Whats happened to AMD?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BoogerBomb

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 10, 2003
Messages
6,470
Just saw that AM2 sockets will take AM3 cpu's but AM3 sockets wont take AM2 cpu's? In the past AMD used to care about compatibility from cpu to cpu, but now it seems as though they want to be like Intel and reduce compatibility as much as possible to force you to buy a new cpu.

AMD cpu's used to be affordable but now they cost almost as much and most of the time even more than Intel cpu's. They refuse to give up on the antique K8 architechture just like Intel refused to give up on Net-Burst and the Pentium architechture for so long.

SocketA lasted a good while for several CPU revisions. Now it seems as though everytime they release a new cpu they change the socket reverting to Intel tactics.

Cpu advances are usually nothing more than mild speed bumps with a new technology that wont be useful for at least 5 years if that soon. Dual core has very few if any advantages it seems at the moment and it could be years before programs actually make use of it.

If the result of an on-die memory controller means plunking down $500 - $1000 for each CPU upgrade for cpu and motherboard then to me it isnt worth it.

AMD should look at its recent results and realize that their customers can see that AMD has slipped into mediocrity and think they have made it to the level of Intel which they have not in my opinion.

I have always had AMD cpu's for their compatibility, performance, and price but lately they seem to not have advantages in any of them categories especially with the new Intels coming out. Does AMD even have a cpu in sight to compete with what Intel has coming? Or will it be 2 years before they do because they sat on their asses thinking all they had to do were slight changes here and there with 1 or 200 more Mhz's added? Once again from what I can tell K8L is just a rehashed K8 core once again. Will they EVER give it up?

As much as it hurts me to say it as much as I love AMD....Intel here I come.
 
They have to change sockets because of the memory controller on the chip. With AM2 and AM3, AM3 will fit inside the AM2 socket, so they definately do care about giving customers what they want by going out of their way to engineer that.

AM2 chips have a DDR2 memory controller. AM3 boards will have DDR3 slots. How are they supposed to make that work?
 
I bought the skt 939 about 8 months ago thinking its futureproof but things changed and i have lost my hope with amd.

I wish at the time i got a cheap skt775 board and good ddr2 modules.

But i guess thats life and you can never predict things like that. At least this way i can go quad core when that comes out and ddr3 , hopefully i will not have to touch ddr2 modules , every other day i have to keep on telling myself this. :(
 
When you upgrade to AM2 they will abandon it a short time later for AM3. Its getting too expensive to upgrade nowadays.
 
robberbaron said:
They have to change sockets because of the memory controller on the chip. With AM2 and AM3, AM3 will fit inside the AM2 socket, so they definately do care about giving customers what they want by going out of their way to engineer that.

AM2 chips have a DDR2 memory controller. AM3 boards will have DDR3 slots. How are they supposed to make that work?
Click to expand...

QFT
 
It is my understanding that AM2 only supports DDR2, whereas AM3 will support DDR2 and DDR3. AM3 boards will use DDR3, whilst AM2 boards will continue to use DDR2. Therefor, the AM3 chip will work in AM2 socket because it can use DDR2. AM2 however, does not have a memory controller capable of DDR3, therefor will not work in an AM3 socket.


Why does it matter anyways? Is there any reason to buy an AM3 mobo when it hits, and then not get an AM3 chip? The way it is works fine. Users who want to upgrade to AM3 can do so without getting a new motherboard and ram if they are on AM2, or if there on an older socket theny can get an AM3 chip, mobo, and DDR3. Looks like your just ranting for the sake of ranting. Give me a good reason why AM3 should support AM2.
 
Dual core has very few if any advantages it seems at the moment and it could be years before programs actually make use of it.
Click to expand...

You obviously dont do anything cpu intensive.

You know dual core is great for servers?

just because it isnt good for gaming doesnt mean it has no use.


programs have been making use of dual processors since god knows how long! back in 486 days.
 
Socket A lasted a while, the motherboards did not. If you tried to keep on the bleeding edge of Athlon/AthlonXP CPUs, you'd probably have bought 3 or 4 Socket A boards as well.
The simple fact is neither AMD nor Intel have had any type of 'socket' stability over the last 6 or 7 years. You basically got lucky AMD could keep power dissipation low enough with the X2s to keep them on the early 939 boards, and that's the only time you've had any type of major CPU upgrade on a single board.

Motherboards are cheap, go ahead and try to have the rest of the system keep up with the CPUs as far as I'm concerned. Don't like it, enjoy Socket 7.
 
BoogerBomb said:
When you upgrade to AM2 they will abandon it a short time later for AM3. Its getting too expensive to upgrade nowadays.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is what I said when I spent $600 on VoodooII SLI.....
 
They started making better chips and got more market share.

And yes, the OP is pretty correct. You used to be able to buy an athlon for $50 or lower, and durons were around $20. Those were the days...
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
wow, the OP is so wrong... i dont even know where to begin....
Click to expand...


Yeah, this thread is not based in reality. It will now be closed. If you feel the need to address this issue again, lets please do a little more research. Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top