people and convince them that AMD is better in certain segments, such as the brazos vs atom, and the Phenom x4 vs a Core i3.
Screw Tv Commercials, get your sticker and brand placed in TV and Movies so the general public can see it and drink the Koolaid. They want to feel "good" about their brands. Its working very well for Apple products.
Ugh, nasty. This is just a giant pile of consumerism and the results of "lifestyle branding" on the psyche. Apple is absolutely the worst about this and that's why there's a serious negative reaction to their brand.
Do you really want to buy products from a brand that's trying to sell you a lifestyle and inject themselves in your daily life. Do you want to identify as an Apple, Coca-Cola, Intel, Chevy, whatever person? Is that really what you want to define you?
I'd much rather AMD and the other chipmakers stick to not marketing aggressively. Advertising is basically overhead that you're paying for when you buy their products. They get enough press from reviews etc.
I would contend that apple is the only serious technology brand from a marketing perspective. Anyone would love to have that brand.
The big question is would you rather have your vendor spend a million on advertising or a million on more engineering that gets you more features.
But you only get one, not a part of either.
The big question is would you rather have your vendor spend a million on advertising or a million on more engineering that gets you more features.
But you only get one, not a part of either.
AMD seems to spend a million on engineering yet nothing competitive comes out. Phenom II can barely keep up with 3 year old Bloomfield (yes, that's Nehalem); Lynnfield beats it hands-down any way you take it. That's quite sad when it's only faster than Core 2, and *maybe* a bit than Nehalem in *a couple* workloads (anything which can use the 6 cores efficiently); vs. Sandy Bridge it's not even funny.
On the server market Magny Cours is quite competitive, especially in HPC or virtualization, but SB-E is about to steal both of those cakes (quad channel for a crapload of memory, lots of cores to do work... and they're MUCH better cores). Bulldozer better be goddamn good or AMD's arse is gonna be kicked really hard.
I don't. I get whatever is the best price per performance. That's why I have a core2duo in one box, a phenom x3 (unlocked) in another box, an Apple Ipod, LG Optimus S cell phone, and a HP Touchpad (for 130 bux
) However, I would contend that more people do define themselves by brands and their status that comes along with them.Many of my friends laugh I bought a Kia, however, I'm 37000 miles in and still have a warranty for 23000 more miles - and I think it is a great car.
Anyhow, in reference to JF-AMD asking about 1 million for Engineering or advertising - from a tech standpoint I want faster and better products so I can tweak and have fun with them. However, it is my opinion that perception matters to the average retail consumer.
Lynnfield does not beat it hands down. I had a p55 setup, so I know this for a fact. Lynnfield did produce some great overclockers that smash Sandy Bridge percentage wise.
i don't think most people give a crap either way.
joe 6pack just buys the cheapest one that can surf the internet. usually that means AMD systems.
Most people are not power users.
Does anyone have any AMD sales data from the Athlon days when AMD kicked the p4's ass ? Didn't intel still outsell AMD even though the athlon was the better cpu ?
Gigantopithecus
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2009
- Messages
- 1,722
Yeah, that 3 to 1 ratio sounds right. Thing is consumers don't spend time researching products past 'does it work?' They wouldn't even know how to do more diligent research. They don't usually make the wisest decision even if you put the data in their faces and give them the correct interpretation.
Yes it does. Performance vs 1100T is close in multithreaded software, but Lynnfield uses... a LOT less power. 95W CPU vs 125W (unless you pay out of your ass for 95W 1075T, assuming you can find it), plus the extinct northbridge.
Pieter3dnow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,784
You can go head to head and AMD will never be able to beat Intel , want to also list the funds in all those years then wonder why it is like this ?
There is so much of these kinds of things flying around , supposedly soonish well know more.
MacLeod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 8,301
So marketing doesnt matter because 80% of people that buy computers/laptops/netbooks, dont even know what processor is in them.
That just doesnt sound right to me. Intel is advertising all over the place with their commercials. I say that DOES matter, most of all to the "processor unaware".
People like my wife and sister dont have a clue what is good but they think Bose is a good brand because theyve seen them on TV but Klipsch must be a cheaper brand cause theyve never heard of them.
Same with computers. My wife or John Q Everyman walks into a Best Buy to pick up a laptop and they see INTEL INSIDE theyre gonna think thats a brand name cause Ive seen it on tv!
I say that brand recognition from marketing is more important to the clueless consumer than it is the those of us here at [H] who can quote benchmarks from memory.
I also say that performance still matters even if enthusiasts are a lowly 5-10% of sales and dont matter. I guarantee you that before somebody plunks down $600 for a laptop, there are a lot of them that arent above browsing a website or two. Only takes a Google search to compare one laptop to another on a site like [H] or even CNET and see the "Intel is 25% faster than the AMD" and when they get to Best Buy, itll be the one with the INTEL INSIDE sticker on the front that they are likely gonna buy.
That wasnt so much an issue with Nehalem first came out cause they were all $300 and up so the $150 Phenom's could cough up 75% of the performance for 50% of the price and it was alright. But now youve got the $125 i3 matching or beating the $200 Phenom X6 in a lot of benchmarks and the equally priced i5 literally shredding it, so the advantage of price difference isnt there anymore.
That just doesnt sound right to me. Intel is advertising all over the place with their commercials. I say that DOES matter, most of all to the "processor unaware".
People like my wife and sister dont have a clue what is good but they think Bose is a good brand because theyve seen them on TV but Klipsch must be a cheaper brand cause theyve never heard of them.
Same with computers. My wife or John Q Everyman walks into a Best Buy to pick up a laptop and they see INTEL INSIDE theyre gonna think thats a brand name cause Ive seen it on tv!
I say that brand recognition from marketing is more important to the clueless consumer than it is the those of us here at [H] who can quote benchmarks from memory.
I also say that performance still matters even if enthusiasts are a lowly 5-10% of sales and dont matter. I guarantee you that before somebody plunks down $600 for a laptop, there are a lot of them that arent above browsing a website or two. Only takes a Google search to compare one laptop to another on a site like [H] or even CNET and see the "Intel is 25% faster than the AMD" and when they get to Best Buy, itll be the one with the INTEL INSIDE sticker on the front that they are likely gonna buy.
That wasnt so much an issue with Nehalem first came out cause they were all $300 and up so the $150 Phenom's could cough up 75% of the performance for 50% of the price and it was alright. But now youve got the $125 i3 matching or beating the $200 Phenom X6 in a lot of benchmarks and the equally priced i5 literally shredding it, so the advantage of price difference isnt there anymore.
Hedghawg71
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2010
- Messages
- 193
How about pushed back to September 19th?
http://www.hkepc.com/6810/page/1#view
Translation for you non-Chinese readin' mofos... J/K
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...MD-Bulldozer-to-be-launched-in-19th-September
http://www.hkepc.com/6810/page/1#view
Translation for you non-Chinese readin' mofos...
J/Khttp://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...MD-Bulldozer-to-be-launched-in-19th-September
BababooeyHTJ
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2009
- Messages
- 6,951
Yeah and when October comes around its going to be pushed back to November just like it has for the past three or four months.
MACK-ATTACK
n00b
- Joined
- May 2, 2011
- Messages
- 13
A+A+A+A+ You nailed it on the head!!! Of course AMD will never come in here and admit to what you just said. Why would they? Instead they will just continue with the same old story how advertising dosnt matter, while continuing to talk about how the "processor unaware" are the majority of consumers and dont care about brand?.... WHAT!?!? why the heck wouldnt they make them aware???? It dosnt take a million dollar a year sallary and a new CEO to figure it out. Just look around its all about consumerism, advertising!!! And Intel has "bodyslamed " there image into our brains over and over!!! So that when those supposed "proccesor unaware" go into best buy for a computer all they know is intel!!
There is a reason amd has less then 20% of the cpu market, and I think what i just ranted about is one of them...
Like everybody is saying BD better be worth it... I believe this is the final straw for alot of amd fans. ME included.
Last edited:
Do you know how much money it takes to run a successful advertising campaign?
It IS NOT as easy as saying "advertise more". It may be that AMD just doesn't have as much money an Intel does to devote to advertising.
I noticed that a lot of people on this forum do not think in terms of corporate budgetary constraints/capital investment. If anyone here thinks they can do a better job than AMD's current marketing department, then apply for a job, and 'show them how it's done'.
It all goes back to capital, AMD has ~20% of the market because they do not have the capital it would take to get up to 50%. Does anyone here realize how much money Intel has spent (mostly on fabrication related machinery) in just the last 10 years?
AMD could market to everyone on the Earth, every second of every day, but if they physically can't push out enough products to compete with Intel, then the advertising point becomes moot.
Like everybody is saying BD better be worth it... I believe this is the final straw for alot of amd fans. ME included.
I remember some of those so-called 'AMD fans' saying things like this before...
CaptNumbNutz
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,134
Thank you. That's exactly the point I was trying to drive home.
AMD needs to seriously do some TV advertising. They don't even have to advertise their flagships. Just get something out there regarding the APU's, or show how they provide the more "complete" solution and heavily emphasize the multimedia usage that all people do in their daily live's. They just need something, anything, just to get their brand recognition up.
You have to spend money to make money.
That may be true, but they are heavily intertwined. Enough so that average joe that is not the head of marketing at a corporation would consider the 2 words interchangeable depending on the context. Even a common thesaurus will tell you that "to market" is "to advertise".You answered your own question. It became a monumental fuckup when they had to fork out millions to replace the parts, affecting their bottom line. It may not have been a monumental fuckup from the public's eyes, but I am sure the Intel bean counters considered it a monumental fuckup.
Last edited:
Hmm... who do you think buys more CPUs, consumers or business? I don't know, I could see cases either way. There are a lot of markets where the "seems" to be a big consumer market, but ultimately it's business that determines (and is the largest customer) trends.
I know the years when AMD was dominant, every enthusiast I knew had AMD rigs. Until nearly Core 2 (and only because I got one for free), every system I had since a Celeron 533 was an AMD. However, every business I had been at (and every one since) had Intel-based desktops. Every workstation.
I know a lot of the video editing crowd stuck with Intel as well during the AMD years.
I'm sure that business workstation market drives a big chunk of sales, and they go with what they know (advertising or not), which is Intel.
I think the server market probably has a lot higher AMD penetration, but I really doubt very many workstations out there have AMD power.
I know the years when AMD was dominant, every enthusiast I knew had AMD rigs. Until nearly Core 2 (and only because I got one for free), every system I had since a Celeron 533 was an AMD. However, every business I had been at (and every one since) had Intel-based desktops. Every workstation.
I know a lot of the video editing crowd stuck with Intel as well during the AMD years.
I'm sure that business workstation market drives a big chunk of sales, and they go with what they know (advertising or not), which is Intel.
I think the server market probably has a lot higher AMD penetration, but I really doubt very many workstations out there have AMD power.
MACK-ATTACK
n00b
- Joined
- May 2, 2011
- Messages
- 13
Well either way AMD doesn't do much of either from what iv seen.
Also, you would think that a company would need both business techniques to be competitive?? while Amd might have somewhat decent marketing, consumers wont know about it if they are not advertising it???
wikipedia states the following:
Marketing is the process used to determine what products or services may be of interest to customers, and the strategy to use in sales, communications and business development.[
W
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing
Advertising is a form of communication used to persuade an audience (viewers, readers or listeners) to take some action with respect to products, ideas, or services. Most commonly, the desired result is to drive consumer behavior with respect to a commercial offering, although political and ideological advertising is also common.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising
Also, you would think that a company would need both business techniques to be competitive?? while Amd might have somewhat decent marketing, consumers wont know about it if they are not advertising it???
wikipedia states the following:
Marketing is the process used to determine what products or services may be of interest to customers, and the strategy to use in sales, communications and business development.[
W
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing
Advertising is a form of communication used to persuade an audience (viewers, readers or listeners) to take some action with respect to products, ideas, or services. Most commonly, the desired result is to drive consumer behavior with respect to a commercial offering, although political and ideological advertising is also common.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising
Last edited:
MACK-ATTACK
n00b
- Joined
- May 2, 2011
- Messages
- 13
Yeah, where I work (local hospital) there is only intel...some of my colleges have never even heard of AMD. Again, all they know is Intel.....because.... of advertising.
MACK-ATTACK
n00b
- Joined
- May 2, 2011
- Messages
- 13
I acutally have never owned an intel processor... And yes I was and hopfully will still be a AMD fan but eventually enough is enough... You can go on with your excuses and try to defend a company, but the fact of the matter is that I have never seen an AMD commercial... never.... That speaks volumes to me and the majorty of the "cpu unaware"consumers...
I dont excpect AMD to match intels advertising but atleast show the world that your alive??
You have to spend money to make money.
While you have to spend money to make money, you have to remember that in the x86 CPU market, Intel can spend 10X or more money than AMD and Via combined. It is hard to increase expenditures when profits are miniscule (compared to revenue).
If, back during the K7/early K8 days, AMD had the capital available to build as many or more fabs than what Intel had at the time, they would probably be 50/50...
TV advertising has potentially the worst ROI of any media if you are trying to sell processors.