What is Digg?99 Comments
- chanop, on 04/18/2008, -0/+81I hope AMD stays in close competition with Intel. It only brings out better technology
- kgorczyn, on 04/18/2008, -1/+69I miss the old days, when the K7 (Athlon) came out and whopped Intel's ass.
- maino82, on 04/18/2008, -0/+33i miss my good ole 1.3ghz thunderbird... i get misty eyed just thinking about it... that thing let me play jedi knight, do my homework, and fry an egg all at the same time. my english teacher was always confused as to why all my writing assignments involved lightsabers and smelled like egg yolk though...
- pimpdad82, on 04/18/2008, -3/+33The idea that Intel is more of a competitor then ATI is completely absurd. ATI makes much more powerful graphics cards. They are morphing this into a battle that hasn't even begun. The battle between integrated chips is light years away. Current integrated chips cannot touch an add on card.
Bottom line: Intel needs to stick with what they do best... Processors - Dylson, on 04/18/2008, -0/+27Yeah, and it makes everything a LOT cheaper!
- i4ybrid, on 04/18/2008, -0/+15No, not onboard graphics. Putting the CPU and GPU on one die will speed up BUS speeds. It has the potential to reduce the costs of building gaming machines and power consumption. I think the biggest hurdle they have are doing this without screwing developers over and cooling these chips.
- Aitese, on 04/18/2008, -4/+16When was the last time some actual tech NEWS hit Digg, rather than mindless speculation on things the author would like to see?
- 0biKwiet, on 04/18/2008, -1/+13I'd really like to see AMD make a big come back. With their stock so low I could make a killing.
- chanop, on 04/18/2008, -3/+14at least it's tech, and not "obama's got golden dingle-berries" stroies
- erkokite, on 04/18/2008, -1/+11AMD needs to get bought by IBM. That way they'll have a serious budget with which to make decent chips again. As for Intel's new massively parallel CPU/GPU/whatever it is, we'll have to wait until it comes out o judge it. My money is on Nvidia holding the performance crown. This is what Nvidia does, Intel is going to be playing on Nvidia's turf here.
- bstockwell, on 04/18/2008, -0/+9I'd like it if no one won, if you get what I mean
- smotpoker, on 04/18/2008, -2/+11My 1.4ghz tbird was a pos
K8 did a pretty good job at handing Intel's ass to them as well - ecarver530, on 04/18/2008, -1/+10AMD lost $350 million according to the last earnings report.
- nirvanix, on 04/18/2008, -3/+12AMD/ATI has really come up with a great integrated graphics chip for video playback - the 780G series. It can playback 1080p without breaking a sweat. Paired with one of their low-power CPUs, this could be a very successful product. They just don't seem to know how to promote and package this into something that a consumer would put in their living room. That is the problem with the PC industry in general and that is why Apple is doing so well - they sell consumer products.
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/18/2008, -0/+9:( I still love my optys.
- inactive, on 04/18/2008, -0/+8He does? Can you post a link on the article please?
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 04/18/2008, -0/+8Sorry, but you forgot the 45nm and the E6750. The E6750 is about $170 now and buries the X2 6000+. The E6600 is old, outdated, and severely over-priced. You also forgot the E8200 and the E7200, both of which bury the X2 6000+ six feet under. The E7200, by the way, is $133.
Final word, you should avoid posting in tech-related Digg stories when you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. At least do the research to know what's on the market, and how it performs based on its price. Maybe that will benefit you more in the future, instead of playing the age-old "AMD is for budget systems" card which became inaccurate about 2 years ago now. - MSstar, on 04/18/2008, -1/+8will it play crysis?
- Andyschism, on 04/18/2008, -0/+7RTFA THEN.
- bradleyland, on 04/18/2008, -0/+7T-bird beat Intel to 1 GHz, and it will always be remembered for that.
http://www.news.com/2100-1040-237615.html
$1299 for a 1 GHz processor
"In the yeeeear two thouuusaaaaaand" - Conan O'Brian - whoreable, on 04/18/2008, -1/+7Neither company (AMD + Intel) will go out of business. The industry moves in cycles. One is always on top, but never permanently.
- Harabeck, on 04/18/2008, -5/+11All this fighting over on board graphics?
- smacksaw, on 04/18/2008, -0/+5A very compelling and convincing article, though I think he's really just demonstrated what a lot of people (including AMD) have been saying.
There's something to be said for both technologies. I really like Intel's approach for devices like PDAs and phones. When I stop and think about it though, the best designed systems like the Amiga had chips that performed specific functions. There's something to be said for that. Intel is almost fighting over the low-end of the market.
Finally, I think the logical comparison with Intel is the Cell, or what Sony is doing with the PS3 - a low-end computer. Even Sony, with all of the potential power for graphical functions from the CPUs still has an nVidia GPU in the machine. Maybe as chip technology progresses we'll see Sony switch to an all-in-one chip on later PS3 revisions. But as it stands now, even with a very robust processing environment, Sony's wisdom was a discrete and dedicated graphics processing unit. - zephyr42, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3Intel has a tenancy to screw people, I wouldn't count that out yet.
- zephyr42, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3And the A64 when it first came out...
which is presently still in my computer :-( - barf314, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3Can it defeat the Grimmace?
- chanop, on 04/18/2008, -4/+7oh my!
- solidcube, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2These new chipsets are going to slaughter the daughterboard market. Just watch.
- fuzzynyanko, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2There's been a few times like NVidia's Geforce 5000 series, which didn't deliver as well as ATI. Now, the Geforce 9000 series is in that same risk. However, ATI's mid-range prices are very competitive right now.
- zephyr42, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Intel is trying their discrete graphics cards... ie "add on" cards again, that's why there was a brouhaha between intel being cocky for no reason and nvidia took offence.
- i4ybrid, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2I read this article on slashdot yesterday, and I really wanted to buy AMD stock. With their upcoming three core processors (basically the quad cores that had a failed/deactivated core) and the fact they can dominate the CPU/GPU hybrids might put them ahead of Intel in personal computing!
- rezonq3, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2I have been considering purchasing AMD stock for two reasons. One, I want to support what they are trying to accomplish which will promote competition, and two, because I feel that it is only a matter of time, albeit likely a year or more, until AMD starts on a rebound trek and becomes a major contender again, which should make me a killing on their stock value ;)
- Harabeck, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3How fast the diggs are accumulated are also factored into the algorithm. Since this was submitted 22 hours ago... It looks like someone came back and really dugg up...
- Ganpachi, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3?
The top graphics solutions out right now is the 9800GX2. - theneb29, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2My first comp, K6-2 with 3D now, good old days! really sad to see them going into 8th straight quater of loss and loosing to intel in both performance and power consumption :( come back amd!
- DestroyFascism, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2I just want the bloody quad core to work so I can tech speck myself....sheesh!
- quakken, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2So far, the 3870's have been reasonably strong performers for the price, and depending on which benches you see the 3870x2 is also a great performer for the price. They're not for the ultra-rich I-just-Have-This-computer-to-see-how-many-more-Frames-per-second-I-can-get-in-crysis people. Nividia and intel with their $1000 pieces are what that is for.
- bradleyland, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2While it's a given that it will take some time for Intel to catch up with the current progression of discrete graphics cards, the author's argument hinges on an even more important question. Who will buy them? Consumers are resisting the change from Windows XP to Vista. Where is the huge demand for powerful graphics processors going to come from? Even advanced visual interfaces like Compiz Fusion run on current gen IGP chipsets like X3100.
I'm not suggesting that we sit stagnant where we are today, but I think the assessment that the GPU will constitute almost two-thirds of the value of a PC by 2012 (in just four years) is wildly optimistic. - zephyr42, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Intel doesn't even have 45nm quad cores out that are affordable. Fact is AMD has a better architecture. I think the new chips are going to have the power savings and the raw power that AMD people love to see....
- fuzzynyanko, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2I'm thinking of upgrading this year, and one aspect about Socket AM2+ is that AMD is going to try to make their CPUs forwards-compatible, brining back one sweet aspect about Socket A: I can pop in a new CPU 2-3 years later and not have to buy a new motherboard. That also leaves less pains with Windows.
- Mapou, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Well, I would say that AMD has an excellent engineering team. The company just does not have the right vision but it's not too late. Engineers, no matter how good they are at what they do, are not paid to have vision. They are paid to find solutions to engineering problems. Vision comes from the top and, in this case, the top is CEO Hector Ruiz. Mr. Ruiz should realize by now that competing against Intel on their own turf is ultimately a losing proposition. They gave it a good try and they did extremely well considering what they were up against. Now that the industry is taking its first painful steps away from sequential computing toward parallel processing, the market and the technological landscape has changed drastically. There is a big crisis under way with multicore processor technology. Current thread-based multicore offerings from both AMD and Intel are very hard to program and legacy code that were not developed with multithreading in mind cannot take advantage of parallel processing. AMD should not consider this problem as a threat to its financial future but as an opportunity to redefine the processor game and force Intel (and Nvidia) to play by its rules. To find out why multithreading is not part of the future of parallel programming, read Nightmare on Core Street at the following link: http://rebelscience.blogspot.com/2008/03/nightmare ... Will Hector Ruiz rise to the occasion? Only time will tell. Hint: It's time to say goodbye to x86 compatibility and grab the 21st century bull by the horns.
- longbow486, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Dual, Dual cores mmmm yup me too
- pcpimpster, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Yeah but why would you go with a e6600 when you can get a q6600 for the same price.
I got one of these bad boys and i must say, i'm colored impressed by its price to performance.
Most capable processor I've ever had the pleasure to abuse. - mmockett, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Rude
- longbow486, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2my old Tbird 900 is still running strong, its lasted through 4 motherboards. thats longer then any other CPU i have ever bought
- Harabeck, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Funny, my quad core works just fine.
- A11YND, on 04/18/2008, -2/+4I hearted my Thunderbird.
AMD FTW. - carl0ski, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1the sale of Vista doesn't necessarily discredit the need for such a product
A motherboard with one less component (IGP on Motherboard)
results in potentially smaller mainboards
It also means a Laptop can centralise its heatsource.
Reduction in space between CPU and GPU may also reduce power consumption and loss caused by distance of circuitry - UtopiaInTheSky, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Gigabyte DS3L. $80.
- HonoredMule, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1"And much of what Intel and NVIDIA are doing today is actually validating what AMD has done over the past 24 months."
Now if only I could find all those "people on the internet who were wrong" ( http://xkcd.com/386/ ) and remind them that I told them so. -
Show 51 - 98 of 98 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