backtop


Print 57 comment(s) - last by JonB.. on Nov 23 at 12:39 AM


AMD guidance details the backwards and forwards compatibility of the AM2, AM2+ and AM3 sockets.  (Source: AMD)

AMD details its platform progression identically to Intel's "tick-tock" architecture roadmap.  (Source: AMD)
AMD announces its Spider Platform in what could be its biggest launch of all time

Tomorrow marks the launch of AMD's platform launch, codenamed Spider. The launch consists of three components: AMD Phenom processors, the ATI Radeon HD 3800 graphics processor and AMD 7-Series desktop chipsets.

The first new AMD desktop architecture in four years will debut with the Phenom 9500 and Phenom 9600. Both chips feature a 95-Watt thermal envelope and a shared 2MB L3 cache.

The AMD Phenom 9600 ships with a 2.3GHz operating frequency, while the Phenom 9500 features a slightly lower 2.2GHz clock. Both processors run on HyperTransport 3.0 and feature a total 2MB L2 cache; 512KB per core. The chips also come with an integrated DDR2 memory controller and support speeds up to the DDR2-1066 specification, which is still pending JEDEC approval.

Directron.com carries the Phenom 9600 at a retail price of $322.00 and the Phenom 9500 at $286.00.

AMD guidance originally stated that a 2.4GHz Phenom, dubbed the Phenom 9700, would also launch on November 19, however last minute roadmap updates indicate this chip will come in December instead.

These two Phenom processors are part of AMD's first-generation, 65nm Stars family. In the second-half of 2008 AMD will announce its second-generation Stars family, which will be a migration of the current K10 core to the 45nm node.

The second-gen Stars lineup consists of five variants, including quad-core Deneb, dual-core Propus, dual-core Regor and single-core Sargas. The second-generation Stars CPUs will also include an integrated DDR3 memory controller, a first for AMD.

AMD's Spider Platform launch also includes the official announcement of its ATI Radeon HD 3800 Series. The launch of the Spider platform will add two new video cards to AMD's lineup, the ATI Radeon HD 3870 and Radeon HD 3850. 

AMD's new Radeon series received overwhelmingly positive feedback during AMD's November 15 media event.  Newegg representatives tell DailyTech the company sold out all of its stock on the first day, but is quickly replenishing inventory.

To round off the launch of the platform, AMD also announced its 7-Series desktop chipsets. The AMD 790FX targets the ultra-enthusiast market segment, and corporate guidance sets the retail price of 790FX boards between $150-250. Several partners already announced boards supporting this new chipset earlier this year.

AMD designates the AMD 790X as its performance chipset, slotted just below the 790FX.  AMD guidance states this chipset will run the consumer between $99-150.  The mainstream AMD 770 chipset will not see store shelves for several months, but AMD claims this chip will round off the mainstream segment for AMD chipsets. 


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Any 'experts' out there?
By wordsworm on 11/18/2007 7:33:58 PM , Rating: 2
Can anyone tell me what the bandwidth would be like between a GPU and CPU on the same die? Isn't the bandwidth supposed to considerably faster on the die as opposed to on the motherboard? I can't help but think that the motherboard would suddenly be freed of one of its most intensive bandwidth hogs.




RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By Zurtex on 11/18/2007 7:40:34 PM , Rating: 2
As it stands that kind of bandwidth simply isn't needed.

If it was on the same die, but not 'onboard the chip', it would probably communicate with HyperTransport instead of PCIe2.0. There's no real need for a graphics card to do this, otherwise AMD would probably be pushing for it.

However thinking about integrating stream processors (what powers modern GPUs) onboard to a modern CPU, opens up all sorts of really interesting possibilities. Having a quasi-sequential quasi-parallel chip would be awesome to play around with.

If only there was a company who built both modern x86 CPUs and modern GPUs, if only there was another company with billions and billions for R&D who were terrified of being beaten by the other company again in terms of performance. ^_^


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By Ringold on 11/18/2007 8:34:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
with billions and billions for R&D who were terrified of being beaten by the other company again in terms of performance. ^_^


That's whats really sad about this whole scenario already. I heard some people talking on CNBC about how Intel is holding back out a real fear of completely destroying AMD; it's much easier to be a duopoly than be a nearly undisputed oligopolist. Intel's already had a small taste of what monopoly power feels like, and it needs to look no further than Microsoft to see how Europe treats dominating success. We're probably already missing out on big performance because AMD's fallen so badly behind.

Phenom doesn't look to be a C2D killer, and we don't even get a die shrink apparently until the tail end of next year. Expect nothing dominating from Intel, then, until when whatever is after Stars comes out; they'd simply be afraid of the consequences.

I also wouldn't be shocked to see prices rise over the next year from where they are now. Not because of a weak dollar, no, but because Intel can afford to without hurting volume much and because Intel knows it might throw AMD a bone if they can do likewise. Meanwhile, of course, they'd roll in the money as well.


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By Zurtex on 11/18/2007 9:01:48 PM , Rating: 4
Well I live in Europe (the U.K), so for me the weak dollar drives prices down not up ^_^.

To be honest though, if Intel really are holding back 'as not to destroy AMD' rather than just milking the market for all its worth, good I guess. In the long run having a duopoly would far more help the market that a monopoly. Sure in the short term we'd get faster more power chips, but what would the incentive be to think of new ideas and not sure slowly ramp up clock speed? AMD and the ATi investment was all about the long term when it comes to R&D, so lets just hope it pays off.


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By Amiga500 on 11/19/2007 5:31:13 AM , Rating: 2
A free market does not guarantee the best deals for the consumer - the sooner you stop tripping over every word the PR divisions of the multinationals come out with the better.

I also wouldn't be shocked to see prices rise over the next year from where they are now. Not because of a weak dollar, no, but because Intel can afford to without hurting volume much and because Intel knows it might throw AMD a bone if they can do likewise. Meanwhile, of course, they'd roll in the money as well.

If AMD were not around, Intel would already be charging us $1000 for a C2D E6600.

If AMD were not around, Intel would have virtually no need to push R&D. The only reason we got Conroe was K8.

With AMD so weak, Intel can relax and not push themselves - do you think they would be pushing harder with no AMD around? How naive are you?


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By ZmaxDP on 11/20/2007 8:21:26 AM , Rating: 2
"A free market does not guarantee the best deals for the consumer"

Then how about enlightening us with what does provide the best deals for the consumer???


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By Visual on 11/20/2007 10:56:53 AM , Rating: 2
a "for free" market does that.
but that's communism, not capitalism


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By wordsworm on 11/21/2007 11:33:48 AM , Rating: 2
That's right... the Soviets didn't have money. China doesn't have money, because everything is free.

Are you a nuclear plant inspector working for someone named Mr. Burns?


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By JonB on 11/23/2007 12:39:41 AM , Rating: 2
It was only two years ago that Intel was still saying that nobody needed 64bit processors except for high end servers. We'd still be running overheated, frequency locked P4's if not for AMD.


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By SilthDraeth on 11/18/2007 11:09:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If it was on the same die, but not 'onboard the chip', it would probably communicate with HyperTransport instead of PCIe2.0. There's no real need for a graphics card to do this, otherwise AMD would probably be pushing for it.


Actually AMD is pushing for, and designing that. It is called AMD Fusion.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061119-8250...
Is one article talking about it.


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By Zurtex on 11/18/2007 11:31:08 PM , Rating: 2
My understanding was the main aim of fusion was really to explore all possible co-processors by allowing intercommunicating through HyperTransport.

The on-die graphics wouldn't be full graphic card power, put something strong enough to at least run a full 3D GUI / HD Acceleration. Sort of a stepping stone to a future I was describing. But I could be wrong, I've not looking in to it too much recently.


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By Targon on 11/19/2007 8:25:10 AM , Rating: 2
There was a slot type for this called HTX which would allow for add-in cards that would communicate via HyperTransport, but it was under-hyped and seems to have died.

AMD has promoted the idea of having different processors that are socket compatible with the CPU, so if you take a 4 socket system, you could put two CPUs in, a PPU(Physics Processing), and a GPU chip into the system, or you could go with 3 CPUs and one GPU, or add other co-processors to provide whatever abilities you might want to see.

A problem with putting a GPU on a straight chip that goes into the motherboard is that video standards are changing too rapidly for this to be a good idea. You have DisplayPort, HDMI 1.3, Dual-link DVI, plus there will be new versions of these connection types out by the time R&D had the chance to release a new motherboard that supported the old standards for video.

If you look at how quickly GPU technology is improving, it seems almost foolish to go with integrated video these days because in the time it takes from the chipset release to motherboard release, a new low-end GPU comes out that allows for $50 video cards that makes the old ones look like garbage.

A HyperTransport connected video card makes the most sense, but would require video card manufacturers to support a new standard that may or may not survive. Look at what happened to Microchannel(old IBM PS/2 days) and VLB(Vesa Local Bus). There would also need to be a real benefit to the technology since something good on paper means nothing if real-world performance doesn't help. Then you have the support end from AMD where the new slot type would need to be properly supported(game players MUST be able to run their games, and problems with video cards not being recognized because they are not PCI-Express are a valid concern.


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By MGSsancho on 11/19/2007 8:22:01 PM , Rating: 2
there are FPGAs that can fit. well its really a FGPA on a tiny board that has pins that fits in the slot.

There are infiniband as well as 10gbit Ethernet chips that use the HT bus. I think myranet but I am probably wrong on that. either way its mostly HPC and nothing us mortals really ever see.


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By murphyslabrat on 11/20/2007 9:31:56 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
My understanding was the main aim of fusion was really to explore all possible co-processors by allowing intercommunicating through HyperTransport.

No, you're thinking of the Torrenza Initiative. Fusion is the idea of integrating a GPU-like co-processor onto the die, itself.

And, as AMD has been feign to let go, it would be far from an exclusively graphical utility. This kind of parallel co-processor could potentially alleviate some bottlenecks in certain applications.


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By Gul Westfale on 11/19/2007 12:12:06 AM , Rating: 2
on an AMD64 system the RAM is already connected to the CPU through its own dedicated bus (the onboard memory controller of the CPU), thus th eonly really bandwidth intensive thing for the mobo chipset is handling traffic between CPU and GPU.

the amount of bandwidth is determined by the slowest part in the chain, meaning that if the GPU can accept data at 10GB/sec but the mobo chipset can only send it at 5, then the bandwidth is 5GB/sec.

if the CPU and GPU are on teh same die than this all still applies; but it is much easier connecting things on-die than through the motherboard, as there is no need for long traces in the mobo that can become hot and may cause interference. all modern mobos are actually 4 or more layers of board sandwiched together because there are just so many traces (and the larger traces need to be cut up into smaller ones to avoid heat issues). putting it all on the same die means the manufacturer is not limited by the mobo anymore, and thus bandwidth would be whatever the manufacturer would want it to be. latency would also be reduced.

at the moment there is no need for such a device yet, but cost also factors in: if you want to build a low-cost PC then the fewer separate components=the lower price.


RE: Any 'experts' out there?
By 3kliksphilip on 11/19/2007 4:03:02 PM , Rating: 1
All this is too complicated for me. All I know is that I liked the 'Confidential' 'DO NOT DISTRIBUTE' writing at the bottom of the page.


AMD continues to disappoint
By BSMonitor on 11/18/07, Rating: 0
RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By Zurtex on 11/18/2007 7:45:44 PM , Rating: 2
To be honest, AMD have never been good at pushing stuff out of the door. 2.3 GHz is what they originally promised for launch...

But they do seem to have a better track record of moving stuff through an open door, here's to hoping they can ramp up clock speeds over the next few months :).


By murphyslabrat on 11/20/2007 9:35:41 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But they do seem to have a better track record of moving stuff through an open door,

Like that HD 38x0 launch blew me away. It was incredibly ironic, like AMD (ATI) and NVIDIA switched places for that half-step. ^^j

Here's to hoping that this underdog has fight left.


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By Regs on 11/18/07, Rating: -1
RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By Regs on 11/18/2007 9:22:51 PM , Rating: 2
Wait..How'd that rate down so quickly?


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By wordsworm on 11/18/2007 9:37:32 PM , Rating: 2
My theory: you rated someone down before you posted.


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By Zurtex on 11/18/2007 9:42:11 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe because it didn't make much sense?

AMD have already demonstrated a 3.0GHz Stars CPU and I believe given it to the odd independent tester to have a quick play around with.

Also Stars is the CPU generation name, Spider is the CPU/Graphics/Chipset platform name.


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By caqde on 11/18/2007 9:43:30 PM , Rating: 2
Stars is the Processor family. Spider is the name given to a platform containing Phenom+RD7xx+HD3xxx products..


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By JumpingJack on 11/19/2007 1:07:02 AM , Rating: 1
Well, it's official... AMD's currently planned highest clocked Phenom is slower than Intel's slowest Quad.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/19/the_spider_...

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=10427

Not good.


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By excrucio on 11/19/2007 6:06:18 AM , Rating: 1
and the spider falls.

I was hoping for a huge success over intel and again im let down by it.

What ever happend to the huge floating point benchmarks that OPTERON proved over xeons?

Couldn't the x4 be the same? =[


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By JumpingJack on 11/19/2007 6:10:07 AM , Rating: 2
The problem is that those huge floating point benchmarks were 'rates', if you take just the base, non-rate SPEC2006fp, C2 wins those FP benches.

The FP rate benches demonstrate AMD's superior bandwidth, this is effective whent he working sets and data sets are extremely large, and you must move large data sets to and from memory.

In client applications, there are very few that will stress the BW needs of the bus to enable the same result you saw in the FPU rate benchmarks.

The trend was the same with dual core, the dual K8 opty was actually pretty close to woodcrest in the rate benchmarks, but of course C2D was dominating K8 in the client desktop... samething here... effectively, simply being 'true-native' quad core provides no distinct advantage.


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/19/2007 8:16:04 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
simply being 'true-native' quad core provides no distinct advantage.

It never did. "Native" anything has been subjective at best. In theory it should eliminate cross talk bottle necks between the cores because they will use the interconnect rather than HT or Bus. While it will do this, the real world gain is so far not apparent. With Intel switching to QuikPath and Native Quads with Nehalem in the July/August '08 time frame this will be a moot point shortly anyways. By the way, Hyper-Threaded native quad cores for Nehalem.... 8 execution paths? Intel is a beast :)

I have a theory that sandwitching 2 together might cause problems for the memory controller (obviously you would get 2 and one has to be disabled). But I'm starting to wonder if they use native designs simply because it would cause some cross talk depending on which side the working memory controller was on.. Intel's MC is still on the north bridge so it could sling data to the processor without much trouble, just a logic update to which side to send it to. Maybe I'm just talking out my ass here but it was just a random thought that jumped into my head while reviewing the native/non-native quad designs.


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By JumpingJack on 11/19/2007 3:24:06 PM , Rating: 2
Well done, well explained -- yes... AMD's share L3 cache eliminates the cache coherency problem at the L3 level, but they are discrete at L1/L2, the native design makes the coherency snooping much faster. The MCM that snoop goes across the FSB, no doubt ... however, the penalty is obviously small and in raw performance, well, we see the results.

I can dig up the link, but I have seen a few reference that the normal coherency pattern is that most snoops (80 or 90%) result in a NAK, which means the MCM is not paying the penalty 90% of the time...


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By MandrakeQ on 11/19/2007 8:34:19 AM , Rating: 2
AMD has been targeting all of their designs for the server space since the K8, and these benchmarks show those decisions do not pay off in the desktop realm.

Core's larger caches are great for typical desktop usage where applications use small working sets and there is a small amount of processors to minimize coherency traffic. Luckily for AMD, these advantages degrade for servers when the addressable memory spans 128 GB and the processor bandwidth is chewed up by coherency requests of 16-32 cores.

If AMD could meet demand in the server space, they would be in a lot better shape since those processors carry higher margins. With that in mind, this desktop launch can't be all bad since it gives them a way to discard all of their broken parts.

I'm hoping they can find a way to increase their yields on the Barcelona parts and somehow make it out of this ordeal.


RE: AMD continues to disappoint
By JumpingJack on 11/19/2007 4:28:18 PM , Rating: 2
This is a good point, for HPC and scientific, FP related activity (aspecially in high cluster super computers), this processor will work great -- AMD focused alot of transistor budget on increasing the bandwidth, where this really helps in these situations.

Unfortunately, in many commercial space applications it still lags... Kanter was quick to point out the lack of any real meaningful commercial benchmark runs on Barcelona launch:
http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?NewsID=375&d...

Makes sense, don't show something you cannot win :) ... but there will be a niche market for this CPU where the margins are good.


codenamed Spider
By crystal clear on 11/19/2007 10:51:18 AM , Rating: 4
As a product announcement it sounds great but as a revenue earner,which AMD badly needs it is a flop.

Just to whom is this platform targeted to ?

The new platform does not specifically target the enterprise, or even the mainstream consumers, the major & vital revenue generating source.

If someone is doing a lot of multitasking or encoding video or involved with content creation, there can be some benefit from these types of PCs."

Now you cannot call the above a major revenue earner-A very small market with limited potentials.

While Spider target gamers but gamers market dont generates those revenues that AMD needs right now.

If AMD calls it a high end desktop pc again it fails to generate those revevnues desired,

The Intel Core 2 Extreme line—which are manufactured both at 65 and 45 nanometer and easily available in their thousands with clock speeds up to 3GHz and L2 cache sizes between 8MB and 12MB, at very competitive prices.

AMD's prices will barely leave them a profit margin worth the effort.

Summary-

1) AMD urgently needs a marketing manager/VP to plan & execute high revenue earning products & marketing statergy.

2) AMD has to reform/restructore its marketing dept.

3) Three straight quaterly losses & three more quaterly loses to come is NOT acceptable for anybody.

Spider will not be the solution for AMD's problems right now.

Hector Ruiz should be replaced by somebody from outside & NOT by somebody in the current AMD management team.




RE: codenamed Spider
By crystal clear on 11/19/2007 11:22:23 AM , Rating: 2
AMD Introduces World's First Comprehensive, Cutting-Edge PC Platform

AMD platform codenamed “Spider” extends AMD leadership in HD technology, energy efficiency and scalable performance; introduces true quad-core processing

SUNNYVALE, Calif. -- November 19, 2007 --Rewriting the rules for enthusiast computing, AMD (NYSE: AMD) today unveiled its new platform codenamed “Spider”, with the first true quad-core processor supporting scalable graphics for The Ultimate Visual Experience™. The AMD Spider platform combines the introduction of AMD Phenom™ quad-core processors, ATI Radeon™ HD 3800 Series graphics processors with Microsoft DirectX® 10.1 support, AMD 7-Series chipsets with CrossFireX™ and AMD OverDrive™ software. The AMD Spider platform is a major milestone on the path to Accelerated Computing, AMD’s vision for platform-level acceleration through co-processing.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoo...


RE: codenamed Spider
By crystal clear on 11/19/2007 11:31:05 AM , Rating: 3
Introducing AMD “Spider” Platform
Media Presentation
November 19, 2007

Confidential

http://download.amd.com/Corporate/SpiderPlatformPr...


RE: codenamed Spider
By crystal clear on 11/20/2007 1:36:48 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
1) AMD urgently needs a marketing manager/VP to plan & execute high revenue earning products & marketing statergy.

2) AMD has to reform/restructore its marketing dept.

3) Three straight quaterly losses & three more quaterly loses to come is NOT acceptable for anybody.

Spider will not be the solution for AMD's problems right now.


The above quotes(posted much ealier by me) are reflected in an article in Ars technica
below-

Launch troubles
The run-up to Phenom's actual launch today has been an enormous mess. Under normal circumstances, a company with a major product on the way is able to give concrete information regarding that product, its availability for review, and its specifications two to four weeks before the actual launch. In contrast, the information coming out of AMD the past four to six weeks regarding Phenom's launch has been simultaneously vague and subject to change. Originally, Phenom was supposed to debut at 2.6GHz with a 2.8GHz part in December. On November 1, AMD "confirmed" that it would launch Phenom at 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4 GHz, with a 2.6GHz part available before the end of 2007. In the 18 days since that presentation was given, AMD did an about face and decided that 2.3 GHz would be the fastest chip available at launch, with a 2.4GHz and a 2.6GHz part available in Q1. Accurate numbers are always better than paper launches, but this sort of thing should've been settled weeks ago.

Discussions on sampling were similarly vague. Yes, chips would be available for testing, at some point in the future, but no clear guidance was given on when, exactly, that might be.


With that said, however, there are significant reasons to be concerned about Phenom, AMD, and the company's future.


One way or the other, Phenom's competitive position must improve, and improve soon. If it doesn't, the ~$700 million dollar cash infusion the company received last week will do little more than buy the company some additional time.


http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071119-amds...

This is what happens when a product launch is managed by somebody not fit to lead AMD in the first place & NO marketing manager to lead the launch.


Down
By BruceLeet on 11/18/2007 7:18:15 PM , Rating: 5
Down came Nvidia and washed the spider out




RE: Down
By OblivionMage on 11/18/2007 8:24:17 PM , Rating: 5
Up came the European union to dry out all the rain and the Amd climbed up the spout again.


RE: Down
By Joz on 11/18/07, Rating: -1
RE: Down
By BruceLeet on 11/19/2007 12:18:27 AM , Rating: 1
Fail.

How could you guys butcher my clever post :P, it was rated 5 at one point, voted down cause I said it first xD


BENCHMARKS PLZ
By phatboye on 11/18/2007 11:08:52 PM , Rating: 2
I have waited over 6 months for phenom benchmarks, now that the chip has been released can we please see some 3rd party benchmarks on how phenom compares to k8, conroe and penryn chips.

Also anyone know when the new nvidia chipsets for phenom cpus will be released?




RE: BENCHMARKS PLZ
By crystal clear on 11/19/2007 11:47:08 AM , Rating: 2
AMD Phenom™ Benchmarks in process

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInforma...

Expect to see them soon on the above link.


RE: BENCHMARKS PLZ
By crystal clear on 11/19/2007 11:52:35 AM , Rating: 2
First Tests: AMD's New Phenom CPU Won't Scare Intel
Our look at AMD's Spider desktop platform reveals impressive technology but disappointing results. Can AMD compete if its high-end chip is slower than a $230 Intel CPU?

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,139725/article.h...


RE: BENCHMARKS PLZ
By Screwballl on 11/19/2007 2:40:17 PM , Rating: 2
first tests:
Intel wasn't scared of the Athlon64 at first either... until they got their rear handed to them.
We will see how things play out. Typically when both companies are on top for their game prices are higher but when one is down, the prices stay lower.

We will see


RE: BENCHMARKS PLZ
By murphyslabrat on 11/20/2007 9:54:45 AM , Rating: 2
You could probably bet that the engineers at Intel were worried, it was just the marketing and management that were blinded by all the clocks. Now, however, it is the engineers of Intel that are running the place, and the current product is competitive.

k8 benches showed a market leading product, k10 benches show otherwise. And, on the same note, Netburst benches showed a toilet, while the Conroe benches showed AMD on that toilet.

First impressions aren't always wrong.


Cleverly placed ad?
By Fox5 on 11/18/2007 8:37:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Directron.com carries the Phenom 9600 at a retail price of $322.00 and the Phenom 9500 at $286.00.


Erm, seems a bit like product placement.




By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 11/18/2007 8:54:16 PM , Rating: 2
Not at all. They're just the only quanity vendor that broke the embargo to sell the product early.


AMD roadmaps are pointless
By redeyedfly on 11/20/2007 10:40:05 AM , Rating: 2
AMD roadmaps are pointless. First of all they are never on time, second, they will never produce half of the components they mention. The other half will change, such as a new socket or something else that will delay a product launch even farther and force everyone that just purchased AMD hardware to upgrade entirely all over again. I've moved to intel I am tired of waiting around for AMD to produce an inferior product a year and half behind schedule.




RE: AMD roadmaps are pointless
By BruceLeet on 11/20/2007 1:08:03 PM , Rating: 1
Wow Deja vu you'll never believe some idiot posted something similar earlier /sarcasm


Chipset Performance
By Zurtex on 11/18/2007 7:27:46 PM , Rating: 2
It's about time we got some new chipsets. I can't wait to see how the AMD 7-Series matches up with the nvidia 700 serious.

Going to make me a very happy bunny if all this culminates in a very consumer friendly environment for a new computer in about 4 months :).




Well
By Locutus465 on 11/18/2007 8:03:58 PM , Rating: 2
I might try an all AMD platform whenever I'm ready to upgrade again... Obviously benchmark results will be required, but it seems like this should be a good set up all in all.




By crystal clear on 11/19/2007 12:24:12 AM , Rating: 2
Is this a once more paper launch ?

AMD Phenom Listings Multiply, Begging Delivery Questions

AMD's Phenom processor is showing up at an increasing number of online resellers, and at some stores with specific dates for availability, begging the question: : Will AMD deliver the processor in sufficient numbers? Doubts about delivery of AMD's quad-core desktop chip are being driven by supply problems with its server-centric sibling, the "Barcelona" Opteron.

Though there is no official word from AMD, some resellers are stating four- to six-week lead times for availability of the 2.4-GHz 9700. One reseller states this on its site: "ETA: Friday December 14, 2007" for the "9700 2.4GHz Quad Core 125W 4MB Processor Socket AM2 HD9700XAGDBOX." Another reseller, contacted by phone, simply stated "four to six weeks" for the same Phenom 9700. The lower-speed parts at some stores are slated for earlier availability. One reseller states rather boldly: "ETA: Monday November 19, 2007" for the Phenom 9600 2.3-GHz Quad Core. But these are simply reseller ETAs, not firm dates. And not systems--availability of the processor for system builders will likely differ. Listings for motherboards, such as the Gigabyte GA-MA790FX-DS5, that integrate AMD's 790FX chipset and support the Phenom are also appearing in increasing numbers at first-tier resellers such as PC Connection and Zones.com. PC Connection is showing about two weeks, while an Asus board listed as "PHENOM QUAD CORE CPU QUAD-CROSSFIRE" at Zones.com is showing "10+ days." (11/17/07)


http://www.x86watch.com/




well I'm eating crow this morning
By Chaser on 11/19/2007 10:03:19 AM , Rating: 2
Phenom WAS a disappointing launch. I was really hoping for an Athlon like launch making AMD the desktop performance/ price leader once again. Sadly it didn't happen. Yet.

You were right Kenobi.




Phenom mobos
By crystal clear on 11/19/2007 11:41:10 AM , Rating: 2
ASUS Unleashes the Ultimate Hardware Combination for the New AMD Phenom Processors
Written by Chris Tom
Monday, 19 November 2007 10:21
-- The new M3A32-MVP Deluxe/WiFi-AP motherboard and triple EAH3850/3870 graphics solutions create a new category of performance components to deliver next-generation user experience --

Fremont, California (November 19) – ASUS®, worldwide leader in component and notebook design and manufacturing, today announced a combination of motherboard and graphics cards based on the new AMD 790FX chipset and ATI Radeon™ HD3800 series GPUs to deliver a next-generation DirectX® 10 gaming experience. Designed to complement the AMD Phenom™ processors to form the ultimate Spider platform, the new M3A32-MVP Deluxe/WiFi-AP motherboard and the EAH3850/3870 graphics cards feature the latest AMD technologies and supports Quad Crossfire™.

http://www.amdzone.com/index.php/component/content...




Well after reviewing..
By excrucio on 11/19/2007 12:29:37 PM , Rating: 2
Well after reviewing... If you really think about it, AMD offers the cheapest quad core solution in the market right now. Being such a small company on a limited amount of money, they did a great job in creating such a cheap and good CPU, their crow imo is in the opterons. AMD is slowly lauching their quads which was reported as a failure when it couldn't bring a 3.0ghz to the table. The 9700 phenom will come at a 2.6 speed hopefully bringing more juice to the table, if not oh well.

One thing is given, Intel will never be the ONLY company to make processors for the fact that monopoly is not acceptable in the US.

AMD has a long way to bring CPU like the dual cores that killed the Smithfields.

In my head the war of the CPU will stop sometime when it hits the 32nm when things start to get complicated.

The thing people dont see is that AMD gives a cpu for the buck, like their AMD 6000+ that never made anywhere because the prices were too high. But when the price cuts came, the 6000+ where competing with the best selling processor E6600, not because of the price, the performance was just great equivalent to the E6600.

I dont see why Phenom can't reach the highest Quad of Intel (NOT THE EXTREME)

Extreme is just some costy processor that intel has time to spend on while AMD has to fight for a piece of the kingdom while Intel enjoy the ride. That's why I stick to AMD, they'll always try to give you what you need and they succeed, while intel just gives you what you need and more but sometimes sloppy.

thats my thoughts on the two compenies. BOTH GREAT COMPANIES but i tend to be an AMD fanboy. Although I won't reject a Intel cpu at anytime. =]

BTW Opterons are the s h i t




By crystal clear on 11/20/2007 1:01:09 AM , Rating: 2
Ars technica has an interesting story on whose benchmarks to believe & those you should NOT.

Read on-

Then AMD came up with a brilliant idea, and offered would-be Phenom reviewers the chance to fly to Tahoe on an all expenses paid trip where they'd be given the opportunity to review Phenom in a closed environment on a system prebuilt by AMD. In order to help things along, AMD also offered a recommended set of benchmarks at hand. Not only is this an extremely poor use of money for a company bleeding red ink, it's precisely the wrong move for a company trying to build any sort of confidence in a new product.

Ars was offered a chance to fly to Tahoe and refused it, as did Anandtech.

This turns out to have been a very good move. According to reports on the event, at least some of the systems AMD offered up for testing were clocked at 2.4 and 2.6GHz, rather than the actual launch speeds of 2.2 and 2.3GHz.

We urge readers to check the "fine print" on individual site reviews for information on whether or not the reviewer went to Tahoe, and to keep it in mind when comparing results. Any website demonstrating 2.4-2.6GHz results without specifically stating that they didn't attend the AMD event almost certainly did—and while that's not a crime, it casts a shadow on the validity of benchmark tests.





http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071119-amds...




AMD roadmaps are pointless
By redeyedfly on 11/20/2007 10:34:56 AM , Rating: 2
AMD roadmaps are pointless. First of all they are never on time, second, they will never produce half of the components they mention. The other half will change, such as a new socket or something else that will delay a product launch even farther and force everyone that just purchased AMD hardware to upgrade entirely all over again. I've moved to intel I am tired of waiting around for AMD.




Meh
By ninjit on 11/19/2007 11:20:56 AM , Rating: 1
This is all irrelvant unless they spell "spider" with a y, and obnoxiously capitalize only a few of the letters

SpYDeR !

Yes, that will sell more beans




"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki