• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel responds to Barcelona benchmarks

GJSNeptune said:
In other words, because of the past, they're going to be just fine in the present and future. Right. "They lead with a previous dominating chip, so duh, they'll be fine competing with Intel's dominating chip no matter what they dish."



Yeah, we'll see.
Click to expand...


Ok, worst case scenario... AMD goes bankrupt... INTEL goes full monopoly.

Oh wait, what's that..? Oh look, it's the SEC here to break Intel up into 4 smaller companies. The world will keep turning man, and we'll continue to receive high performing parts.

(Quick example, once upon a time in the US there was 1 phone company!)
 
So what? Intel would eventually buy them back, just like at&t.
 
my A64 X2 4600+ stock still owns. I am waiting for the barcelona for my next uprgrade... no need for intel here :D
 
GJSNeptune said:
So what? Intel would eventually buy them back, just like at&t.
Click to expand...

Have you ever heard of Verizon? Or perhaps the dozens of VoIP providers out there?

Also AT&T, isn't even AT&T anymore... SBC bought AT&T and changed their name to AT&T. Furthermore AT&T has very little VoIP infrastructure... they're fighting an uphill battle as they're so late getting in on it, and for the record VoIP is the future of the "phone".

Worst case scenario there, they get too big and we bust them up again and have to repeat the process every 20yrs.
 
Last edited:
VOIP is not the future of the phone. Phasing out landlines is the future. ;)
 
GJSNeptune said:
VOIP is not the future of the phone. Phasing out landlines is the future. ;)
Click to expand...

I'd agree that's the longterm future. We still have some time before that day, until then VoIP on broadband connections will eat away your copper phone line business.

I long for the day my cell phone has perfect digital signal everywhere. lol
 
'Eh, not that many landline providers aren't involved in the wireless industry. Mostly rural ones, really.
 
What about the griffin too? The new notebook proc I'm pretty sure AMD is releasing, is this going to have any effect on intel right now? (but intel does have their core 2's in notebooks)
 
d44ve said:
AMD is not going out of business anytime soon.

It takes a lot for a company of that size to go out of business
Click to expand...

intel won't let amd die .. if amd goes out of business intel has a monopoly => bad => antitrust

intel is 15 times bigger than amd .. you think they care much?
 
W1zzard said:
intel won't let amd die .. if amd goes out of business intel has a monopoly => bad => antitrust

intel is 15 times bigger than amd .. you think they care much?
Click to expand...

Still, I don't like Intel being all arrogant, even if it's warranted. :D
 
If K10/Barcelona isn't a Core2 killer - and from what I've seen, it's not going to be - AMD is up s**t creek without a paddle.

The fact of the matter is that the Core2 architecture has the potential to last as long as the original Pentium/P6 architecture - 5 years - and Intel is already well on the way to rolling out their 8-core, 45nm processor in 2008.

Dark times ahead for AMD, methinks.
 
Fox34 said:
What about the griffin too? The new notebook proc I'm pretty sure AMD is releasing, is this going to have any effect on intel right now? (but intel does have their core 2's in notebooks)
Click to expand...

hate to say this, but griffin does not stand much of a chance against core 2 laptops. the current turion chip is based on the original atholon i believe (k7 or something like that). griffin is based on curent gen athlon 64 chips (if im thinking of the right amd next-gen mobile chip). my chip can beat pleanty of a64's, even with the crap ram i have. core 2 is just way to fast for amd to catch up to right now. now these benchmarks, if they are true, we better hope that amd used chips in the <1.5 ghz range, so it can still fuel pleanty of competition. that and amd's product still is not final, so it may not be as efficent as possible yet, also k10 may be able to hit higher clock speeds than core 2 (highly doubt that myself, but i can hope) while not having such a horible problem as netburst (god...i hate those huge pipelines, we will only be able to make a decision as pre-release chips are given out to certain sites, and once k10 comes out itself.
 
AMD really have jumped into a big puddle of crap in the last year. Their decision to buy ATi has killed their profits (I don't think AMD really reaslised just what a mess had been made of R600, and that the product was so far from release), and Dell has eaten all of their production capacity. Hence they have angered the channel which was their most loyal customer base, and now face lower margins due to a ferocious price war with Intel.

Also, now that AMD have to carry the burden of uncompetetive performance in both the Graphics and Core Proccessor sectors there is a long arduous road back, twice as long as would have been faced as a CPU manufacturer alone. And with Barcelona not looking like a solution to the Core2 line, and a decent refresh for lacklustre R600 a long way off, AMD is looking stagnant.
 
So, from the facts of this thread, the Barcelona does not look to promising as compared to the core 2 and the griffin wont be either, also they released that crap 600, all their new products do not meet par..........AMD is screwed..and the Barcelona is a quad core and basically the answer to the core 2, the core two is a dual core for the most part as the Barcelona is a quad core, AMD had to use 4 cores to beat Intel's dual core in a sense.


Poor AMD:(
 
Well shit, way to air-tight yourself.
 
Actually Dan, Im talking about the numbers of that 8 core vs 4 core server proc. In my opinion, I wouldnt think too many people would care about that, unless everyone here is going to start running out and getting all kinds of server parts to build a computer with. If thats the case, then I would be wrong. However, I dont see that happening. So, way to go with the nice rhetoric.

C2D just happened to come along at a great time and give AMD a nutkick. After a few years of consistently getting beat, Intel had a separate team working on some new things and taking some of what AMD had going for it and integrated it into its new processor. The result? An AMD bitch smacking. Now, Im a huge AMD fan and I like what they have done. However, if they think they can be like Intel, get beat a little bit (like before they had their success and before they bought ATI or merged) and then take the best of C2D and then come back, that isnt going to fly. Intel is a huge company with plenty of money to burn. Waiting was a good strategy for them. They offered new chips, little speed bumps and then a couple years later, they blew the processor market away.

Barcelona, Kuma and Phenom looks like they are going to be awesome processors with the ability to compete head on with Intel. Also, they should be offered at a decent price level as well. The best thing to come from C2D, to me at least, is the price wars.

I dont see AMD faltering soon, but they may wish to change their strategy a bit.
 
What procs are Kuma and Phenom?
 
READ this:
" The objective of our demo was to show performance scaling from our current dual-core processors to our upcoming quad-core processors within the same thermal envelope and drive home the point through a real-world demonstration that customers could expect to see 2x the performance without an increase in power consumption.
At some point before our launch you can plan on us showing a demo of our parts vs. Intel's high-performance processors.
One thing to note, the system we showed, while it was a 4P, it was running only 6GB of memory."
that was the response from AMD posted on the same source of the original article

Intel forgot to mention that they used almost 3 times more RAM than AMD
One more thing, "...Intel's chips is 150W versus 65W for AMD...", same source.
 
Last edited:
So the benchmarks aren't even legit?
 
No, they are probably legit, just they used more ram.

Im not gonna try to cloak and dagger this, but right now, Intel seems to be doing everything right.
 
well if they used more ram that would completely change the benchmarks
 
Hmm...yeah it may. But we still cannot overlook the fact that with 10more giga of ram and 8 less processors, Intel managed to score better in this benchmark. Not saying Im a fan of Intel, Im just pointing it out. Im sure, if AMD used 16GB of ram, they would be back on top, however, I dont feel the performance delta would be large enough, say, twice as many pixels per second as one would think with twice the processors.
 
thats a good point behind the core count. But since thats the whole point behind the Barcelona so they should have kept the RAM count the same.
 
Fox34 said:
thats a good point behind the core count. But since thats the whole point behind the Barcelona so they should have kept the RAM count the same.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt RAM size makes that much of a difference. Plus, you should also consider that Clvoertown has been available for half a year already and Barcelona isn't as of yet. Shortly after Barcelona Intel will also introduce the new Xeon MP's, which should be Barcelonas target. Tigerton will have the same amount of cores and features CSI. At that time both should be compared, since those 2 platforms are in the same market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top