PDA

View Full Version : AMD Phenom update



Mehen
13th November 2007, 11:38
http://www.amdzone.com/images/stories/News/Phenom/PIB/phenomsmall.jpg

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/11/13/amd-phenom-9000-quad-core-8000

naming scheme - "AMD Phenom 9000 is quad core, and 8000 is tri-core"

Performance-wise - expect something around the Q6600 level (and similar performance/clockspeed), but with MUCH less overclocking headroom. Nonetheless, they should be priced pretty competitively and will be a definite option for new system builders - provided of course they don't plan on overclocking.

That being said, there is rumor we might see an Intel quadcore @ 4GHz (STOCK) in mid 2008.

Tjalfe
13th November 2007, 12:16
sounds like tough times for AMD, if they don't get the clock speed up in a hurry :(

rylan
13th November 2007, 13:26
Wow was that one of the worst articles from the inquirer or what? Tons of typos, and very difficult to read. That editor should be canned.

Mehen
13th November 2007, 18:03
l'inq is in the habit of getting their articles out as soon as possible - even if that means no editting :p

I think if the pricing on the AMDs are good they will still sell a lot - especially if bulk pricing to the big guys (Dell, HP, etc) is good.

Kooldino
15th November 2007, 10:25
This reminds me - Since I put my 'new' motherboard in 6+ months ago, I've yet to OC my Opteron.

Tjalfe
19th November 2007, 14:57
not exactly getting glowing reviews :(
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3153
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/19/the_spider_weaves_its_web/

Elie
19th November 2007, 15:41
Results look dissapointing!!!

AMD could have done better, why are they not focusing on higher clocks is beyond me.

Mehen
19th November 2007, 15:41
Seems like the Q6600 is still the best overall choice, even for a high range of budgets.

Mehen
19th November 2007, 15:42
AMD could have done better, why are they not focusing on higher clocks is beyond me.

Because they can't get em to run properly at higher clocks :(

First they were supposed to be ~2.8 and 3.0ghz, then it was 2.6 and 2.4, now we are gonna see them at 2.2 and 2.3.

FatBastard
19th November 2007, 18:20
Indeed, when Intel already released their mighty 8 core CPUs (for the time being only in the Xeon flavor (X5365 V8)), and the folks at firingsquad confessed they switched their desktops from AMD to Core 2 CPUs, things couldn't look grimmer for AMD.

Nowhere
19th November 2007, 21:33
Rant: c'mon, dissapointing? (yeah, and I consider reviews which include slower 8800 in midrange a "waste of paper", and I'm not alone in this).

Slower than Intel, sure; will be cheaper not long from now :)

But enough generally, don't tell me you could actually feel the difference if doing anything other than compiling/encoding large things?

(accidentelly just 2 days ago I realised that it makes sense for me to buy...X2 4000: the only motherboard with integrated GFX that has more than 2 PCI slots is for AM2 (even more than that - the only one overall with 4 PCI slots, without even taking into account integrated GFX); I'd like to use my PCI cards for a long time...and with AMD I'll be able to do that even with CPUs that will come what, 3 years from now? Plus CPU for 50€ & mobo for 40€ is rather nice)

ZokesPro
20th November 2007, 06:39
It's defenitely a mid-range product. But at the price, it should attract some attention. Plus with the ATi sector improving on it's products, shouldn't be long now until AMD comes out for some serious competition. Hope they do well in the mobile market.

The PIT
20th November 2007, 11:09
AMD are in big doo dah.

No real competitive cpu's unless they drop there prices. In the graphics department no end top part to compete with Nvidea and last but not least a slight finical problem as well.

I wouldn't be surprised if they went under sooner than later which will be a shame.

Jammrock
20th November 2007, 12:06
Not so fast. They still have a good percent of the low to middle end market, and a large chunk of the server market. Just because Intel has the fastest CPU doesn't mean AMD is in big trouble. Plus they just got a huge cash infusion from the Middle East somewhere.

Nowhere
20th November 2007, 12:10
...huge cash infusion from the Middle East somewhere.


huh? :>

Tjalfe
20th November 2007, 13:23
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/11/16/arabs-parts-amd

Dr Mordrid
20th November 2007, 13:25
The Inquirer's been rounding their numbers again :p

Abu Dhabi's government investment firm, Mubadala Development, invested $622 million USD to acquire an 8.1 percent of AMD on Friday. AMD says it'll go into R&D etc. but mostly on Fusion.


ComputerWorld article.... (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9047598)

Evildead666
20th November 2007, 15:43
Oops. didn't see page 2 ;)

Tjalfe
20th November 2007, 16:12
can't really fault the inquirer, as they quoted here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21827274/

dZeus
21st November 2007, 07:47
The Inquirer's been rounding their numbers again :p

Abu Dhabi's government investment firm, Mubadala Development, invested $622 million USD to acquire an 8.1 percent of AMD on Friday. AMD says it'll go into R&D etc. but mostly on Fusion.


ComputerWorld article.... (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9047598)

what's 622 million USD when AMD is able to leak money like a seive leaks water?

As I said before, buying ATI was the best thing that could happen to ATI shareholders, but the worst thing that could happen to either ATI or AMD as a business (spending way more money that ATI was worth and than AMD could afford), and bad news for AMD shareholders.

Nowhere
21st November 2007, 08:27
In worst case AMD simply will be producing slower (but more than enough IMHO) & cheaper solutions along more lucrative Intel market...because, well, doesn't Intel need AMD?
I wouldn't be surprised if they'd save them if things would be really bad...

ALBPM
21st November 2007, 09:14
The Inquirer's been rounding their numbers again :p

Abu Dhabi's government investment firm, Mubadala Development, invested $622 million USD to acquire an 8.1 percent of AMD on Friday. AMD says it'll go into R&D etc. but mostly on Fusion.


ComputerWorld article.... (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9047598)


What a joke....ROFLMAO!!!!!!
They'll piss that away quickly in R&D. What AMD needs.... is to learn how to manufacture. That's where they fall flat on their face. So, now they have become a Charity....:rolleyes:


"We will crush them, see them driven before us, and hear the lamentations of the AMD Fanboyz."

Darth_Mahl

Jammrock
21st November 2007, 10:07
What a joke....ROFLMAO!!!!!!
They'll piss that away quickly in R&D. What AMD needs.... is to learn how to manufacture. That's where they fall flat on their face. So, now they have become a Charity....:rolleyes:


"We will crush them, see them driven before us, and hear the lamentations of the AMD Fanboyz."

Darth_Mahl


Agreed. AMD's R&D is fine. They produce good stuff, they just can pump it out with good yields fast enough. When the ATi/AMD HD 2000-series was supposed to come out it would have been better than nvidia's offering, but they couldn't get the manufacturing right so the product got pushed back.

Same thing with the Phenom. If AMD had 45 nm process and could have put it out in the summer at near 3.0 GHz, Intel would have been the one trying to catch up.

Intel just has so much production capacity it's insane.

Wombat
21st November 2007, 18:15
In worst case AMD simply will be producing slower (but more than enough IMHO) & cheaper solutions along more lucrative Intel market...because, well, doesn't Intel need AMD?
I wouldn't be surprised if they'd save them if things would be really bad...Except that right now it seems that they're producing slower chips than Intel, but at the same value (performance/dollar). People used to buy AMD because they got more bang for the buck. Now it seems there at less bang, less buck.

The PIT
26th November 2007, 04:14
They'll have to go back to cloning. Cheap AMD Core Duo with twice the cache of the Intel offering.
As for ATI side of things poor drivers are also hindering progress. AGP owners seemed to have been abandoned by the looks of it.

Nowhere
26th November 2007, 12:33
I believe AMD did just that up to their 486 equivalents, but as complexity of chips became bigger, times needed for reverse engineering grow. Today it would have to be so absurdly long that AMD is much better with their own designs.

And c'mon...they aren't that much worse. Would you ever notice the difference?

BTW, as for AGP...it seems that ATI division doesn't even support current AGP DirectX10 Radeons in their latest drivers (you need to use drivers provided by manufacturer of the card); their certainly still in their old game...