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

Intel 32 nm Clarkdale Chip Brought Forward to Q4 2009

Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
325 (0.09/day)
Likes
146
System Name Harley
Processor Intel core i7 3820
Motherboard ASRock Extreme6 X79
Cooling NZXT Kraken X60
Memory Geil Enhance Corsa DDR3 1600+ 16GB
Video Card(s) EVGA SuperClocked GTX Titan
Storage OCZ Vertex4 128GB SSD / Toshiba 7200 2TB HDD
Display(s) Crossover 30" 2560x1600
Case CoolerMaster HAF XB - Custom Modded
Audio Device(s) n/a
Power Supply CoolerMaster Silent Pro Hybrid 1300w
Software Win7 64
#26
i can remember tv ads for intel from way back, but i have never seen a AMD ad.

imo this is why intel is currently ahead, alot of people have never heard of AMD before.
 

Darren

New Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
1,936 (0.39/day)
Likes
338
System Name Cheap yet powerful gaming and entertainment rig!
Processor AMD Athlon 3800+ X2 Windsor, 1 MB L2 Cache (512k L2 Per Core), 65W Energy efficient, 2GHz @ 2.78 Ghz
Motherboard Asrock ALiveNF7G-HD720p Rev v5.0
Cooling Freezer 64, 2x120mm, 1x92mm
Memory 8 GB DDRII PC6400 @ 929 MHz OCZ (2GBx4) timing: 5-5-5-5-16-2T
Video Card(s) XFX ATI4830
Storage Seagate 320 GB SATA (16 MB Cache)
Display(s) 19' HannsG (1440x900 @ 75hz)
Case Coolermaster Elite 330 Black Case
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Meridian, Pioneer VSX-516 Receiver 7.1 with DD/DD EX/Prologic II/DTS/DTS-ES//DTS: Neo
Power Supply Cool Master eXtreme Power 460W PSU
Software Vista Ultimate X64 Corporate Edition
#27
i can remember tv ads for intel from way back, but i have never seen a AMD ad.

imo this is why intel is currently ahead, alot of people have never heard of AMD before.
I'm not sure what you mean by ahead, but ahead financially Intel's got a bigger marketing budget for adverts and probably lots of sponsors too. Ahead architecturally AMD have dominated previously for a long time despite AMD being almost known out of the enthusiast community.
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
325 (0.09/day)
Likes
146
System Name Harley
Processor Intel core i7 3820
Motherboard ASRock Extreme6 X79
Cooling NZXT Kraken X60
Memory Geil Enhance Corsa DDR3 1600+ 16GB
Video Card(s) EVGA SuperClocked GTX Titan
Storage OCZ Vertex4 128GB SSD / Toshiba 7200 2TB HDD
Display(s) Crossover 30" 2560x1600
Case CoolerMaster HAF XB - Custom Modded
Audio Device(s) n/a
Power Supply CoolerMaster Silent Pro Hybrid 1300w
Software Win7 64
#28
market share is what i meant.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
1,706 (0.34/day)
Likes
975
Location
South Africa
System Name Firelance
Processor i7-3770K @ 4.6GHz / 1.23V
Motherboard Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H @ F16h mod BIOS
Cooling Corsair H105 + 4x Gentle Typhoon 1850
Memory 2x 8GB Crucial Ballistix Sport DDR3-1600 CL9 @ CL7
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1070 Armor OC with Gaming X BIOS @ 2000 core / 2300 mem
Storage 2x 256GB 840 Pro (RAID-0) + 3TB Deskstar 7K3000 + 512GB BX300 + 8TB WD Purple
Display(s) Dell U2713HM (25x14) + Acer P243W (19x12)
Case Thermaltake Core X31
Audio Device(s) Corsair VOID Wireless
Power Supply Seasonic SS-760XP² Platinum
Mouse Logitech G400
Keyboard Logitech G19
Software Windows 7 Professional x64 Service Pack 1
#29
Darren said:
Remember there was the Athlon XP vs the Pentium 4, AMD had the better architecture.

There was the Athlon MP vs the P4 Xeon, AMD had the better architecture.

There was the AMD Duron vs the Celeron, AMD had the better architecture.

There was the Athlon FX vs the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition, AMD had the better architecture.

There was the Celeron D vs Sempron, AMD had the better architecture.

There was the Athlon 64 vs the Pentium D, AMD had the better architecture

There was the Athlon X2 64 vs the Pentium D, AMD had the better architecture.
Wrong.

Between the P3 and the Core 2 line, AMD's processor architecture was more efficient, clock-for-clock, than Intel's. That does not necessarily mean that AMD's architecture was better.

In fact, I would argue that Intel's architecture won out in the end because they took elements from the P3 and P4D to create the monster that is Core 2; contrast that with AMD, who are still using the Athlon64 architecture and failing to produce chips that can compete with Intel's best.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
23,268 (6.30/day)
Likes
12,316
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) PowerColor PCS+ 390 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate 6 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
#30
I'd almost say it was more of the reason why AMD's lead vanished, since the majority of computer users are buying for value, not speed. Even though AMD had chips that were a better value, you had to buy Intel, since hardly anyone was selling pre-built computers with AMD chips.
In USA, only Dell didn't offer AMD chips. Dell started offering them not long after Core 2 Duo came out because of popular demand (low price).

Intel wasn't found guilty in the USA.


Pentium 4 had a more facinating architecture than Athlon 64 featuring long pipes and a brand new technology, Hyper-Threading. Yes, it couldn't beat Athlon 64 but there is very little changes in AMD processors since the K6. AMD's offerings, therefore, aren't as interesting to disect.


Core 2 is a direct decendant from Core, Pentium M, and Pentium III. Little came from Pentium 4 except the process (65nm).
 
Last edited:

Darren

New Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
1,936 (0.39/day)
Likes
338
System Name Cheap yet powerful gaming and entertainment rig!
Processor AMD Athlon 3800+ X2 Windsor, 1 MB L2 Cache (512k L2 Per Core), 65W Energy efficient, 2GHz @ 2.78 Ghz
Motherboard Asrock ALiveNF7G-HD720p Rev v5.0
Cooling Freezer 64, 2x120mm, 1x92mm
Memory 8 GB DDRII PC6400 @ 929 MHz OCZ (2GBx4) timing: 5-5-5-5-16-2T
Video Card(s) XFX ATI4830
Storage Seagate 320 GB SATA (16 MB Cache)
Display(s) 19' HannsG (1440x900 @ 75hz)
Case Coolermaster Elite 330 Black Case
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Meridian, Pioneer VSX-516 Receiver 7.1 with DD/DD EX/Prologic II/DTS/DTS-ES//DTS: Neo
Power Supply Cool Master eXtreme Power 460W PSU
Software Vista Ultimate X64 Corporate Edition
#31
Wrong.

Between the P3 and the Core 2 line, AMD's processor architecture was more efficient, clock-for-clock, than Intel's. That does not necessarily mean that AMD's architecture was better.
If AMD's processors prior to the Core 2 line were faster clock for clock and were priced cheaper than the competition (Intel) that is the definition of a better architecture and better competitive pricing as far as I'm concerned. I do not believe anyone can dispute that.

In fact, I would argue that Intel's architecture won out in the end because they took elements from the P3 and P4D to create the monster that is Core 2; contrast that with AMD, who are still using the Athlon64 architecture and failing to produce chips that can compete with Intel's best.
Perhaps the Core 2 being derived from the P4D and P3 was Intel's saviour but it has little to do with anything I said in post #25 or from what you quoted from me. You can not claim that I'm wrong when I didn't disagree with the P3 architecture being exploited or disagree with the Core 2 being better than the Athlon 64 architecture. I was just merely pointed out 7 events from the top of my head where AMD dominated the architectures in the past. But I give Intel the Core 2 and i7 range, 2/7 is not bad.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
23,268 (6.30/day)
Likes
12,316
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) PowerColor PCS+ 390 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate 6 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
#32
Pentium 4, Xeon, Pentium 4 EE, Pentium 4 D vs Athlon XP, Athlon MP, Athlon 64 FX, Athlon 64 X2: Intel was better. Pentium 4 (and sons) was much better because of Hyper-Threading.

Duron, Semperon vs Celeron: both are crap.


Just because one outperforms the other doesn't necessarily mean it is a better architecture. I consider NetBurst the best architecture out there because it represented a paradigm shift. It attempted to rewrite how processors are designed and the first attempt didn't work out so great. They fixed the bugs in Nehalem and now NetBurst has returned with a vengence. Eight logical cores for the price of four physical cores; Hyper-Threading has come a long way.
 

Darren

New Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
1,936 (0.39/day)
Likes
338
System Name Cheap yet powerful gaming and entertainment rig!
Processor AMD Athlon 3800+ X2 Windsor, 1 MB L2 Cache (512k L2 Per Core), 65W Energy efficient, 2GHz @ 2.78 Ghz
Motherboard Asrock ALiveNF7G-HD720p Rev v5.0
Cooling Freezer 64, 2x120mm, 1x92mm
Memory 8 GB DDRII PC6400 @ 929 MHz OCZ (2GBx4) timing: 5-5-5-5-16-2T
Video Card(s) XFX ATI4830
Storage Seagate 320 GB SATA (16 MB Cache)
Display(s) 19' HannsG (1440x900 @ 75hz)
Case Coolermaster Elite 330 Black Case
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Meridian, Pioneer VSX-516 Receiver 7.1 with DD/DD EX/Prologic II/DTS/DTS-ES//DTS: Neo
Power Supply Cool Master eXtreme Power 460W PSU
Software Vista Ultimate X64 Corporate Edition
#33
FordGT90Concept,

The Semprons were good, used to beat out the low end Pentium 4s which cost like 75% more, with a small overclock it was competing with the high end Pentium 4s. From an engineering stand point you are correct. Its like the argument "PS3s cell processor vs 360s IMB Tri-core". PS3 fan boys can boast about its architecture superiority and pretend to be engineers all they want, just like Intel fan boys that defend Intel’s slow ass Pentium 4s and Ds (back before the core 2 duos) when as customers all that matters is performance not theoretical performance, actual performance relative to price.

Edit:


My post in #25 was ambiguous but the message was easy to convey AMD had faster processors at numerous points in time, one can argue theoretically that AMDs had faster processors despite having a slower architecture. But the post was suppose to interpreted as if we are basing architecture superiority to actual performance opposed to theoretical.

Edit 2:

A 1.4 GHz Pentium 4 is faster than a 2.4 GHz Semperon. That's a generational gap even. Semperons and Celerons both have butchered caches and because of that, it takes them a lot longer (more clocks) to do everything.


Customers only care about getting something that works. Performance is rarely a concern--cost is. $400-600 PCs are still the best selling segment.
It depends what generation of sempron and what generation of Pentium 4 we are talking about. Remember the sempron spanned accross socket A and 754!
 
Last edited:

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
23,268 (6.30/day)
Likes
12,316
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) PowerColor PCS+ 390 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate 6 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
#34
The Semprons were good, used to beat out the low end Pentium 4s which cost like 75% more, with a small overclock it was competing with the high end Pentium 4s. From an engineering stand point you are correct. Its like the argument "PS3s cell processor vs 360s IMB Tri-core". PS3 fan boys can boast about its architecture superiority and pretend to be engineers all they want, just like Intel fan boys that defend Intel’s slow ass Pentium 4s and Ds (back before the core 2 duos) when as customers all that matters is performance not theoretical performance, actual performance relative to price.
A 1.4 GHz Pentium 4 is faster than a 2.4 GHz Semperon. That's a generational gap even. Semperons and Celerons both have butchered caches and because of that, it takes them a lot longer (more clocks) to do everything.


Customers only care about getting something that works. Performance is rarely a concern--cost is. $400-600 PCs are still the best selling segment.


My post in #25 was ambiguous but the message was easy to convey AMD had faster processors at numerous points in time, one can argue theoretically that AMDs had faster processors despite having a slower architecture. But the post was suppose to interpreted as if we are basing architecture superiority to actual performance opposed to theoretical.
Faster does not necessarily mean a better architecture. I define architecture supremecy by innovation. In your example of PS3 vs Xbox 360, I'd say it is a tie. PS3 has the Cell Broadband Engine which uses SPEs while Xbox360's tri-core processor can handle two threads per core. They are both fairly innovative in their own regards. Performance is based largely on clockspeed. In examining an architecture, I ignore the clockspeed nullifying performance.


It depends what generation of sempron and what generation of Pentium 4 we are talking about. Remember the sempron spanned accross socket A and 754!
Socket 423 Willamette vs Socket 754 Palermo

I used both. Willamette flew on XP and Palermo could barely boot. The story is the same for Celerons. It takes at least twice as long to do everything on a Celeron/Sempron everything else being equal.
 
Last edited:

Darren

New Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
1,936 (0.39/day)
Likes
338
System Name Cheap yet powerful gaming and entertainment rig!
Processor AMD Athlon 3800+ X2 Windsor, 1 MB L2 Cache (512k L2 Per Core), 65W Energy efficient, 2GHz @ 2.78 Ghz
Motherboard Asrock ALiveNF7G-HD720p Rev v5.0
Cooling Freezer 64, 2x120mm, 1x92mm
Memory 8 GB DDRII PC6400 @ 929 MHz OCZ (2GBx4) timing: 5-5-5-5-16-2T
Video Card(s) XFX ATI4830
Storage Seagate 320 GB SATA (16 MB Cache)
Display(s) 19' HannsG (1440x900 @ 75hz)
Case Coolermaster Elite 330 Black Case
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Meridian, Pioneer VSX-516 Receiver 7.1 with DD/DD EX/Prologic II/DTS/DTS-ES//DTS: Neo
Power Supply Cool Master eXtreme Power 460W PSU
Software Vista Ultimate X64 Corporate Edition
#35
I agree with you, innovation is just as important as performance, however in the previous posts everyone seems to view sheer performance as the measuring stick and hence why I disagreed that if performance is the only indicator than AMD have been doing well in prior years. Personally I like prices that are relative to performance, innovation is good too but if the processor has 45 GBs of cache and 100 cores but costs £10,000 I'm still not buying it. We are going to have to agree to disagree for the majority of this architectural debate as I'm sure that we are not making much progress.

As for the Sempron I was reading a classic Xbit Labs review of the Sempron 2600 @ 2.5 GHz destroying a Pentium 4 E @ 3.4 GHz. Interesting read.
Here

To be fair the slighty OC'd sempron destroyed even the high end Athlons. Semprons were absolute beasts and workhorses. Ultra cheap too.
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
2,475 (0.58/day)
Likes
502
Location
Oulu, Finland
System Name Enslaver :)
Processor Intel i7 8700k
Motherboard Asus Strix Z370-F Gaming
Cooling CPU: Noctua NH-D14, Case: mix of different fans
Memory 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200MHz + 2x4GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000MHz (running all 3200MHz)
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX 1080 A8G Strix
Storage 500GB Samsung Evo 850 SSD, internal WD Red 4TB for storage
Display(s) LG 55SJ810V 4K IPS TV, HDR
Case Corsair 800D
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster Z. DTS sound over SPDIF
Power Supply Corsair RM850x
Mouse ROG Gladius
Keyboard ASUS Strix Tactic Pro
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#36
I agree with you, innovation is just as important as performance, however in the previous posts everyone seems to view sheer performance as the measuring stick and hence why I disagreed that if performance is the only indicator than AMD have been doing well in prior years. Personally I like prices that are relative to performance, innovation is good too but if the processor has 45 GBs of cache and 100 cores but costs £10,000 I'm still not buying it. We are going to have to agree to disagree for the majority of this architectural debate as I'm sure that we are not making much progress.

As for the Sempron I was reading a classic Xbit Labs review of the Sempron 2600 @ 2.5 GHz destroying a Pentium 4 E @ 3.4 GHz. Interesting read.
Here

To be fair the slighty OC'd sempron destroyed even the high end Athlons. Semprons were absolute beasts and workhorses. Ultra cheap too.
I know.. I had a 745 Sempron 3000+.. oced to well over 3GHz once.. it could motor any game i threw at it (Doom3, Battlefield Vietnam, BFII)..
Heck it still motors most of the games.. i sold it to a friend with my mobo and he uses that setup till he has some cash to update it and he plays games like Fallout 3, The Witcher and NHL 2009 with some drawbacks in eyecandy :)
 

cray86

New Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
97 (0.02/day)
Likes
10
Location
Springfield, IL
System Name DEATH STAR
Processor Q6700 @ 3.66
Motherboard ABIT IX38 Quad GT LGA 775
Cooling ZEROtherm Nirvana NV120 120mm, 4 antec 120mm
Memory OCZ Reaper HPC Edition 4GB DDR2-800 4-4-4-18
Video Card(s) VisionTek 4870 X2
Storage 1TB Seagate
Display(s) Acer 24" LCD
Case COOLER MASTER RC-690-KKN1-GP Black Mid Tower
Power Supply OCZ ModXStream 780W
Software Windows 7 RC Build 7100
#37
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
2,475 (0.58/day)
Likes
502
Location
Oulu, Finland
System Name Enslaver :)
Processor Intel i7 8700k
Motherboard Asus Strix Z370-F Gaming
Cooling CPU: Noctua NH-D14, Case: mix of different fans
Memory 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200MHz + 2x4GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000MHz (running all 3200MHz)
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX 1080 A8G Strix
Storage 500GB Samsung Evo 850 SSD, internal WD Red 4TB for storage
Display(s) LG 55SJ810V 4K IPS TV, HDR
Case Corsair 800D
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster Z. DTS sound over SPDIF
Power Supply Corsair RM850x
Mouse ROG Gladius
Keyboard ASUS Strix Tactic Pro
Software Windows 10 Pro x64

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
23,268 (6.30/day)
Likes
12,316
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) PowerColor PCS+ 390 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate 6 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
#39
To be fair the slighty OC'd sempron destroyed even the high end Athlons. Semprons were absolute beasts and workhorses. Ultra cheap too.
I wouldn't call a 36% overclock "slight." Processors that have less cache tend to be able to run higher clocks at lower voltages. That doesn't mean they are getting more work done though. The 4000+ was clocked at 2.4 GHz and the FX-55 was at 2.6 GHz. I don't doubt that either of those processors would hand it to a 2.5 GHz Sempron.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
294 (0.08/day)
Likes
34
Location
New York
System Name Geraldo RiveraII
Processor Intel Core2Quad q6600 @ 3.2ghz
Motherboard DFI Lanparty DK x38-t2rb
Cooling Xigmatek HDT-D1264 CPU fan, case fans
Memory 4 gigs (2x2gig) G.Skill DDR2 800
Video Card(s) Sapphire HD3870 @ 850/1305
Storage WD 500gb Caviar, WD Mybook 1tb external
Display(s) Asus 24" VK246H
Case Antec 900
Audio Device(s) onboard realtek
Power Supply PCP&C Silencer 750 quad 750w
Software Windows 7 (7100), Sony Vegas Pro 9, Photoshop CS4+
Benchmark Scores 3dmark06=12680 (Vista Business 32x) 3dmark06=12852 (Windows 7 7100 64x)
#40
AMD have been behind for around 3 years. But how long were Intel behind before that? longer than 3 years I would presume



Remember there was the Athlon XP vs the Pentium 4, AMD had the better architecture.

There was the Athlon MP vs the P4 Xeon, AMD had the better architecture.

There was the AMD Duron vs the Celeron, AMD had the better architecture.

There was the Athlon FX vs the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition, AMD had the better architecture

There was the Celeron D vs empron, AMD had the better architecture.

There was the Athlon 64 vs the Pentium D, AMD had the better architecture

There was the Athlon X2 64 vs the Pentium D, AMD had the better architecture.


My point AMD has been dominating the performance for a long time, Intel’s 3 year reign has been very short in comparison to AMDs. Even with Intel’s slower architectures Intel still overpriced their CPUs but some how managed to maintain a larger market share than AMD.
.
Thats wayyyyy offff. Intel held the crown since the early 70's. Then they messed up with P4, and AMD had the crown for a few years. Now after Core 2, and now with Core i* Intel is once again holding the crown. AMD has had to deal with the back seat a lot longer then Intel had to in the past few years....

That being said, I don't find it surprsing Intel is slated to release 32nm tech before AMD, its just simple economics, but will Intel have it better than AMD will eventually do? I honestly don't know, 32nm is small...and its pretty much new territory for mass production, although so was 45nm...and 65...oh well, well see.
 

cdawall

where the hell are my stars
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
27,331 (6.07/day)
Likes
8,216
Location
Houston
System Name All the cores
Processor 2990WX
Motherboard Asrock X399M
Cooling XSPC RayStorm Neo, MCR220-Stack+MCR220+MCR320, D5-PWM+EK X-RES 140
Memory 4x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 3200 CL16
Video Card(s) (2) EVGA SC BLACK 1080Ti's+AMD VEGA FE (sometimes)
Storage Samsung SM951 512GB, Samsung PM961 512GB
Display(s) Dell UP2414Q 3840X2160@60hz
Case Caselabs Mercury S5
Audio Device(s) Fischer HA-02->Fischer FA-002W High edition/FA-003/Jubilate/FA-011 depending on my mood
Power Supply Seasonic Prime 1200w
Mouse Thermaltake Theron
Keyboard Thermaltake Poseidon ZX
Software W10P
Benchmark Scores Zoom zoom mofo
#41
I agree with you, innovation is just as important as performance, however in the previous posts everyone seems to view sheer performance as the measuring stick and hence why I disagreed that if performance is the only indicator than AMD have been doing well in prior years. Personally I like prices that are relative to performance, innovation is good too but if the processor has 45 GBs of cache and 100 cores but costs £10,000 I'm still not buying it. We are going to have to agree to disagree for the majority of this architectural debate as I'm sure that we are not making much progress.

As for the Sempron I was reading a classic Xbit Labs review of the Sempron 2600 @ 2.5 GHz destroying a Pentium 4 E @ 3.4 GHz. Interesting read.
Here

To be fair the slighty OC'd sempron destroyed even the high end Athlons. Semprons were absolute beasts and workhorses. Ultra cheap too.
not quite they are about 15% weaker clock for clock against a standard athlon same goes on the sempron X2 vs athlon X2 a windsor chip clocked at 2.8ghz could out perform my sempronX2@3.2ghz 256KB L2 vs 1MB L2 cache makes alot of difference.

Thats wayyyyy offff. Intel held the crown since the early 70's. Then they messed up with P4, and AMD had the crown for a few years. Now after Core 2, and now with Core i* Intel is once again holding the crown. AMD has had to deal with the back seat a lot longer then Intel had to in the past few years....

That being said, I don't find it surprsing Intel is slated to release 32nm tech before AMD, its just simple economics, but will Intel have it better than AMD will eventually do? I honestly don't know, 32nm is small...and its pretty much new territory for mass production, although so was 45nm...and 65...oh well, well see.
not 100% correct P3 vs K6-2/K7 was pretty much a toss up a 1600+ and P3 1.4ghz ran about the same cost the same etc.
 

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
35,945 (8.85/day)
Likes
18,381
Location
Hyderabad, India
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Motherboard MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
Cooling AMD Wraith Prism
Memory 2x 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) Colorful iGame GTX 1070 Ti Vulcan X
Storage Crucial MX500 500GB
Display(s) Samsung U28D590 28-inch 4K UHD
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D PCIe
Power Supply Antec EarthWatts Pro Gold 750W
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard Microsoft Sidewinder X4
Software Windows 10 Pro
#42
Let's get back to topic. It's not that every news post about AMD or Intel should descend into an Intel vs. AMD discussion.
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (5.48/day)
Likes
3,682
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
#43
Can't wait to see how well 32nm clocks, and if they are able to keep electron migration in check on such a small process.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
23,268 (6.30/day)
Likes
12,316
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) PowerColor PCS+ 390 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate 6 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
#44
That being said, I don't find it surprsing Intel is slated to release 32nm tech before AMD, its just simple economics, but will Intel have it better than AMD will eventually do? I honestly don't know, 32nm is small...and its pretty much new territory for mass production, although so was 45nm...and 65...oh well, well see.
AMD co-develops new processes with IBM. AMDs 90 and 45 are pretty good but their 65 was crap. Intel has never really stumbled with a new process but there is a first for everything.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
294 (0.08/day)
Likes
34
Location
New York
System Name Geraldo RiveraII
Processor Intel Core2Quad q6600 @ 3.2ghz
Motherboard DFI Lanparty DK x38-t2rb
Cooling Xigmatek HDT-D1264 CPU fan, case fans
Memory 4 gigs (2x2gig) G.Skill DDR2 800
Video Card(s) Sapphire HD3870 @ 850/1305
Storage WD 500gb Caviar, WD Mybook 1tb external
Display(s) Asus 24" VK246H
Case Antec 900
Audio Device(s) onboard realtek
Power Supply PCP&C Silencer 750 quad 750w
Software Windows 7 (7100), Sony Vegas Pro 9, Photoshop CS4+
Benchmark Scores 3dmark06=12680 (Vista Business 32x) 3dmark06=12852 (Windows 7 7100 64x)
#45
AMD co-develops new processes with IBM. AMDs 90 and 45 are pretty good but their 65 was crap. Intel has never really stumbled with a new process but there is a first for everything.
I know that, but this is really small...what is it, two processes above nanoelectronics? I'm not saying they are gonna mess something up, or its not gonna be the best it can be when they release, or in the coming months after, I'm just saying its interesting how its gonna play out going smaller and smaller.
 

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
35,945 (8.85/day)
Likes
18,381
Location
Hyderabad, India
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Motherboard MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
Cooling AMD Wraith Prism
Memory 2x 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) Colorful iGame GTX 1070 Ti Vulcan X
Storage Crucial MX500 500GB
Display(s) Samsung U28D590 28-inch 4K UHD
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D PCIe
Power Supply Antec EarthWatts Pro Gold 750W
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard Microsoft Sidewinder X4
Software Windows 10 Pro
#46
AMD co-develops new processes with IBM. AMDs 90 and 45 are pretty good but their 65 was crap. Intel has never really stumbled with a new process but there is a first for everything.
Intel stumbled with 90 nm.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2007
Messages
2,487 (0.58/day)
Likes
342
Location
Your house.
System Name Jupiter-2
Processor Intel i3-6100
Motherboard H170I-PLUS D3
Cooling Stock
Memory 8GB Mushkin DDR3L-1600
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1050ti
Storage 512GB Corsair SSD
Display(s) BENQ 24in
Case Lian Li PC-Q01B Mini ITX
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair 450W
Mouse Logitech Trackball
Keyboard Custom bamboo job
Software Win 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Finished Super PI on legendary mode in only 13 hours.
#47
Intel wasn't found guilty in the USA.
Given the traditional pro-business-no-matter-who-gets-screwed-over political climate in the US, the fact that Intel wasn't found guilty in the USA means absolutely nothing to me. :laugh:

Just because the US won't take a stand on something doesn't make it okay. The US has never joined international treaties banning the use of landmines, for example -- does that make them okay, too?

The fact remains is that Intel has been a very, very naughty company in the past, and everything they do can be seen in suspect because of that, which was what I was trying to get at. ;)
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,685 (0.92/day)
Likes
402
Location
Ohio
System Name Felix777
Processor Core i5-3570k@stock
Motherboard Biostar H61
Memory 8gb
Video Card(s) XFX RX 470
Storage WD 500GB BLK
Display(s) Acer p236h bd
Case Haf 912
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Rosewill CAPSTONE 450watt
Software Win 10 x64
#48
So what is the limit to silicon's manufacturing process? 11nm? what will TSMC/Global Foundries use then? wonder if once we get to 11nm, there'll be like a delay where companies(Nvidia, Intel, AMD) are stuck using 11nm for a while till they come up with something else, or is there already something in the works to replace silicon? i'm not too savy on this subject so if there's a good read or just general info on it post it :toast:
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
23,268 (6.30/day)
Likes
12,316
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) PowerColor PCS+ 390 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate 6 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
#49
I know that, but this is really small...what is it, two processes above nanoelectronics? I'm not saying they are gonna mess something up, or its not gonna be the best it can be when they release, or in the coming months after, I'm just saying its interesting how its gonna play out going smaller and smaller.
Nanoelectronics are around 10nm.


Intel stumbled with 90 nm.
I was thinking the same thing actually. It wasn't as bad of a stumble as AMD's 65nm but a stumble nevertheless.


Given the traditional pro-business-no-matter-who-gets-screwed-over political climate in the US, the fact that Intel wasn't found guilty in the USA means absolutely nothing to me. :laugh:
It should. Screwing business means screwing employees which means screwing the economy. Anti-trust laws only come in to play in the USA when there is a blatant violation of fair business practices (e.g. buying up all your competitors so you have no competition).


Just because the US won't take a stand on something doesn't make it okay. The US has never joined international treaties banning the use of landmines, for example -- does that make them okay, too?
Considering USA is about the only country that still conducts wars, most countries have little use for landmines anymore. We do. Landmines are excellent area denial weapons and much cheaper than $100,000 bombs.


The fact remains is that Intel has been a very, very naughty company in the past, and everything they do can be seen in suspect because of that, which was what I was trying to get at. ;)
You can't stop a mob determined to burn a "witch" (see Salem Witch Trials). Your perception of "fact" varies from mine. Just because a court in EU and a court in Japan considers it fact doesn't make it a "universal truth."
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
1,998 (0.54/day)
Likes
337
System Name Budget AMD System
Processor FX-8320 @ 4Ghz (5.2Ghz when gaming)
Motherboard Gigabyte 970A-UD3P 1.0
Cooling Corsair H100i V2
Memory G-Skill X Series 2x4GB 1866
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon RX Vega₆⁴ Liquid @ 1,820Mhz
Storage 3x SATA (320GB/ 160GB/160GB Seagates)
Display(s) Vizio 22" 1080p 60hz TV (Samsung Panel)
Case Corsair 570X
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Seasonic X Series 850W KM3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#50
If what I read was correct AMD may skip 32nm and go straight to 22nm if GLOBALFOUNDRIES has their way. This is more rumor than it is fact but I think it might be true... 45nm for AMD clocks real well and has decent efficiency so... why change it*?
*so soon
---OFF TOPIC BELOW---
Also, Intel has yet to be found guilty in the US because the cases are not over yet... Intel's final trial is set for August 09... the judge is very pissed off at Intel for screwing with him over and over again... so I doubt this will end well for Intel.
---
As for the FTC investigation... FTC has said that they will take all the findings from the AMD vs Intel case to assist in putting down their possible fine.
---
As for the state of NY... same applies...
 
Last edited:
Top