What is Digg?123 Comments
- aceslick911, on 02/09/2008, -1/+94what happened to you AMD? You used to be cool...
- Keitosha, on 02/09/2008, -3/+37In case this hasn't been mentioned before: Finally a tech related story reaching the FP. No Anon, ***** $cientology, RIAA, taser or Ron Paul this time. :)
Oh and btw, that's bad for AMD. :( - lordtyros, on 02/09/2008, -1/+34Fortunately for AMD, most games are still mostly GPU-bound so CPU speed isn't as important as it once was. But still, they really need to get their ***** together. They can't be the Sam's Choice processor brand forever.
- Dgen_X, on 02/09/2008, -0/+30As long as the X2s keep dropping in price I'm good, even though I'm a pc gamer I don't feel the urge to spend any extra money on a quad core processor, Core or Phenom.
Been putting off building a new X2 based desktop...and I just bought a 1 year old (new, not used) 1.7ghz Core Duo laptop, I can say...I'm pretty impressed with this processor, unless the performance problems with vista have been over exaggerated. - inactive, on 02/09/2008, -2/+26Too bad, competition is good for everyone, Intel included......
- renegadeafk, on 02/09/2008, -0/+21the X2's were Raping the Pentium D's before the core2 came out too.
- houndeyex, on 02/09/2008, -2/+20They bought ATI.
- zephyr42, on 02/09/2008, -2/+18It's true, they spent way too much on it and it's holding their CPU manufacturing behind.
- Keitosha, on 02/09/2008, -0/+14The story has been updated.
QFA:
"Update: We just got off the phone with AMD, who told us that they're actually ahead of schedule on the "B3" Phenom silicon, which fixes that buffer error without requiring a new BIOS, and that they expect to ship higher frequency quad-core Phenoms in Q2 as planned. They would not, however, give us model numbers or clock speeds, and wouldn't commit to a date in Q2 -- so don't be surprised if these hit as the 9750 and 9950 on the last day of Q2 after all." - pipdip, on 02/09/2008, -1/+14Disappointing... even though I'm an Intel fan. This may mean Intel will delay processors due to lack of competition and raise prices for the same reason. They already delayed the newest 45nm chips for "processing problems".
- motang, on 02/09/2008, -1/+14Damn this sucks, this is giving the competition the hands up.
- MindTrigger, on 02/09/2008, -0/+13I miss the old Digg. The tech section sucks ass now. I don't even know if I will bother hanging around here much longer, and I signed up in '05.
- chingy1788, on 02/09/2008, -7/+19Currently the AthlonX2s and Phenoms that are out, out perform the equivalently priced Intel
- inactive, on 02/09/2008, -0/+9Intel must be loving every minute of it
- amnesiac096, on 02/09/2008, -1/+9I just got my new X2 5000+ Black Edition, it's amazing so far, and I'm in the same boat as you... not worth spending extra for a quad from either company right now. Plus I already had an AM2 board, so I figured just go with the X2 black edition instead of fiddling with the Phenom which may not even work on my board since there was no BIOS update that specified whether or not it allowed for Phenom's. X2's are good processors, and they're a lot cheaper than their Intel counterparts.
- kentifer, on 02/09/2008, -2/+10Update: We just got off the phone with AMD, who told us that they're actually ahead of schedule on the "B3" Phenom silicon, which fixes that buffer error without requiring a new BIOS, and that they expect to ship higher frequency quad-core Phenoms in Q2 as planned. They would not, however, give us model numbers or clock speeds, and wouldn't commit to a date in Q2 -- so don't be surprised if these hit as the 9750 and 9950 on the last day of Q2 after all.
- JaredMD, on 02/09/2008, -0/+8At that point, is the gender of the camel really necessary?
- Muncher, on 02/09/2008, -1/+9Wow, it's like you've been frozen in time the past two years.
- MisterPink, on 02/09/2008, -0/+7Just wanted to put this out for you, for $447(with $40 mail in rebate) I can build a computer with a geforce 8600 GT, athlon 5000+, 2 gigs of ram, 450 watt power supply, and a 250 gig sata hard drive(includes dvd burner and case). How is that not a gaming computer for $400? If you want I can email you the shopping cart from newegg.
- bnolsen, on 02/09/2008, -0/+6They'd already lost their edge when they bought ATI, that's why they bought them.
Basically AMD dropped their R&D after releasing Athlon64 and moved into "feature parity" mode with the P4.
I totally blame their management for blowing 3-4 years of R&D. - sdlvx, on 02/09/2008, -1/+7Engadget is pretty biased against AMD.
http://www.amdzone.com/index.php/news/chipsets/38/ ...
Is this really a big deal? Instead of giving us more ***** TLB infested computers, they're just going to skip it all and dish out the B3 revision, and that will *hopefully* take care of the cache speed issue, which is one of the greatest factors holding back phenom from being a decent processor. In case you haven't noticed, Phenom has a lot of potential (http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_phemon ... The thing is a beast in cinebench. If AMD would fix the flaws in Phenom (cache speed, TLB, etc), and get on the 45nm process, it would give intel a run for it's money until nehalem.
I can't seem to find it, but I saw benches on an overclocked phenom 9900 at about 3.1Ghz. A 16% overclock in cinebench gave a 37% performance gain.
AMD is in such ***** shape because some moron (see Hector Ruiz) decided that Core 2 was "a perfect storm they just had to ride out". They should be *somewhat* competitive again if they can skip playing around with B2 phenoms, get B3 going, and then drop the process to 45nm with B4. - gyrfalcon, on 02/09/2008, -0/+5Probably since it helps evoke homophobia. :)
- atbnet, on 02/09/2008, -1/+6Yeah this is what it used to be like in 2005.
- Orderless, on 02/09/2008, -0/+5Since the article has been updated, this headline is no longer accurate. Buried as such.
- inactive, on 02/09/2008, -1/+6No,competition is not good for intel. No company wants marginal revenue to match marginal price when they can match it to marginal cost instead. No AMD ---> flagrant market discrimination, as Intel ramps up prices and sells fewer chips to wealthier buyers so that it can make equal revenues without having to expend as much on R&D and production.
- gyrfalcon, on 02/09/2008, -1/+5Give me a break... Is Intel currently king? Yes... Who kicked the sleeping giant in the ass??? AMD!!!
So don't give me this BS about their engineers being "better". - aussieNickuss, on 02/10/2008, -0/+4If the tech sections sucks so much.....isn't it up to people like yourselves to post the stories to digg that are interesting?
- CaviMike, on 02/09/2008, -0/+4Damn, I really planned on building another AMD powered computer.
- cebbs, on 02/09/2008, -0/+4I hope AMD is able to pull it together. Its great for consumers to have two companies competing with comparable products.
- carlosos, on 02/09/2008, -2/+6Of course not considering the reduce CPU life and the additional cost for a better cooler...
Most people won't overclock and I believe that less than 2% of people are overclocking. - STARTSOMETHING, on 02/09/2008, -1/+5AMD FTW.
- deadbaby, on 02/09/2008, -0/+4That's fine for gamers but many people are using these high end CPUs for video encoding, audio processing, scientific work, CAD design, professional graphics design/editing, etc, etc, etc.
- bjornski, on 02/09/2008, -1/+4OC'd my 386 DX-25 to 40Mhz.
It rocked.
Paid $2100 for that sucker. At the time, it was top of the line stuff. The video card was as long as my arm. - Zaneris, on 02/09/2008, -1/+4That wasn't so long ago... I remember overclocking my Pentium II processor.
- Giga, on 02/09/2008, -0/+3Wow. Just wow. Apparently someone hasn't been paying attention to the Core 2 Duo vs X2 benchmarks.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/athlon64-x2-600 ...
Considering the X2 6000+ is 3GHz and is no faster than a 2.4GHz E6600, your claim that performance per clock is entirely wrong. - mutagenesis, on 02/09/2008, -0/+3As long as I can get a decent quad-core in my laptop without paying 3k this summer I'm happy.
//too bad though - iofthestorm, on 02/10/2008, -0/+3Well, Intel has better process technology so they can do that, AMD can't afford to put that much cache on their cores, in fact it seems like they've actually been reducing the amount of cache on their chips since the Athlon 64 days. Also, all that cache isn't the only factor, the Core2 architecture is just better. Back in the Athlon 64 days the Intel Extreme Editions had an unheard of (for that time) 2MB of L3, and yet they still got stomped by the Athlon 64 FX. But yeah, I'm sure they'll get ahead too, the tech industry seems to always go in cycles. Now if they could just get some Phenoms out at 3+Ghz, they would rock.
- ipugh, on 02/09/2008, -0/+3What is the clock speed on the delayed Phenom processors?
- HonoredMule, on 02/09/2008, -4/+750 more dollars is no trifling matter when you could be building your whole GAMING rig for 400 + vid card cost, or your whole non-gaming rig for about 350. 20 more dollars is the maximum "It's substantially better, so I might as well" upgraded choice price range in today's market.
- samgab, on 02/09/2008, -0/+3But it looks like the 9700 Phenom quad-core is available now:
http://pcu.co.nz/store/product.php?product=3569&PH ...
http://www.computerlounge.co.nz/components/compone ...
So what is Nilay talking about? - Typhoon2009, on 02/09/2008, -3/+6I still remember the days when the Athlon XP 2500+ Mobile or that one Opteron processor were THE processors of choice for overclocking.
- kingmanic, on 02/09/2008, -1/+4Competition is good for us though, and good for the "fitness" of a company. It ensures they don't bloat away into mindless bureaucracy .
- chingy1788, on 02/09/2008, -0/+2they were basically the top in 2005, when Core 2 was not released
- mGARANDEUR1, on 02/10/2008, -0/+2AMD won over the p4 for performance in the last round. It is now Intel's time to shine. It brings good competition.
- dopesick, on 02/09/2008, -2/+4Well atleast unlike intel, they aren't release a known defective chip. Anyone remember that pentium with the math errors? LOL.
- chingy1788, on 02/09/2008, -0/+2360 would just overheat and die
- mGARANDEUR1, on 02/09/2008, -2/+4I'm sure they will eventually get ahead of Intel. Maybe they will catch on and realize that the reason Intel chips are so much better is their high L2 caches. You can get quad core processors with 16mb L2 cache!
- FoxRacR17, on 02/09/2008, -1/+3I'm disappointed. I was planning on building a new quad core machine once i graduate in july and i was hoping it would be amd just like my last build (which has been stable, even on overclock, since the day i built it) but it looks like the next build is going to end up being intel...
- mGARANDEUR1, on 02/09/2008, -3/+5Intel has been so far ahead of AMD for the dual core and quad core processors. AMD chips were faster than the P4s, but it seems like they are lagging behind now.
- neutrascrub, on 02/09/2008, -2/+4i did by buying their stock but that was before the failures
-
Show 51 - 100 of 119 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 