AMD to launch Athlon 64 X2 6400+

[QUOTE="Pdiddy105"][QUOTE="D9-THC"][QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"][QUOTE="D9-THC"]

AMD will change their strategy before they go bankrupt.

They're already giving up on being the "best and fastest."

They're almost starting to take a Wii approach of "we know we're not the fastest, but for the price you can't beat it." I would expect them corner to the "bargain" market. Just look at what they did with ATi and the 2900...

D9-THC

The wii approach has nothing to do with this! They want the no gamers to be casual gamers.

And from what i've seen, Nvidia has better middle-range cards then ati. I was expecting way more of the 2900 when it was hyped back then. And where's the 2900xtx version?

The Wii appeals to more people because of its lower price tag. That the comparison I was trying to draw. They don't try to hide the fact that their hardware is less powerful.

you defend the wii yet your sig states the xbox is endangering the future of gaming? ironic...

I defended the Wii?

It is a fact, not an opinion, that the Wii sells better than any other console and one of the main reasons is the price.

AMD and ATI are aware that there is a section of the market that looks for bargains and they attempt to appeal to that section of the market...people who want to game on the cheap.

Yes this section is called mid-range hardware... have you noticed it? it's been around from the start.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2889&p=8

Note : I never said a word about it running cooler.Bebi_vegeta

BTW- that is their first 65nm chip, their 65nm PP has matured pretty quickly noticing all the EE chips they are now churning out. AnandTech.com needs to try OCing these newer chips.

Counting AMD out would be very shortsighted. Allow them to release their new chips before these ridiculous claims. Before C2D, they were dominant on the high end for quite some time. The lead position flip flops all the time and regardless of the champ for a mere 6 months may be, the consumer always wins. Phabiuo3

AMD is not going down. I find it funny that one corporation reports a loss one quater and people say they are doomed. Why don't we go into their finacial statements and see exactly what made them lose so much? Was it research or was it do to people not purchasing their products? As I recall people are still purchasing their products even though they aren't the top and it is mainly do to the price. As for ATI, so what if they screwed up the 2xxx series. Nvidia did it in the past and came back, who the hell says ATI can't do the same? And saying "Nvidia has better engineers" is pretty biased as you have no proof to back the statement. I mean have they done a contest to compare who engineers are better? No? Guess we don't have proof then.Cdscottie

Nvidia had more money when they failed whit 5 series and they also have better engineers than ATi, which were able to return Nvidia in game whit superb 6 series cards. I doubt that ATi has this ability.

Counting AMD out would be very shortsighted. Allow them to release their new chips before these ridiculous claims. Before C2D, they were dominant on the high end for quite some time. The lead position flip flops all the time and regardless of the champ for a mere 6 months may be, the consumer always wins. Phabiuo3

They made less money than Intel when they were dominatingmarket, and Intel was way behind them, and still made much more money than AMD. Hell Intel made more profit whit P4 and their line of procesors taht time than AMD whit A64.

I just read the news and man, things are looking bad for AMD. Their Phenomen release is set for 1Q of 2008. Desktop processors while Barcelona should come out before for servers. They probably have big problems whit performance of Phenomen and thats why its getting delayed. domke13

[QUOTE="domke13"]I just read the news and man, things are looking bad for AMD. Their Phenomen release is set for 1Q of 2008. Desktop processors while Barcelona should come out before for servers. They probably have big problems whit performance of Phenomen and thats why its getting delayed. yoyo462001

When is penryn planning to be released??? I think its suposed to be out this year.

[QUOTE="yoyo462001"][QUOTE="domke13"]I just read the news and man, things are looking bad for AMD. Their Phenomen release is set for 1Q of 2008. Desktop processors while Barcelona should come out before for servers. They probably have big problems whit performance of Phenomen and thats why its getting delayed. domke13

When is penryn planning to be released??? I think its suposed to be out this year.

Yes this section is called mid-range hardware... have you noticed it? it's been around from the start.

Bebi_vegeta

Yes but the 8 series videocards brought gaming to a whole new level of expense. Of course there has always been mid-range hardware but the difference in price has traditionally been in the 20 to 50 dollar range. Can't afford the best? Get the 2nd best for 50 bucks cheaper.

As Nvidia/Intel push the performance peak, AMD/ATI push the performance for the price peak.

Now we see differences as much as $400 between the "best" videocard and the "2nd best." The mid-range hardware market is becoming bigger because of the huge games coming out for PC that appeal to console gamers. They want to be able to game but don't want to pay $1500 for a gaming rig. So they go with AMD/ATI...

To think that the significance of mid-range hardware in the future will be miniscule is just naive. It's likely to become (if it hasn't already) the"most bought" section of the market. AMD has a strong future even if they aren't the best.

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

Yes this section is called mid-range hardware... have you noticed it? it's been around from the start.

D9-THC

Yes but the 8 series videocards brought gaming to a whole new level of expense. Of course there has always been mid-range hardware but the difference in price has traditionally been in the 20 to 50 dollar range. Can't afford the best? Get the 2nd best for 50 bucks cheaper.

As Nvidia/Intel push the performance peak, AMD/ATI push the performance for the price peak.

Now we see differences as much as $400 between the "best" videocard and the "2nd best." The mid-range hardware market is becoming bigger because of the huge games coming out for PC that appeal to console gamers. They want to be able to game but don't want to pay $1500 for a gaming rig. So they go with AMD/ATI...

To think that the significance of mid-range hardware in the future will be miniscule is just naive. It's likely to become (if it hasn't already) the"most bought" section of the market. AMD has a strong future even if they aren't the best.

What? That's what i said from the begining!!!!! Mid-range card has been existing since a long time ago! Mid-range card has always been the big market!!!

If you don't have enough money to go with this generation of cards you can go with the one before it. They still performe very well. Nvidia as won last year mid-range card and won this year mid-range card as well.

If you would be geting a new computer today for 1000 dollars or less and you want to play games... i would go with intel/nvidia combo...

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2889&p=8

Note : I never said a word about it running cooler.LordEC911

BTW- that is their first 65nm chip, their 65nm PP has matured pretty quickly noticing all the EE chips they are now churning out. AnandTech.com needs to try OCing these newer chips.

I would like to see this aswell... but why don't you tell me why the 6000+ and 6400+ are on 90nm then?

[QUOTE="LordEC911"][QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2889&p=8

Note : I never said a word about it running cooler.Bebi_vegeta

BTW- that is their first 65nm chip, their 65nm PP has matured pretty quickly noticing all the EE chips they are now churning out. AnandTech.com needs to try OCing these newer chips.

I would like to see this aswell... but why don't you tell me why the 6000+ and 6400+ are on 90nm then?

Most likely that the (AMD's not Intels or rather) 65nm process does not scale well with clock speeds/voltages. Other reasons could be that the transistor gates are too thick and limit current (there by clock speeds go down) especially when at 2.8GHz+, or that the transistor gates are too thin and there's too much leakage with the voltages needed to reach 3GHz.

Honestly, AMD only know the real answer, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that AMD has just gotten used to the 65nm process.

[QUOTE="Cdscottie"]AMD is not going down. I find it funny that one corporation reports a loss one quater and people say they are doomed. Why don't we go into their finacial statements and see exactly what made them lose so much? Was it research or was it do to people not purchasing their products? As I recall people are still purchasing their products even though they aren't the top and it is mainly do to the price. As for ATI, so what if they screwed up the 2xxx series. Nvidia did it in the past and came back, who the hell says ATI can't do the same? And saying "Nvidia has better engineers" is pretty biased as you have no proof to back the statement. I mean have they done a contest to compare who engineers are better? No? Guess we don't have proof then.domke13

Nvidia had more money when they failed whit 5 series and they also have better engineers than ATi, which were able to return Nvidia in game whit superb 6 series cards. I doubt that ATi has this ability.

I'm sorry, but that's a laugh.

The so called genius engineers designed the pathetic FX series and the monkey driver teams optimised the living hell out of drivers for stuff like 3DMark (game performance was still rubbish).

Also, ATi has always been ahead in architecture, IMO. The FX was a POS and anything could beat that, the 6 series was actually really good for NVIDIA (especially the inclusion of SM3.0) but it was eventually outperformed by the X850, then the 7 series faced a constant uphill battle against ATi's X1K series starting with the X1800 XT, X1900 XTX and the unbeatable X1950 XTX. Perhaps the tables have turned for NVIDIA and ATi with the HD 2000 and 8 series... Will G80 outperform R600 in DX10 games? We'll just have to see.

Also, my monkey comment at NVIDIA's driver team for fooling consumers into thinking that the FX was worth their time is kinda of unfair. ATi almost all the time had superior cards on their hands, yet their driver team have had a lot of struggles in writing good drivers (both for benchmark optimisation and in game performance) but that didn't stop the cards from outperforming the NVIDIA equivalent.

As for my take on the X2 6400+: It's Prescott all over again, but on AMD's hands.

The thing has a TDP that could be higher than 125w! That's nearly the same as the 3GHz Core 2 Extreme QX6850!

[QUOTE="domke13"]

[QUOTE="Cdscottie"]AMD is not going down. I find it funny that one corporation reports a loss one quater and people say they are doomed. Why don't we go into their finacial statements and see exactly what made them lose so much? Was it research or was it do to people not purchasing their products? As I recall people are still purchasing their products even though they aren't the top and it is mainly do to the price. As for ATI, so what if they screwed up the 2xxx series. Nvidia did it in the past and came back, who the hell says ATI can't do the same? And saying "Nvidia has better engineers" is pretty biased as you have no proof to back the statement. I mean have they done a contest to compare who engineers are better? No? Guess we don't have proof then.Wesker776

Nvidia had more money when they failed whit 5 series and they also have better engineers than ATi, which were able to return Nvidia in game whit superb 6 series cards. I doubt that ATi has this ability.

I'm sorry, but that's a laugh.

The so called genius engineers designed the pathetic FX series and the monkey driver teams optimised the living hell out of drivers for stuff like 3DMark (game performance was still rubbish).

Also, ATi has always been ahead in architecture, IMO. The FX was a POS and anything could beat that, the 6 series was actually really good for NVIDIA (especially the inclusion of SM3.0) but it was eventually outperformed by the X850, then the 7 series faced a constant uphill battle against ATi's X1K series starting with the X1800 XT, X1900 XTX and the unbeatable X1950 XTX. Perhaps the tables have turned for NVIDIA and ATi with the HD 2000 and 8 series... Will G80 outperform R600 in DX10 games? We'll just have to see.

Also, my monkey comment at NVIDIA's driver team for fooling consumers into thinking that the FX was worth their time is kinda of unfair. ATi almost all the time had superior cards on their hands, yet their driver team have had a lot of struggles in writing good drivers (both for benchmark optimisation and in game performance) but that didn't stop the cards from outperforming the NVIDIA equivalent.

I must dissagree whit you but IMO Nvidia has better engineers. Yes they made POS whit FX series, they lost much money, and still they were able to come back whit great 6 series. It takes some world class engineers to made such a great chip after such a flop as FX was. And X1950XTX was the fastest single card, but 7950GX2 outperformed it, despite being soo loud and using so much power. ATi always made fastest cards of current gen, when nvidia was already making another chip.

I would like to see this aswell... but why don't you tell me why the 6000+ and 6400+ are on 90nm then?Bebi_vegeta

Business purposes.
I found a really nice post on this earlier that explains their exact reasoning, I couldn't have said it any better myself.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2325340&postcount=52

I must dissagree whit you but IMO Nvidia has better engineers. Yes they made POS whit FX series, they lost much money, and still they were able to come back whit great 6 series. It takes some world ****engineers to made such a great chip after such a flop as FX was. And X1950XTX was the fastest single card, but 7950GX2 outperformed it, despite being soo loud and using so much power. ATi always made fastest cards of current gen, when nvidia was already making another chip.

It's not that much of a miracle to come back from a POS architecture--just look at Intel or any other company that didn't do so well in a previous product cycle.

The 6 series was good, but as I said, it lost to the X100 series.

Meanwhile, the X1K cards were leaps and bounds better than any of the 7 series cards. NVIDIA had to make SLi on a stick to compete with a single card from ATi! What's more embarrasing is that 7950 GX2 SLi (aka quad SLI) actually lowered performance in some cases to a single 7950 GX2, and two X1950 XTXs in CrossFire just humiliated NVIDIA (yet, many went with GX2 SLI because of the 'Quad' jingle).

Then again, I guess NVIDIA can celebrate as the G80 turned out to be a hit and still hold the performance crown from ATi (at least in DX9, anyways).

[QUOTE="LikkleLee"]nah, i doubt they will get bankruptdomke13

If phenomen fails, than most likely yes.

amd is much stronger now than it was during the athlon xp days. one thing intel lost that I dought it will ever get back is oem exclusives. hp didn't used to use amd chip nor did dell, asus, compaq toshiba etc etc, basicly ever oem has amd options now and that's where all the money is so while amd has those it wont go bankrupt.

[QUOTE="D9-THC"][QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"][QUOTE="D9-THC"]

AMD will change their strategy before they go bankrupt.

They're already giving up on being the "best and fastest."

They're almost starting to take a Wii approach of "we know we're not the fastest, but for the price you can't beat it." I would expect them corner to the "bargain" market. Just look at what they did with ATi and the 2900...

Bebi_vegeta

The wii approach has nothing to do with this! They want the no gamers to be casual gamers.

And from what i've seen, Nvidia has better middle-range cards then ati. I was expecting way more of the 2900 when it was hyped back then. And where's the 2900xtx version?

The Wii appeals to more people because of its lower price tag. That the comparison I was trying to draw. They don't try to hide the fact that their hardware is less powerful.

Uhhh, you need power to run PC games... I ain't buying a PC to have a wii graphics.

The wii appeals to more because of the low price and the family games. The price might be low, but if you don't have games that go with it... nobody will buy it. The Wii headed in a different direction with there controlers.

and what game need more than a pentium d to run max?

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"][QUOTE="D9-THC"][QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"][QUOTE="D9-THC"]

AMD will change their strategy before they go bankrupt.

They're already giving up on being the "best and fastest."

They're almost starting to take a Wii approach of "we know we're not the fastest, but for the price you can't beat it." I would expect them corner to the "bargain" market. Just look at what they did with ATi and the 2900...

imprezawrx500

The wii approach has nothing to do with this! They want the no gamers to be casual gamers.

And from what i've seen, Nvidia has better middle-range cards then ati. I was expecting way more of the 2900 when it was hyped back then. And where's the 2900xtx version?

The Wii appeals to more people because of its lower price tag. That the comparison I was trying to draw. They don't try to hide the fact that their hardware is less powerful.

Uhhh, you need power to run PC games... I ain't buying a PC to have a wii graphics.

The wii appeals to more because of the low price and the family games. The price might be low, but if you don't have games that go with it... nobody will buy it. The Wii headed in a different direction with there controlers.

and what game need more than a pentium d to run max?

Quite a lot actually, at least if you're talking about maxing the game without a significant CPU bottleneck..

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]I would like to see this aswell... but why don't you tell me why the 6000+ and 6400+ are on 90nm then?LordEC911

Business purposes.
I found a really nice post on this earlier that explains their exact reasoning, I couldn't have said it any better myself.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2325340&postcount=52

That's what i taught... but it's still just a good guess.

That's what i taught... but it's still just a good guess.Bebi_vegeta

Not a guess, that is logic.

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]That's what i taught... but it's still just a good guess.LordEC911

Not a guess, that is logic.

Logic is = too a good guess... no?

I mean without proof you have what?

[QUOTE="Wesker776"][QUOTE="domke13"]

[QUOTE="Cdscottie"]AMD is not going down. I find it funny that one corporation reports a loss one quater and people say they are doomed. Why don't we go into their finacial statements and see exactly what made them lose so much? Was it research or was it do to people not purchasing their products? As I recall people are still purchasing their products even though they aren't the top and it is mainly do to the price. As for ATI, so what if they screwed up the 2xxx series. Nvidia did it in the past and came back, who the hell says ATI can't do the same? And saying "Nvidia has better engineers" is pretty biased as you have no proof to back the statement. I mean have they done a contest to compare who engineers are better? No? Guess we don't have proof then.domke13

Nvidia had more money when they failed whit 5 series and they also have better engineers than ATi, which were able to return Nvidia in game whit superb 6 series cards. I doubt that ATi has this ability.

I'm sorry, but that's a laugh.

The so called genius engineers designed the pathetic FX series and the monkey driver teams optimised the living hell out of drivers for stuff like 3DMark (game performance was still rubbish).

Also, ATi has always been ahead in architecture, IMO. The FX was a POS and anything could beat that, the 6 series was actually really good for NVIDIA (especially the inclusion of SM3.0) but it was eventually outperformed by the X850, then the 7 series faced a constant uphill battle against ATi's X1K series starting with the X1800 XT, X1900 XTX and the unbeatable X1950 XTX. Perhaps the tables have turned for NVIDIA and ATi with the HD 2000 and 8 series... Will G80 outperform R600 in DX10 games? We'll just have to see.

Also, my monkey comment at NVIDIA's driver team for fooling consumers into thinking that the FX was worth their time is kinda of unfair. ATi almost all the time had superior cards on their hands, yet their driver team have had a lot of struggles in writing good drivers (both for benchmark optimisation and in game performance) but that didn't stop the cards from outperforming the NVIDIA equivalent.

I must dissagree whit you but IMO Nvidia has better engineers. Yes they made POS whit FX series, they lost much money, and still they were able to come back whit great 6 series. It takes some world class engineers to made such a great chip after such a flop as FX was. And X1950XTX was the fastest single card, but 7950GX2 outperformed it, despite being soo loud and using so much power. ATi always made fastest cards of current gen, when nvidia was already making another chip.

You know, I have never read many of your posts before but I think I can safely say you have ventured into the realm of the fanboy. Nvidia has finally come back to trump ATI and I'm glad. We need bloody competition to get the better products out faster and at better quality. We are still waiting to see the full effects of the DX10 games hitting both architechures. ATI could pull ahead or fall flat on it's face and guess what? Who cares? As for the nVidia engineer bulll, just give it up. Companies tend to go through cycles where their products are a massive success and cycles where their products flop. Mac has had this problem, Dell has had this problem, ....wait every company has had this problem. Who would have guessed?

[QUOTE="domke13"][QUOTE="Wesker776"][QUOTE="domke13"]

[QUOTE="Cdscottie"]AMD is not going down. I find it funny that one corporation reports a loss one quater and people say they are doomed. Why don't we go into their finacial statements and see exactly what made them lose so much? Was it research or was it do to people not purchasing their products? As I recall people are still purchasing their products even though they aren't the top and it is mainly do to the price. As for ATI, so what if they screwed up the 2xxx series. Nvidia did it in the past and came back, who the hell says ATI can't do the same? And saying "Nvidia has better engineers" is pretty biased as you have no proof to back the statement. I mean have they done a contest to compare who engineers are better? No? Guess we don't have proof then.Cdscottie

Nvidia had more money when they failed whit 5 series and they also have better engineers than ATi, which were able to return Nvidia in game whit superb 6 series cards. I doubt that ATi has this ability.

I'm sorry, but that's a laugh.

The so called genius engineers designed the pathetic FX series and the monkey driver teams optimised the living hell out of drivers for stuff like 3DMark (game performance was still rubbish).

Also, ATi has always been ahead in architecture, IMO. The FX was a POS and anything could beat that, the 6 series was actually really good for NVIDIA (especially the inclusion of SM3.0) but it was eventually outperformed by the X850, then the 7 series faced a constant uphill battle against ATi's X1K series starting with the X1800 XT, X1900 XTX and the unbeatable X1950 XTX. Perhaps the tables have turned for NVIDIA and ATi with the HD 2000 and 8 series... Will G80 outperform R600 in DX10 games? We'll just have to see.

Also, my monkey comment at NVIDIA's driver team for fooling consumers into thinking that the FX was worth their time is kinda of unfair. ATi almost all the time had superior cards on their hands, yet their driver team have had a lot of struggles in writing good drivers (both for benchmark optimisation and in game performance) but that didn't stop the cards from outperforming the NVIDIA equivalent.

I must dissagree whit you but IMO Nvidia has better engineers. Yes they made POS whit FX series, they lost much money, and still they were able to come back whit great 6 series. It takes some world class engineers to made such a great chip after such a flop as FX was. And X1950XTX was the fastest single card, but 7950GX2 outperformed it, despite being soo loud and using so much power. ATi always made fastest cards of current gen, when nvidia was already making another chip.

You know, I have never read many of your posts before but I think I can safely say you have ventured into the realm of the fanboy. Nvidia has finally come back to trump ATI and I'm glad. We need bloody competition to get the better products out faster and at better quality. We are still waiting to see the full effects of the DX10 games hitting both architechures. ATI could pull ahead or fall flat on it's face and guess what? Who cares? As for the nVidia engineer bulll, just give it up. Companies tend to go through cycles where their products are a massive success and cycles where their products flop. Mac has had this problem, Dell has had this problem, ....wait every company has had this problem. Who would have guessed?

Not all companies had this problem. And i addmit i preffer Nvidia, but i wouldnt call myself fanboy. I wouldnt buy Nvidia card if i can get ATi card that performs better, even if ATI card costs more. I had ATi Radeon 9200 before 8800 GTX since i didnt care about plazing games in low settings before and i just wanted to get cheap card. Since 5000 seris from nvidia ****d i just went for 9200SE.