Intel's suprise attack!

darkarius · 09-09-2007, 11:58 AM

Ok I found this link but only from one site online, can anyone confirm this. Also does anyone know if these numbers are surprise benchmarks or just Intel propoganda trying to dent whatever hype Barcelona is generating. If so and the there is bench marks to back up the claims of this article then I think it's curtains for AMD

.

EDIT: Oops, I forgot to post the link. Here it is:

http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/sho...leID=201804316

Fozzik · 09-09-2007, 01:03 PM

Looks like Intel marketing and hand-picked / hand-tweaked benchmarking. I don't really know what the real performance story is between the newest CPUs...but I imagine it will be all over the web pretty soon.

rhagz · 09-09-2007, 01:08 PM

Of course these are thousand dollar server chips and these aren't gaming benchmarks.

rabb1t · 09-09-2007, 05:12 PM

I don't see any benchmarks, am I missing something? I only see a vague reference that 'some benchmarks' reach 'up to 50%' more. Those aren't even actual numbers for that reference.

That being said, everything I've seen so far which were 'real benchmarks' shows that the Barcelona home design chip will, at best, catch up with the now previous generation Core 2 Duo chips. So, since Intel is ahead, now on 1333 FSB, and will soon be shrinking to 45nm, further extending their lead, reports that Barcelona won't really be a gain over Intel isn't really a surprise.

As I've been saying though, we have to wait until 2008 when the home based AM2 Barcelonas show up before we can really compare scores. Till then, server architecture is really just predictive of server performance. I know of no gamers that use servers to game with.

darkarius · 09-10-2007, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabb1t

I don't see any benchmarks, am I missing something? I only see a vague reference that 'some benchmarks' reach 'up to 50%' more. Those aren't even actual numbers for that reference.

That being said, everything I've seen so far which were 'real benchmarks' shows that the Barcelona home design chip will, at best, catch up with the now previous generation Core 2 Duo chips. So, since Intel is ahead, now on 1333 FSB, and will soon be shrinking to 45nm, further extending their lead, reports that Barcelona won't really be a gain over Intel isn't really a surprise.

As I've been saying though, we have to wait until 2008 when the home based AM2 Barcelonas show up before we can really compare scores. Till then, server architecture is really just predictive of server performance. I know of no gamers that use servers to game with.

What I mean't was that there were no hard benchmarks but there were amazing claims to this 7300 series of chips that they have surprise released just before the now released Barcelona. Those claims state a 70% jump over there current tech while AMD was claiming 50% and according to what the reviews that I have read so far they don't have that advantage. In the server space they are on par but I found one site( Techreport )that actually showed the Barcelona on desktop and it's performance is lower then a Athlon4400X2 in almost every bench

I hope that there is some difference between Barcelona and Phenom on desktop( In this review they did a near 50% Overclock to see how the chip scales but at 3gigs it was still worse then the current 3gig Athlon chip )maybe some type of driver modification might help the situation.

Right now it's not looking good for AMD, they needed at least one trump card but at best all they have been able to do is break even. Server wise the chip does not look so bad and with ramp up they should be able to hang with Peneryn they won't face another possible cataclismic blow until Nehalium. But.... if that surprise launch by Intel is what they say it is then AMD probly won't see another year without some type of buy out.

Boceefus · 09-10-2007, 01:43 PM

I just dont see how it can be "curtains" for AMD. Frankly If I can purchase "almost as fast" or comparable performance from not only AMD cpu's but from the video cards for a cheaper price Im all for it. If I had a unlimited wallet that could afford me to purchase top of the line upgrades then hey maybe I would but as long as AMD is making comparable and somewhat cheaper parts ill stick with them.

darkarius · 09-10-2007, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boceefus

I just dont see how it can be "curtains" for AMD. Frankly If I can purchase "almost as fast" or comparable performance from not only AMD cpu's but from the video cards for a cheaper price Im all for it. If I had a unlimited wallet that could afford me to purchase top of the line upgrades then hey maybe I would but as long as AMD is making comparable and somewhat cheaper parts ill stick with them.

Same here but there are two reasons why. One most people arn't enthusiast or even remotely knowledgeable about Proccessors so they stick with whats most commonly heard unless some unknown comes and drops the bomb in witch this chip while good is not. Second is the aggressive priceing is not making money, it's stopping the competition from making as much money( frankly Intel is more suited for this war with 45nm around the corner it will allow them to make cheaper parts better and thus offer bargains and still make a profit )this is causing AMD to slowly bleed to death as they have lost 600 million dollars in each of the last 3 quarters. To turn the trend around they need a blow to grab volume sales without offering bargain prices, they need a bomb product. Neither 2900XT nore Barcelona has been that-how much longer do you think they can last, how many more chances do you think they will get before their pockets run dry.

I love AMD and am discovering that I am somewhat of a fanboi, but even with that I have to face the facts of what I see happening in front of me. Only time will tell though.

rabb1t · 09-10-2007, 02:35 PM

I don't really keep up with server hardware, so I can't talk about any 'surprise attack' by previously unannounced cores launching. (To my knowledge the server cores on both sides have been known quantities for quite some time.)

Skimming this article at TG Daily does still seem to show that the industry is favoring AMD in the server space, primarily due to lower power requirements and decent performance.

I don't know if you are only worrying about server space, the industry overall, gaming space, or what, but again, to my knowledge, the power behind the Phenom chip is only estimated to, at best, match what Intel has out. This doesn't include the fact that Intel chips are currently cheaper, and run on smaller processing (so cheaper to the company to produce as well), so if you consider those facts, AMD is a bit behind at this point. The fact that they are not going to use DDR3 and PCIe v2 for about a year behind Intel could put them even further behind.

Regarding estimates for Phenom, here is a bit from an AnandTech article

Quote:

Here's where things get complicated; we knew Phenom/Barcelona would be faster clock for clock, it was only a matter of how big of an improvement we'd get. If we are to believe that 15% is the best we'll get on average, taking into account that Penryn is around 5% faster than Conroe, the updated architecture from AMD alone isn't enough to really compete with Intel. In other words, price matters.

We saw how competitive AMD became after the first round of price cuts this year, but after the second set Intel went back to dominating. The trouble for AMD this time around is that Phenom is a much larger chip than the outgoing Athlon 64 X2, whereas Intel's Penryn family will actually be smaller than Conroe. AMD is already losing a considerable amount of money each quarter, so fabbing a larger chip at the same price as current CPUs will only make the situation worse. However, Intel can afford to continue to keep its processors as aggressively priced, especially moving to 45nm.

To put it plainly: Phenom/Barcelona make this price war more difficult on AMD, while Penryn makes it easier on Intel. What's the end game? Is there a solution? We're not sure, all we know today is a starting point for Phenom expectations.

darkarius · 09-10-2007, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabb1t

I don't really keep up with server hardware, so I can't talk about any 'surprise attack' by previously unannounced cores launching. (To my knowledge the server cores on both sides have been known quantities for quite some time.)

Skimming this article at TG Daily does still seem to show that the industry is favoring AMD in the server space, primarily due to lower power requirements and decent performance.

I don't know if you are only worrying about server space, the industry overall, gaming space, or what, but again, to my knowledge, the power behind the Phenom chip is only estimated to, at best, match what Intel has out. This doesn't include the fact that Intel chips are currently cheaper, and run on smaller processing (so cheaper to the company to produce as well), so if you consider those facts, AMD is a bit behind at this point. The fact that they are not going to use DDR3 and PCIe v2 for about a year behind Intel could put them even further behind.

Regarding estimates for Phenom, here is a bit from an AnandTech article

Yep read that article as well as this one: http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/12616

Look at the specs in gaming and then look at the performance after OC in Cinbench and other benchmarks on the same page.

As far as what part of AMD I am worried about most is AMD's business( I could care less about the server space personally but it has alot to do with them staying in business )next and the reason closest to my heart is Gaming and on the low end of the totem pole is Servers. Two reasons why I care about AMD as a whole 1: As long as they are in business prices stay reasonable, 2: As far as the consumer perspective goes I think that if we had a clear monopoly AMD would be better in not price gouging the customer base.

Intel has proven to me to be a company that will exploit it's position to the fullest; some might say this is just business thats fine with me I just don't want to see people who will do business that way thrive off of my money so I vote with my dollar. I cannot garantee who AMD really is they could end up being just as bad or worse then Intel but I think they deserve a chance at bat.
Even better keep the sales even between the two companies and the prices reasonable.

Kurron Nye · 09-10-2007, 06:08 PM

This appears to be yet another Intel 'FUD' (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) campaign launched to coencide with the AMD Barcelona release.

Also let us not forget Intel is the lord high master of paper launching products then 'maybe' delivering them a year or more later.

But I would take this at face value, that is just something to make you feel like the grass is greener on the other side of the fence (which happens to be where the septic tank is buried) :-)

evilsofa · 09-10-2007, 06:56 PM

Not that AMD doesn't play dirty too:

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/09/0025220

darkarius · 09-16-2007, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by evilsofa

Not that AMD doesn't play dirty too:

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/09/0025220

AMD, Intel, IBM and many other companies have catch 22 NDA's just like games in beta. If there is a mistake that you did not catch you don't want someone blasting the product making it sound worse then it is( witch does happen ), especially if it can be fixed. A bad review on a key part doesn't just ward off people from buying that part it often causes people to not consider the maker of the product. From a consumer standpoint I so certainly value my media resources that let me know whats up and I am sure it would be different if bad press on a particlar product would not cost the company as much as it does as a whole.

Anyways look at Threadkillers link on " AMD back in the Saddle? " thread and you will see what type of good vs evil I am hinting toward between AMD and Intel.