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

AMD Desktop CPUs Most Disappointing Product of 2007

malware

New Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2004
Messages
5,422 (1.12/day)
Likes
954
Location
Bulgaria
Processor Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 G0 VID: 1.2125
Motherboard GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3P rev.2.0
Cooling Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme + Noctua NF-S12 Fan
Memory 4x1 GB PQI DDR2 PC2-6400
Video Card(s) Colorful iGame Radeon HD 4890 1 GB GDDR5
Storage 2x 500 GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 32 MB RAID0
Display(s) BenQ G2400W 24-inch WideScreen LCD
Case Cooler Master COSMOS RC-1000 (sold), Cooler Master HAF-932 (delivered)
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi XtremeMusic + Logitech Z-5500 Digital THX
Power Supply Chieftec CFT-1000G-DF 1kW
Software Laptop: Lenovo 3000 N200 C2DT2310/3GB/120GB/GF7300/15.4"/Razer
#1
AMD Desktop CPUs One of the Most Disappointing Product of 2007

ZDNet blog calls AMD's desktop processors as one of the most disappointing products of 2007:
For the entirety of 2007 I’ve held the belief that AMD would come out with something worth buying, but that hope is now gone. I’m not sure what’s going on at AMD but progress seems to have slowed down drastically and I’m wondering whether my last Athlon 64 X2 processor will have eroded to dust before I buy another AMD branded processor.
Next to AMD according to the writer Adrian Kingsley-Hughes are NVIDIA's graphics card drivers which I think can be hardly defined as product as well as Blu-ray and HD DVD. Continue reading the full story here.

Source: ZDNet
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
54 (0.01/day)
Likes
3
Processor e8400. 3.6 Ghz
Motherboard DFI blood iron
Cooling 7 120mm case fans + zalman 9700
Memory Crucial 4x1GB
Video Card(s) 8800gt
Storage 3 320GB. 2 in raid 0. 1 for backup.
Display(s) 24" Gateway fhd2400
Case Stacker 830 black
Audio Device(s) extremegamer X-fi
Power Supply 650watt TX Corsair. 52 amp.
Software xp pro 64
#2
no vista?
 

JC316

Knows what makes you tick
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
9,371 (2.14/day)
Likes
1,000
System Name Budget Gaming
Processor AMD FX6300
Motherboard Gigabyte 880GMA-USB3
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper 212+
Memory 8GB Ripjaws DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) HD7850 1GB
Storage 1TB Sata2
Display(s) Acer 24" LED
Case Generic black
Audio Device(s) Stock onboard
Power Supply FSP Aurum Gold 650W
Software Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit
#3
Sadly, I agree with them. AMD really dropped the ball on Phenom and Barcelona, not even matching hardware thats much older.
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
19,714 (5.12/day)
Likes
5,130
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
#4
better off making a Quad K8 Unit and just racking the speed up until they can fix Phenom
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
5,052 (1.24/day)
Likes
540
Location
Manchester, United Kingdom
Processor AMD FX 8320 @ 4GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5 rev1
Cooling Corsair H70
Memory 4 x 4GB DDR3 Ripjawz 1600Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire Vapor-X AMD R9 280X
Storage 1 x 500GB Samsung Evo 850, 1 x 500GB Vrap Data Drive, 3 x 2TB Seagate, 1 x 1TB Samsung F1
Display(s) 3 x DGM IPS-2402WDH
Case Coolermaster HAF X
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Coolermaster 1000W Silent Pro M
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Logitech G510
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#5
Sadly, I agree with them. AMD really dropped the ball on Phenom and Barcelona, not even matching hardware thats much older.
Unfortunately I agree as well...

I'm really disappointed in AMD, but I also don't want them to crumble. So I'll buy ATi, and Intel Processors :p
 

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
34,486 (9.19/day)
Likes
17,517
Location
Hyderabad, India
#6
Same here. 2x HD 3870. Job well done.


BTW malware, AMD is one of the most disappointing products of 2007. It does not top the list. The Apple TV does (on page 2 of the article).
 
Last edited:

malware

New Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2004
Messages
5,422 (1.12/day)
Likes
954
Location
Bulgaria
Processor Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 G0 VID: 1.2125
Motherboard GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3P rev.2.0
Cooling Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme + Noctua NF-S12 Fan
Memory 4x1 GB PQI DDR2 PC2-6400
Video Card(s) Colorful iGame Radeon HD 4890 1 GB GDDR5
Storage 2x 500 GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 32 MB RAID0
Display(s) BenQ G2400W 24-inch WideScreen LCD
Case Cooler Master COSMOS RC-1000 (sold), Cooler Master HAF-932 (delivered)
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi XtremeMusic + Logitech Z-5500 Digital THX
Power Supply Chieftec CFT-1000G-DF 1kW
Software Laptop: Lenovo 3000 N200 C2DT2310/3GB/120GB/GF7300/15.4"/Razer
#7
BTW malware, AMD is one of the most disappointing products of 2007. It does not top the list. The Apple TV does (on page 2 of the article).
Title changed, thanks.
 
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
1,628 (0.34/day)
Likes
554
Location
The Pico Mundo Grill
System Name Commercial towing vehicle Nostromo
Processor R7 1700X Base Clock @4.000.000.000 Hz
Motherboard Crosshair Hero VI (BIOS 3008)
Cooling Hydro H110i V2 High Performance
Memory 2x8 GB Dominator CMD16GX4M2B3200C16 v4.31
Video Card(s) 970 STRIX
Storage 960 EVO M2 500 GB w. EKWB EK-M.2 NVMe nickel heatsink / UV400 480 GB / Red PRO 4 TB
Display(s) VG248QE
Case HAF XB
Audio Device(s) Onboard / JDS Labs O2 AMP / K550 headphones
Power Supply AX 860
Mouse KANA
Keyboard K60
Software Win 10 Pro x64 / KIS 2018
Benchmark Scores 2141 lightyears per hour.......
#8
Look what he says under the "nVIDIA graphics card drivers" section....ATI rules...
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2007
Messages
3,762 (1.01/day)
Likes
338
Location
WI
System Name MUFFIN_MACHINE
Processor i7 920
Motherboard E760 Classified
Cooling cooler master gemini II
Memory 6gb ddr3 crucial ballistix
Video Card(s) TFIII 6950
Storage 500gb wd, samsung spinpoint t series 500gb, 2 tb samsung somthing or other
Display(s) syncmaster 940bw 19"
Case Corsair Carbide Series 500R
Audio Device(s) X-fi extrememusic
Power Supply Corsair HX 850W
Software windows 7 64bit
Benchmark Scores i can drink a pint in 5 seconds flat.
#9
ati really did drop the ball on processors, although ati has released some phenominal cards 2900 and 3800 series and there drivers are awesome so im gunna do what darknova said keep my 2900 and buy an intel processor
 

ryboto

New Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2005
Messages
289 (0.06/day)
Likes
4
Processor Opteron 170 [2.8ghz@1.4v|1.25ghz@1.025v]
Motherboard Abit AT8 32x
Cooling HR-03, TR Ultra-120, 3xScythe S-Flex
Memory 2gb Crucial Ballistix PC4000
Video Card(s) Ati Radeon X1950 pro
Storage 150 GB WD Raptor/500GB WD
Display(s) Acer AL2032WA 20'' Widescreen LCD
Case Lian Li PC-A05b
Audio Device(s) On board Audio/Plantronics USB Headset
Power Supply Enermax NoiseTaker EG495AX-VE 485W
Software Windows XP SP2 bblean shell/Ubuntu
#10
Not sure why everyone is soooo dissapointed...it took Intel, what, 4 years to combat the K8? It's only been 1.5 years for AMD, and they manage to release a product that outperforms their old k8 by a decent amount in a majority of benchmarks. It's a decent upgrade for current AM2 users who don't want to invest in a new motherboard for an Intel system. Sure it isn't the best, but so what. The only real annoyance is the lame execution, errata, low availability, that's disappointing, but the product is only disappointing if you really expected it to demolish the competition, which is pretty unrealistic considering we knew ahead of time K10 wasn't going to be a revolutionary new arch, but rather an amendment to K8.
 

3991vhtes

New Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
2,785 (0.71/day)
Likes
107
Location
My house.
Processor AMD Athlon 64 3800+ Venice 2.4GHz
Motherboard ASUS A8V-VM SE
Cooling Stock
Memory 1GB DDR400
Video Card(s) DiamondViper Radeon X1650PRO 512MB PCI-e
Storage Seagate 250GB SATA
Display(s) Acer AL2002W 20" LCD Widescreen
Case cheap
Audio Device(s) Creative SoundBlaster
Power Supply 500 watt
Software Vista Ultimate
Benchmark Scores 4.1 Vista index
#11
AMD is slowly on their way out of business :(
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
3,177 (0.84/day)
Likes
529
Location
Florida, US
System Name bits and pieces
Processor Intel Xeon E3-1230V3
Motherboard Gigabyte H97
Cooling stock
Memory 16GB for now
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 970 SC
Storage 256GB SSD + 3x 2TB WDs (storage)
Display(s) 2x BENQ GW2250 + ViewSonic 24"
Case Cooler Master Centurion 5 :P
Audio Device(s) X-Fi Titanium HD --- JBL 4412 Studio Monitors / Polk PSW505
Power Supply Antec 550W
Mouse Corsair M65 pro
Keyboard MS Sidewinder
Software Win 10 Pro x64
#12
apple tv sucks
 

panchoman

Sold my stars!
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Messages
9,595 (2.50/day)
Likes
1,148
Processor Amd Athlon X2 4600+ Windsor(90nm) EE(65W) @2.9-3.0 @1.45
Motherboard Biostar Tforce [Nvidia] 550
Cooling Thermaltake Blue Orb-- bunch of other fans here and there....
Memory 2 gigs (2x1gb) of patriot ddr2 800 @ 4-4-4-12-2t
Video Card(s) Sapphire X1950pro Pci-E x16 @stock@stock on stock
Storage Seagate 7200.11 250gb Drive, WD raptors (30/40) in Raid 0
Display(s) ANCIENT 15" sony lcd, bought it when it was like 500 bucks
Case Apevia X-plorer blue/black
Audio Device(s) Onboard- Why get an sound card when you can hum??
Power Supply Antec NeoHe 550-manufactured by seasonic -replacement to the discontinued smart power series
Software Windows XP pro SP2 -- vista is still crap
#13
phenoms are disappointing. barcelonas completely kicked ass and the black editions were good, but phenom was a huge let down
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
164 (0.04/day)
Likes
4
#14
*AMD Desktop CPUs One of the Most Disappointing Product of 2007 *
Although true, now it's starting to feel like we are beating a dead horse :(
 
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
7,662 (1.97/day)
Likes
536
Location
c:\programs\kitteh.exe
Processor C2Q6600 @ 1.6 GHz
Motherboard Anus PQ5
Cooling ACFPro
Memory GEiL2 x 1 GB PC2 6400
Video Card(s) MSi 4830 (RIP)
Storage Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320 GB Perpendicular Recording
Display(s) Dell 17'
Case El Cheepo
Audio Device(s) 7.1 Onboard
Power Supply Corsair TX750
Software MCE2K5
#15
*AMD Desktop CPUs One of the Most Disappointing Product of 2007 *
Although true, now it's starting to feel like we are beating a dead horse :(
your quite right about that
 

erocker

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2006
Messages
42,445 (10.11/day)
Likes
18,110
#16
As far as thier new processors go, my Opty 170 was made in 07 and I couln't be happier with it.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,413 (5.50/day)
Likes
10,547
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K@4.8GHz(Quick and dirty)
Motherboard AsRock Z370 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H110i GTX
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) PNY XLR8 GTX1060 6GB
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#17
Not sure why everyone is soooo dissapointed...it took Intel, what, 4 years to combat the K8? It's only been 1.5 years for AMD, and they manage to release a product that outperforms their old k8 by a decent amount in a majority of benchmarks. It's a decent upgrade for current AM2 users who don't want to invest in a new motherboard for an Intel system. Sure it isn't the best, but so what. The only real annoyance is the lame execution, errata, low availability, that's disappointing, but the product is only disappointing if you really expected it to demolish the competition, which is pretty unrealistic considering we knew ahead of time K10 wasn't going to be a revolutionary new arch, but rather an amendment to K8.
People are disappointed for several reasons.

1.) AMD was in the lead for 4 years, and in that 4 years what did they do? Apparently nothing. They just sat back and enjoyed being on top, when they really should have used that time to improve themselves. Yeah they made small tweaks to K8, but nothing major was done.

2.) Intel might have been behind in performance for 4 years, but they still dominated the market share. AMD doesn't have the luxury. They have to find a way to stay competitive with Intel when they don't have the performance crown.

3.) Now that they don't have the performance crown they aren't competing in price. They need to fall back to their roots and start under-cutting Intel's prices. That is what made their older Socket A processor so appealing, they were cheaper than Intel's offering. They might not have performed at the top, but they were close, and cheaper. This is what they need to do with their current processors. Intel can get away with selling slower processors for more money, but unfortunately AMD can't.

4.) They have wasted so many resources on developing othing things. The spider platform is just insane. The money the wasted on that should have been put into researching a better performing processor. Here is a hint AMD: No one wants to spend crap loads of money on 4 graphics cards, just to slap them in a machine with a processor that bottlenecks 1.
 

Mandown

New Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2007
Messages
303 (0.08/day)
Likes
21
Location
Atlanta, GA
System Name Rusty Black Dragon <> Spider-Dragon <> Raging Theatah
Processor Phenom II X4 940BE 3.6 <> Phenom X4 9850BE 3.1 <> Phenom II X3^4 740BE 3.75
Motherboard MSI K9A2 Platinum <> MSI K9A2-CF V2 <> ASUS M4A785-M
Cooling ZEROTherm Nirvana <> 2x AC Freezer 64 pro
Memory 4Gb G-skill ripjaws @1200Mhz 5-5-5-18 <> 4Gb - G-skills 1066Mhz <> 4Gb - G-skills 1066Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire 4850 X2 <> HIS 3850 TurboX <> HIS 4670
Storage WD 750GB Caviar Black <> Western Digital 640GB <> 300GB Maxtor + 500GB Seagate
Display(s) Hanns-G 28" HG281D 1080p <> Acer 22" X223W <> LG 42" LCD 720p
Case Antec Twelve-Hundred <> NZXT Apollo Black <> NZXT Apollo Orange
Audio Device(s) SB Audigy-Logitech Z-5300e <> Diamond Xtreme 5.1 <> 4670 HD Audio
Power Supply Cosair 850w<> Ultra LSP 750w <> Antec 650w Trio-power
Software Windows 7 Ultimate x64
#18
I think we were better off with 939 forever. it worked like a charm.:rockout:
 

KennyT772

New Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
3,572 (0.81/day)
Likes
102
System Name Raptor
Processor Intel E8400 Wolfdale @3600
Motherboard Asus P5Q-Pro LGA775
Cooling Zalman CNPS9700
Memory 1024mbx2 Crucial Ballistix DDR800
Video Card(s) XFX 9600GT
Storage Seagate 7200.11 500GB
Display(s) Acer AL2216Wbd and Acer AL1717
Case Gigabyte 3DAurora Black
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Extreme Gamer Faitality
Power Supply OCZ GameXStream 500w
#19
Well for one AMD can't make a dual die quad cpu like intel can. Due to the IMC design, they would have to tie the two memory controllers together, which wouldn't work. Phenom doesn't perform bad, and for the price its a good chip. AMD needs to ramp up 45nm to get power under control, and start raising clock speeds.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
144 (0.04/day)
Likes
19
Processor Intel E8400 @ 4GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte EP35
Cooling Noctua NH-U12P w/ dual NF-P12
Memory G.Skill 2x1GB DDR2-800 @ 650MHz
Video Card(s) HD 3870 512MB
Storage WD 250GB, Sammy 80GB, WD 80GB, Seagate 80GB
Display(s) HP w2408h
Case CoolerMaster ATCS 840
Audio Device(s) Onboard Audio
Power Supply ThermalTake ToughPower 850w Modular
Software Windows Vista Business 64-bit, Ubuntu 9.04, Windows XP Pro SP2
#20
3.) Now that they don't have the performance crown they aren't competing in price. They need to fall back to their roots and start under-cutting Intel's prices. That is what made their older Socket A processor so appealing, they were cheaper than Intel's offering. They might not have performed at the top, but they were close, and cheaper. This is what they need to do with their current processors. Intel can get away with selling slower processors for more money, but unfortunately AMD can't.
I think that AMD was doing rather well with their K8 processors. Hell, the X2 was nothing compared to the C2D but it was hella cheap. Now you can get a X2 for sub $65. For $65 on intel you can get a Celeron D or a Pentium 4 processor. Hell, the budget market is MUCH MUCH larger than the mid or high-end market. Because not everyone can afford to spend $1500+ or even $600 on a new computer. I upgraded my entire system from a P4 3.2 to a X2 3800+ system for under $700. A similar system from Intel would of cost me an easy $100-200 more.

Yes, I agree.. Phenom is sad and very expensive. But so was Core 2 Quad $500+ when it first came out. Being AMD's first processor, first true-quad processor, the sub $300 price tag on these Phenoms is nice. AMD didn't rush into the market like Intel did, stick two dual-cores together and say its a quad. They researched and made a true-quad core. For the price and what it offers its pretty good. It will give an AMD X2 3800 - 5000+ user about a 25-50% boost in application performance and for games it will add a fair 1-10FPS.

I've been known to be a pretty big AMD/ATI fan. Am I disappointed with Phenom? Yes, to be simply honest. I was expecting it to overtake at least the X2 6400+ and Q6600. I also expected the price to be a bit lower... But, would I still get one? Yup! Will I get it now? Nope, I'll wait for BLACK and the L3 bug to be fixed. I might be a budget or mid-end user, but I don't want to drop $250+ on a processor and want it to have a bug.

4.) They have wasted so many resources on developing othing things. The spider platform is just insane. The money the wasted on that should have been put into researching a better performing processor. Here is a hint AMD: No one wants to spend crap loads of money on 4 graphics cards, just to slap them in a machine with a processor that bottlenecks 1.
:laugh: You'd be surprised how many people would actually be willing to spend one or two grand on video cards. You think Alienware and others offer $4-5k desktops and $2-4k laptops for no reason? Nope, sorry to disappoint. They offer these machines because people are actually WILLING to drop that many grand on a "top of the line" computer. Sure you and I who build our own systems might not drop that much on a system as we know things. But a 100% novice who knows nothing except the general rule of $ = better would be willing to go on alienware.com and configure what he or she thinks is the best computer out there. Currently, Dell is the biggest buy of AMD stuff.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,413 (5.50/day)
Likes
10,547
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K@4.8GHz(Quick and dirty)
Motherboard AsRock Z370 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H110i GTX
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) PNY XLR8 GTX1060 6GB
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#21
I think that AMD was doing rather well with their K8 processors. Hell, the X2 was nothing compared to the C2D but it was hella cheap. Now you can get a X2 for sub $65. For $65 on intel you can get a Celeron D or a Pentium 4 processor. Hell, the budget market is MUCH MUCH larger than the mid or high-end market. Because not everyone can afford to spend $1500+ or even $600 on a new computer. I upgraded my entire system from a P4 3.2 to a X2 3800+ system for under $700. A similar system from Intel would of cost me an easy $100-200 more.
For $65 you are looking at Celeron 440, which is a Core 2 Solo essentially. However, come January, Intels Dual-Core Celerons will be out for the $65 price point to compete with AMDs lowest end dual core. Though the E2140 is the next step up and only $9 more. Funny how you talk about the budget market being the most important part, then try to defend AMD's massively expensive spyder platform a few lines down.:slap:

Yes, I agree.. Phenom is sad and very expensive. But so was Core 2 Quad $500+ when it first came out. Being AMD's first processor, first true-quad processor, the sub $300 price tag on these Phenoms is nice. AMD didn't rush into the market like Intel did, stick two dual-cores together and say its a quad. They researched and made a true-quad core. For the price and what it offers its pretty good. It will give an AMD X2 3800 - 5000+ user about a 25-50% boost in application performance and for games it will add a fair 1-10FPS.
Intel has been using strapping two dies to gether for years, they did it in the dual-core days too. Why? Because it works, and appearently works better. It isn't like AMD's offering at the time was much better, they strapped two sockets together on a motherboard and called it a quad.:banghead: AMD fanboys always pull out the "well it isn't a true-quad" argument. I really don't care how I get 4 cores, if it has 4 cores then it is a quad-core. This "true quad-core" BS is exactly that, BS.

I've been known to be a pretty big AMD/ATI fan. Am I disappointed with Phenom? Yes, to be simply honest. I was expecting it to overtake at least the X2 6400+ and Q6600. I also expected the price to be a bit lower... But, would I still get one? Yup! Will I get it now? Nope, I'll wait for BLACK and the L3 bug to be fixed. I might be a budget or mid-end user, but I don't want to drop $250+ on a processor and want it to have a bug.
That is my point. Everyone hyped over Phenom, and it bombed because AMD didn't spend enough time on it. They wasted time doing essentially nothing when K8 was in the lead, and once K8 fell from the top AMD struggled to throw together something better. Yes, it is better than K8, but it isn't what people expected. AMD could have done a lot better, but the waited too long and stumbled out of the block. I hope 2008 is better for them, but 2007 was a failure.

:laugh: You'd be surprised how many people would actually be willing to spend one or two grand on video cards. You think Alienware and others offer $4-5k desktops and $2-4k laptops for no reason? Nope, sorry to disappoint. They offer these machines because people are actually WILLING to drop that many grand on a "top of the line" computer. Sure you and I who build our own systems might not drop that much on a system as we know things. But a 100% novice who knows nothing except the general rule of $ = better would be willing to go on alienware.com and configure what he or she thinks is the best computer out there. Currently, Dell is the biggest buy of AMD stuff.
You said it yourself, the budget market is where the money is, so if the company is stuggling, why are they wasting time on this crap?
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
144 (0.04/day)
Likes
19
Processor Intel E8400 @ 4GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte EP35
Cooling Noctua NH-U12P w/ dual NF-P12
Memory G.Skill 2x1GB DDR2-800 @ 650MHz
Video Card(s) HD 3870 512MB
Storage WD 250GB, Sammy 80GB, WD 80GB, Seagate 80GB
Display(s) HP w2408h
Case CoolerMaster ATCS 840
Audio Device(s) Onboard Audio
Power Supply ThermalTake ToughPower 850w Modular
Software Windows Vista Business 64-bit, Ubuntu 9.04, Windows XP Pro SP2
#22
For $65 you are looking at Celeron 440, which is a Core 2 Solo essentially. However, come January, Intels Dual-Core Celerons will be out for the $65 price point to compete with AMDs lowest end dual core. Though the E2140 is the next step up and only $9 more. Funny how you talk about the budget market being the most important part, then try to defend AMD's massively expensive spyder platform a few lines down.:slap:
What? Took Intel 4 years to come out with a budget processor to compete price wise with AMD? ;)

@ budget v spyder: see end.


Intel has been using strapping two dies to gether for years, they did it in the dual-core days too. Why? Because it works, and appearently works better. It isn't like AMD's offering at the time was much better, they strapped two sockets together on a motherboard and called it a quad.:banghead: AMD fanboys always pull out the "well it isn't a true-quad" argument. I really don't care how I get 4 cores, if it has 4 cores then it is a quad-core. This "true quad-core" BS is exactly that, BS.
Well, the thing to remember is we can't compare a wounded 3-legged dog v a 4-legged dog in a race. Its possible, and the outcome might be surprising, but it isn't fair most of the time. There is a L3 bug that cripples Phenom's performance. After all, the Phenom 9500 came within 65-99% of the Q6600's performance. Who knows, maybe it has the potential to be better than intel's quad? We won't know for a few more months.

It takes more time and money to research a new processor that isn't simply two old ones sticked together. Thats all the "true quad" argument is, in my eyes.


That is my point. Everyone hyped over Phenom, and it bombed because AMD didn't spend enough time on it. They wasted time doing essentially nothing when K8 was in the lead, and once K8 fell from the top AMD struggled to throw together something better. Yes, it is better than K8, but it isn't what people expected. AMD could have done a lot better, but the waited too long and stumbled out of the block. I hope 2008 is better for them, but 2007 was a failure.
Yes, some of the changes in the K8 processors were a little useless, but the research was worth it. AMD created 45w and 65w processors that still performed the same, or better as their 89w older brothers and sisters. AMD Black was a surprise to me, but it seems to be an okay move. Some of the extreme-AMD OC'rs would love a AMD Black, especially a 5000+ @ 99$.

I do hope 2008 is better for them to. I hope that
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=46869
that comes true and AMD delivers in a timely manner. I wasn't expecting the 45nm chips until late 2008!


You said it yourself, the budget market is where the money is, so if the company is stuggling, why are they wasting time on this crap?
Alright, I may of worded it poorly... All three markets are important. There are people in every single market: budget/low, mid and high-end. Every group of people should be served. However, in the united states the lower class and upper class are growing much faster than the middle class is. In theory, if you surved those expanding markets better than your profits will be better. You can sell a $100 chip to 10 people... Or you can sell a $50 chip to 100 people. Sell cheap and sell a lot is a very simple business method that works pretty well.

Now, generally speaking, in business you should try to sell a product for 2-3x the production cost. Therefore, it is easier to milk money from a more expensive item than a cheap item. Would you pay for a X2 3800+ if it were $200? I probably wouldn't myself. Would I pay for it if it was $99? Yup, I bought mine at $99!

Now, the 8800ULTRA is a pretty fast card, eh? Think it actually costs around $600+ to make these cards? Probably not. It probably makes around the same as an 8800GTX. However, since this product is higher-end, nVidia is able to milk it more and get more out of it.

So what I was saying is, if AMD didn't introduce the AMD Spider w/ quad-fire then they'd lose a lot of money as the high-end market isn't being served.

Dell/Alienware would buy the HD 3870 and HD 2900XT cards from AMD in large bulk, giving a savings to Dell/Alienware, and AMD selling more (remember, sell low and sell a lot makes more money and sell high, sell few. Think mass production and assembly line!). Both companies are happy and have money so Dell/Alienware and AMD keep doing business and more money goes into AMD. While a novice computer user orders a $600 dell with AMD Athlon X2 64 processor!

And then of course my argument from before that there are people who don't know about building their own computer and what not. They just know that if they spend $500,000 on a Mclaren SLR they'll get a better car than a $15,000-20,000 KIA. So they go ahead and buy a $5,000 gaming rig from Alienware w/ AMD Phenom 9600 + Quad-Fire HD 3870.

I hope I explained it better this time.

-robodude666
 

ryboto

New Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2005
Messages
289 (0.06/day)
Likes
4
Processor Opteron 170 [2.8ghz@1.4v|1.25ghz@1.025v]
Motherboard Abit AT8 32x
Cooling HR-03, TR Ultra-120, 3xScythe S-Flex
Memory 2gb Crucial Ballistix PC4000
Video Card(s) Ati Radeon X1950 pro
Storage 150 GB WD Raptor/500GB WD
Display(s) Acer AL2032WA 20'' Widescreen LCD
Case Lian Li PC-A05b
Audio Device(s) On board Audio/Plantronics USB Headset
Power Supply Enermax NoiseTaker EG495AX-VE 485W
Software Windows XP SP2 bblean shell/Ubuntu
#23
People are disappointed for several reasons.
So what, they can be disappointed about the company, but this is about the PRODUCT, right? Most disappointing product, not company/company history. The product isn't the extreme end of performance, but it is an improvement. If they wanted to rate AMD for their handling of the production issues, do so, but you can't call it a "product".
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2007
Messages
3,762 (1.01/day)
Likes
338
Location
WI
System Name MUFFIN_MACHINE
Processor i7 920
Motherboard E760 Classified
Cooling cooler master gemini II
Memory 6gb ddr3 crucial ballistix
Video Card(s) TFIII 6950
Storage 500gb wd, samsung spinpoint t series 500gb, 2 tb samsung somthing or other
Display(s) syncmaster 940bw 19"
Case Corsair Carbide Series 500R
Audio Device(s) X-fi extrememusic
Power Supply Corsair HX 850W
Software windows 7 64bit
Benchmark Scores i can drink a pint in 5 seconds flat.
#24
What? Took Intel 4 years to come out with a budget processor to compete price wise with AMD? ;)

@ budget v spyder: see end.




Well, the thing to remember is we can't compare a wounded 3-legged dog v a 4-legged dog in a race. Its possible, and the outcome might be surprising, but it isn't fair most of the time. There is a L3 bug that cripples Phenom's performance. After all, the Phenom 9500 came within 65-99% of the Q6600's performance. Who knows, maybe it has the potential to be better than intel's quad? We won't know for a few more months.

It takes more time and money to research a new processor that isn't simply two old ones sticked together. Thats all the "true quad" argument is, in my eyes.




Yes, some of the changes in the K8 processors were a little useless, but the research was worth it. AMD created 45w and 65w processors that still performed the same, or better as their 89w older brothers and sisters. AMD Black was a surprise to me, but it seems to be an okay move. Some of the extreme-AMD OC'rs would love a AMD Black, especially a 5000+ @ 99$.

I do hope 2008 is better for them to. I hope that
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=46869
that comes true and AMD delivers in a timely manner. I wasn't expecting the 45nm chips until late 2008!




Alright, I may of worded it poorly... All three markets are important. There are people in every single market: budget/low, mid and high-end. Every group of people should be served. However, in the united states the lower class and upper class are growing much faster than the middle class is. In theory, if you surved those expanding markets better than your profits will be better. You can sell a $100 chip to 10 people... Or you can sell a $50 chip to 100 people. Sell cheap and sell a lot is a very simple business method that works pretty well.

Now, generally speaking, in business you should try to sell a product for 2-3x the production cost. Therefore, it is easier to milk money from a more expensive item than a cheap item. Would you pay for a X2 3800+ if it were $200? I probably wouldn't myself. Would I pay for it if it was $99? Yup, I bought mine at $99!

Now, the 8800ULTRA is a pretty fast card, eh? Think it actually costs around $600+ to make these cards? Probably not. It probably makes around the same as an 8800GTX. However, since this product is higher-end, nVidia is able to milk it more and get more out of it.

So what I was saying is, if AMD didn't introduce the AMD Spider w/ quad-fire then they'd lose a lot of money as the high-end market isn't being served.

Dell/Alienware would buy the HD 3870 and HD 2900XT cards from AMD in large bulk, giving a savings to Dell/Alienware, and AMD selling more (remember, sell low and sell a lot makes more money and sell high, sell few. Think mass production and assembly line!). Both companies are happy and have money so Dell/Alienware and AMD keep doing business and more money goes into AMD. While a novice computer user orders a $600 dell with AMD Athlon X2 64 processor!

And then of course my argument from before that there are people who don't know about building their own computer and what not. They just know that if they spend $500,000 on a Mclaren SLR they'll get a better car than a $15,000-20,000 KIA. So they go ahead and buy a $5,000 gaming rig from Alienware w/ AMD Phenom 9600 + Quad-Fire HD 3870.

I hope I explained it better this time.

-robodude666
you explained it quite well actually
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,413 (5.50/day)
Likes
10,547
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K@4.8GHz(Quick and dirty)
Motherboard AsRock Z370 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H110i GTX
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) PNY XLR8 GTX1060 6GB
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#25
I hope I explained it better this time.
Yes you did, and while I might not agree with some of your ideas, I'm not going to keep restating mine. I'll just pick out a few things you got wrong.

What? Took Intel 4 years to come out with a budget processor to compete price wise with AMD?
Intel did have a budget processor to compete with AMD, they are called Celeron Ds, and they performed very nicely compared to the Sempron line. They weren't great, but they did the job nicely.

Yes, some of the changes in the K8 processors were a little useless, but the research was worth it. AMD created 45w and 65w processors that still performed the same, or better as their 89w older brothers and sisters. AMD Black was a surprise to me, but it seems to be an okay move. Some of the extreme-AMD OC'rs would love a AMD Black, especially a 5000+ @ 99$.
The 45/65w processors were nothing special, and there was no research done, they just binned chips that were stable at lower voltage and made that the default voltage, no special research done there. Same thing with their Black Edition processors, they are just better binned processors, with unlocked multipliers(renamed FX series). No special research there. AMD sat on their ass for 4 years while they were in the lead instead of using that time to better themselves. That is why people are disappointed. They could be a lot further than they alreay are.
 
Last edited: