Why AMD havent succeded

I will give AMD this. They do have a nack for producing good chips for a company with such little cash. But they are not superior to Intel right now. In fact the Penryn will probably sho itself to be better.

The current C2D is not as power effecient as the BarcelonaI would hope not since Barcelona had a years worth of extra time to make it better) but the Penryn will probably close the gap if not beat it especially with the die shrink and the high-k and metal transistor lowering leakage. Both size and leakage determine power consumption and heat dissipation.

So Penryn will be cooler, more effecient and better performance for probably same to less price as a current C2D. Even if AMD rasies the clock it might not do anything since a clock raise will create heat/power consumption and probaly not be able to beat a Penryn.

While AMD may have a native Quad, Itnels non-native Quad still gives the same if not better performance in some areas. ANd the on die memory controler is effecient but in terms of performance has yet to blow away the FSB.

At the current time Intel is moving to 45nm in November and earlt 2008 will have Nahlem and 32nm where as AMD doesn't plan to move to 45nm until mid to late 2008.

Intel also has their 80 core processor to run off and I am sure will use it if they need to boost the server area. They have WiMax coming with Penryn which will expand wireless connections by a lot.

And as for the memory thing, you can currently(DDR2) buy a new mobo and CPU(from a different company) and still use the same memory if the new mobo/CPU supports it. Intel has always pushed the newer memory technology first.

I think Intel has the ball right now and is controling it very well. They are very aggressive and AMD is coming up short in that area. Although a few years from now I can see AMD claiming it was unfair that Intel was this aggressive but thats how the market is.

I totally agree.

I think the glaring difference between Intel and AMD is that Intel shows technologies and releases them ahead of schedual. AMD talks about technologies but releases things months later. Intel is completely smothering AMD in all price segments and it looks like they have failed to surpass Intel by stealing the flagship crown. I have a feeling they will never get back that crown.

Intel is relentless and will use every single tool they have as the title of this article implies. More fabs. More money for R&D. More incentives for 3rd parties to make Intel boxes. Too many arms swinging at AMD.

Even tho AMD has been trying to cut down prices on their AM2 socket Its hurting the company. Pricess are extremely agressive I am not a fan boy of either side just choose performance always. At this point AMD cannot afford to release an expensive project they have been working on (Phenom). Pretty sure core has kept the company closing late at nite Penryn wont let them sleep.

I disagree.

Yes you are right with performance for the money. If you look at Intel core and quad they didnt have to move to another socket. Penrym will also fit on LGA775. Down fall of AMD that even the high end entry (am2 6000+ 3.0ghz) has a huge down fall of heat and power consmer, where If you compare it to intels e6750 witch is only a few more dollars then the 6000+ will give you a leap in performance, power and heat.

Im not sure how Phenom triple core will stand even against intels 65mn x6800....With already plans of clock being lower then 2.6ghz and 2- maybe later 4mb FSB. I am pretty sure Intel can afford of releasing the Processors and at the same time lowering their current generation processor, Intels consuming market can afford it.

I think the problem here is that people expect too much out of AMD.

Just look at the financials of both companies. Seriously! It's nearly impossible to beat a company who's market value eclipses your's. Let alone a company who constantly posts record net profits.

People expect AMD to keep beating Intel as if AMD had the same resources as Intel. The cold hard truth is that it's impossible (minus when Intel makes a stupid decision such as NetBurst). It's like trying to win a marathon against a professional athlete; sure you might go ahead of him at the start of the race, but he'll eventually beat you.

That's not to say they can't compete, however. AMD should keep selling their chips on their own terms. The most obvious strength of AMD is the server market. Their current processors and system bus architecture allows them to scale extremely well for medium to large servers. But even that lead will be diminished by Nehalem (which is why AMD is looking at implementing a highly modular architecture that is cheap to maintain and can cater to different levels of server clients).

I don't have time to explain myself fully now, but I'm basically saying that AMD can compete with Intel, but they can't win against Intel (whether it be quantity sold or revenue from operating activities).

AMD's triple-core processor plan might help Phenom become a winner. Rather than losing a quad-core processor to slightly flawed manufacturing where one core doesn't work, they're just going to re-badge them as triple core and still be able to sell them off. A rather intelligent move if you ask me, and one that has been very successfully employed by GPU companies for years.RayvinAzn

true, but Phenom will also be 45nm (2nd q 08 i think?) so their catching up. Their also working heavely on getting 32nm fabs as fast as possible. think is its not about who can make the smallest die that should say who is behind or not.

One "can" say AMD is in stone age compared to Intel, but tbh id say its the other way around.. AMD produce far superior dies, AMD has had integrated memory controller for years ahead of Intel, AMD went away from the soon obsolete FSB way ahead from Intel. Nahalem will have things AMD has had for many years in its processors.

im not a AMD fanboi, i just hate hearing how far ahead intel is when its only their manufacturing process thats ahead. Intel dies are years behind AMD dies, AMD is catching up to the process manufacturing and Intel is catching up on the architectural advantages AMD has had for years, with their Nahalem.

i dont know who is the winner, AMD is doing bad but imo their further ahead then intel in many many ways, Intel is only ahead of them in die shrinks but clearly AMD do not need die shrinks as often to stay competetive ;)

Intel takes the easy ways, AMD does it propperly. I use the stuff thats good for my gaming and currently its Intel, but after Phenom it might switch, id mutch rather use normal ddr2/3 for the dual socket monsters coming then getting all new expensive ram that will be obsolete when nahalem comes. Intel got SLI for their V8, so its a tough decission. thing most bothering me about AMD is they rather let their company die then put 2 dies on a chip to compete with Intel.. AMD is way to proud of their native dual and quad cores, they dont want to "cheat" and thats what hurting them the most.. i want both to do well = better and cheaper stuff for me ;)

i was thinking about buying a q6600 but i gona hold and see what phenom with it's level 3 cach can do as long as the price is wright

for gaming amd is enogh for encoding and rtsintel is the dog wright now

i was thinking about buying a q6600 but i gona hold and see what phenom with it's level 3 cach can do as long as the price is wright

for gaming amd is enogh for encoding and rtsintel is the dog wright now

Good for us consumers! I sincerely hope that in the next processor development cycle AMD can produce something really good to keep Intel honest and on their toes.

IQT786

to put it in perspective, here are some figures i found interesting.

In 2006 Intel had a profit of US$5 billion

In that same year AMD LOST US$166 million

Intel has 94 000 (!) employees

AMD has only 16 700

and its not like Intel has branches that AMD doesn't, they both essentially do the same things, Intel just on a MUCH larger scale.

to put it in perspective, here are some figures i found interesting.

In 2006 Intel had a profit of US$5 billion

In that same year AMD LOST US$166 million

Intel has 94 000 (!) employees

AMD has only 16 700

and its not like Intel has branches that AMD doesn't, they both essentially do the same things, Intel just on a MUCH larger scale.

kruesader

Yes but even if this was a lost at this point AMD has 4billion$$ in the bank.

Sun Is thinking of buying AMD. If SUN buys AMD, then there would be something truly interesting: A company that makes the processor and the operating system and the graphics.

That would truely give you an alternative to both Apple and Wintel that has the complete support from the bottom up, THIS I would gladly move a complete company infrastructure over too, talk about a solution in a box.

[QUOTE="kruesader"]

to put it in perspective, here are some figures i found interesting.

In 2006 Intel had a profit of US$5 billion

In that same year AMD LOST US$166 million

Intel has 94 000 (!) employees

AMD has only 16 700

and its not like Intel has branches that AMD doesn't, they both essentially do the same things, Intel just on a MUCH larger scale.

pawns186

Yes but even if this was a lost at this point AMD has 4billion$$ in the bank.

Sun Is thinking of buying AMD. If SUN buys AMD, then there would be something truly interesting: A company that makes the processor and the operating system and the graphics.

That would truely give you an alternative to both Apple and Wintel that has the complete support from the bottom up, THIS I would gladly move a complete company infrastructure over too, talk about a solution in a box.

this should = in low cost so cheaper cpu for us

[QUOTE="kruesader"]

to put it in perspective, here are some figures i found interesting.

In 2006 Intel had a profit of US$5 billion

In that same year AMD LOST US$166 million

Intel has 94 000 (!) employees

AMD has only 16 700

and its not like Intel has branches that AMD doesn't, they both essentially do the same things, Intel just on a MUCH larger scale.

pawns186

Yes but even if this was a lost at this point AMD has 4billion$$ in the bank.

Sun Is thinking of buying AMD. If SUN buys AMD, then there would be something truly interesting: A company that makes the processor and the operating system and the graphics.

That would truely give you an alternative to both Apple and Wintel that has the complete support from the bottom up, THIS I would gladly move a complete company infrastructure over too, talk about a solution in a box.

Sun? Who is sun? Operating system? Sun? Huh?
lettuceman44

Sun isn't very well-known in the gaming PC world, but they're a longtime contender in the business world.

[QUOTE="lettuceman44"]Sun? Who is sun? Operating system? Sun? Huh?
RayvinAzn

Sun isn't very well-known in the gaming PC world, but they're a longtime contender in the business world.

whats a well known company that does basically the same thing, i cant work out exactly what Sun are..

[QUOTE="RayvinAzn"]

[QUOTE="lettuceman44"]Sun? Who is sun? Operating system? Sun? Huh?
kruesader

Sun isn't very well-known in the gaming PC world, but they're a longtime contender in the business world.

whats a well known company that does basically the same thing, i cant work out exactly what Sun are..

We know that the competition hasnt started yet. I will like to know In your own opinion what will be about from this upcoming competition. Doesnt only have to tackle desktop also servers as well.

whats a well known company that does basically the same thing, i cant work out exactly what Sun are..

kruesader

They made the Solaris OS, a reasonably popular business OS, as well as making workstations for a wide variety of business uses.