AMD compatibility no problem for Intel chip

[Malfunction]

http://news.com.com/2100-1006-5159067.html

For AMD, the existence of a 32/64-bit Intel chip would deprive the company of a competitive advantage. But, by the same token, the company wouldn't have to worry about courting developers to write software for the 15 percent of the market that AMD commands. AMD also has more experience in this market, the AMD representative pointed out.

Good for me... good for you!:p hehe

Peace,

:afro:

[Ninja Prime]

I'm curious, why is it you feel the need to defend the poor helpless giant monopoly chipmaker who uses eseenitally "evil" unfair tactics to smash the competition? Do they really need defending? Do they really need you to stand up for them and sell their products? I mean, if they were really good products(which some are) wouldnt they sell themselves?

I'm just... confused by you. Please explain.

[Malfunction]

Originally posted by Ninja Prime
I'm curious, why is it you feel the need to defend the poor helpless giant monopoly chipmaker who uses eseenitally "evil" unfair tactics to smash the competition? Do they really need defending? Do they really need you to stand up for them and sell their products? I mean, if they were really good products(which some are) wouldnt they sell themselves?

I'm just... confused by you. Please explain.

1) Why do you feel threatened whenever Intel makes a statement?

2) How am I defending Intel when saying, "Good for me... good for you"

3) Why do you feel the need to down play Intel?

4) Why do you feel the need to defend AMD, they paying your bills or something?

5) Shouldn't AMD's products speak for themselves?

6) Why do the *faithful AMD loyalist feel the need to not participate in screen captures, benchmarks and testing if they believe in AMD's products?

This is a good thing for Intel and even better for AMD. This means more software (rather quickly) will come out and more than likely be advantageous towards AMD. Ya know, I really get a sense of someone maturity now when they attack either Nvidia or Intel around here. Thank you for opening my eyes to this relation.

Peace,

:afro:

[Ninja Prime]

Originally posted by Malfunction
1) Why do you feel threatened whenever Intel makes a statement?

2) How am I defending Intel when saying, "Good for me... good for you"

3) Why do you feel the need to down play Intel?

4) Why do you feel the need to defend AMD, they paying your bills or something?

5) Shouldn't AMD's products speak for themselves?

6) Why do the *faithful AMD loyalist feel the need to not participate in screen captures, benchmarks and testing if they believe in AMD's products?

This is a good thing for Intel and even better for AMD. This means more software (rather quickly) will come out and more than likely be advantageous towards AMD. Ya know, I really get a sense of someone maturity now when they attack either Nvidia or Intel around here. Thank you for opening my eyes to this relation.

Peace,

:afro:

1) Because their statements tend to be lies or arrogant "We're gonna do it our way because we can and you can't stop us." type statements.

2) I detected a "nah nah nah AMD doesn't have anthing Intel doesn't already have" tone to it, but maybe I was just over-stating it.

3) Because their products force developers to make annoying changes that slows development for Intels foolish anti-competative designs.

4) Because they have equal or superior products for cheaper prices, yet they still are the minority due to Intels PR and monopoly tactics. I wish they paid my bills, or even would send me a free FX-51 for speaking well of them. ;)

5) They do, but their speech is often silenced by the bullhorn of Intels FUD and PR.

6) Because many, if not most benchmarks are skewed in favor of Intel, as they are optimised for Intels "added special instructions" and not for anything on an AMD processor. Recent findings show that Quake 3's engine has certian features disabled for AMD processors that reduce performance of them by 25%+, and it's a simple fix to turn them on...

As for that last comment, I was simply asking you why, and now you insult my maturity for it? Maybe you should look in the mirror for your "sense of someone maturity." ;)

[Malfunction]

Originally posted by Ninja Prime
6) Because many, if not most benchmarks are skewed in favor of Intel, as they are optimised for Intels "added special instructions" and not for anything on an AMD processor. Recent findings show that Quake 3's engine has certian features disabled for AMD processors that reduce performance of them by 25%+, and it's a simple fix to turn them on...


You are aware that is a crock of sh** don't you? :rolleyes: Your gonna try to tell me that UT2K3, UT2K4 and possibly XII have special optimizations which put's AMD at a disadvantage? Oh gosh, what reviews have you seen this?

What is sad is all of the whinning you are doing because AMD hadn't capatilized on Intel when they could have. So who would have thought that for some odd reason devs would code for the market leader, instead of a CPU like (Cyrix) who's tech is questionable?:rolleyes: That's what I can't figure out you AMD/ATi extremist... lol. Hell, there is a discussion about the developement of R400 now R500 whether that decision is either cautious or unwarrented.

I don't see many 3DNow! games out there, so as long as AMD can do MMX, SSE, SSEII things should be open for them. I mean Intel is going to leach off them for tech this time around, how many oppertunities has AMD had to do the same? Why did they even decide to come out with 3DNow!? Seems like a waste of time and money. They were in no posistion to set the industry in any type of direction. This could very well be their moment, I just hope they don't screw it up. I would love to see Intel begging for something competitive to whatever AMD has out. We just might be seeing that right now, however to have the market for 1 year is one thing. To own the market for several years is another. That needs to be AMD if they want their special optimizations to be recognized as worth spending time on.

Anything is possible, however you have to make do with what you got and that's the bottomline. Whinning get's you no where.

Peace,

:afro:

[ChrisRay]

Originally posted by Ninja Prime
I'm curious, why is it you feel the need to defend the poor helpless giant monopoly chipmaker who uses eseenitally "evil" unfair tactics to smash the competition? Do they really need defending? Do they really need you to stand up for them and sell their products? I mean, if they were really good products(which some are) wouldnt they sell themselves?

I'm just... confused by you. Please explain.


This guy is one of the biggest fanboys you'll ever meet, His posts defy logic on several occasions, Just pretend he doesnt exist, You'll feel better :)


Most Compilers these days optimise for 3dnow/MMX if they cant find SSE instruction sets btw.

[Malfunction]

Originally posted by ChrisRay
This guy is one of the biggest fanboys you'll ever meet, His posts defy logic on several occasions, Just pretend he doesnt exist, You'll feel better :)


Most Compilers these days optimise for 3dnow/MMX if they cant find SSE instruction sets btw.

Defy logic huh, well it probly goes far over your head when I say something more intelligent than, "Just shut up" or some other childish remark. You remind me of someone ChrisRay... someone who use to follow me like a lost puppy ready to bark at anything I did. Who was it... oh yah, it was Mr. John Reynolds.

Tell you what, if you can't contribute to the thread... then keep the hell away from it ChrisrAY. :retard: Thank! :thumbsup: Everquest huh... figures. :rolleyes:

Peace,

:afro:

[Ninja Prime]

You are aware that is a crock of sh** don't you? Your gonna try to tell me that UT2K3, UT2K4 and possibly XII have special optimizations which put's AMD at a disadvantage? Oh gosh, what reviews have you seen this?

Well, lets look at history... AMD brings out 3dnow, its all impressive and cool. Intel essenitally rips off parts of it and creates SSE, which AMD doesn't support yet, and developers who were really excited about 3dnow have to support it instead or be left in the dust. So, AMD deals with it, gets SSE support, but at the very moment AMD gets SSE, Intel brings out SSE2, which AMD doesn't support, which games and programs now have to use, once again shafting AMD.

Now Intel is bringing out all kinds of crap to compentsate for their crappy processor designs, aka Hyperthreading, which only really helps Intels P4 design, so there is no reason for AMD to support it, yet, if they don't their benchmarks and performance will suffer in the future. Now as soon as AMD has SSE2, Intel whips out SSE3... grrrrreaaat.

I mean Intel is going to leach off them for tech this time around, how many oppertunities has AMD had to do the same? Why did they even decide to come out with 3DNow!? Seems like a waste of time and money. They were in no posistion to set the industry in any type of direction.

... You expect them to be a market leader and tech leader by leeching off of the current leaders tech, bringing it out at later dates? They innovated, SSE would have never came out when it did without 3Dnow. You're saying it was a bad move to innovate, advance technology, and give us more performance, because it didn't end up helping them buisness wise? No wonder you love Intel so much...

Every time AMD starts to get ahead of Intel, Intel doesn't bring out something better, they bring out something that pulls the wool over our eyes and crushes AMD's tech with PR and something that is really inferior.

3dnow! comes out, Intel brings SSE which often isn't as good in games but is very good in benchmarking. Athlon comes out, but Intels PR on their P3 keeps them from gaining too much, though they gained quite a bit. Intel sees it's getting owned by Athlon, so they bring out a gimmick processor, the P4, which it slower than the Athlon most of the time, but has a huge clock speed printed on it, so it sells better. Also, AMD just got SSE support, so Intel adds SSE2, which AMD will have to wait to support. AMD brings out the Athlon64, which is faster and better than Intels processor, so Intel brings out the triple PR threat; they increase the pipeline to a billion stages so it can clock real fast while doing no work per clock, they add SSE3 because AMD just got SSE2, and finally they add Hyperthreading, which essenitally just fixes an error in their P4 design. :rolleyes:

That's why I can understand disliking Intel, but not the other way around... what is there to hate about AMD? What have they done to make your PC experiance worse? If anything, at least they keep Intel from charging even more of a exorbant premium on their processors.

[Malfunction]

HT is PR huh.... ya... ok, right. :rolleyes: Run a demo in windowed mode, take a screen shot of your desktop with Task Manager open. I will run the same demo and take the same screen shot, ok?

HT is PR, we will see then huh... :o

Peace,

:afro:

[DPGX]

why would you play games windowed? :) And personally to me this sounds like something that was rushed, a few months ago Intel was saying how 64-bit was no use to consumers at this point in time, now theyre feeling the need to rush a chip out? Was Intel incorrect on their previous statements perhaps? Also, any estimate on price? Given the steep price tag of the 3.2 EE I dont imagine these are going to be "Practical" for some time to come if they even compete with AMD's 64-bit offering's. 1 more question, care to answer who was in the "driver's seat" this round? Seem's to me Intel is scampering to get a product out. Not looking for a flamewar but theres really not a whole lot of room to cut down AMD right now, and the remark about the compiler, Intel's compiler does in fact disable optimizations when a program compiled with it is run on a non-intel processor. There was a hidden flag which basically doesn't allow non-intel processors to use the optimized algorithm's/routine's. Im not a fanboy so to speak either, just very impressed with the Athlon 64, just switched from a P4 2.6C to a A64 3200+ and am currently thrilled with my purchase, really hoping tommorrow's nV Driver release brings us an updated 64-bit display driver because i'll be switching back to 64-bit XP at that point.

[Malfunction]

Originally posted by DPGX
why would you play games windowed? :) And personally to me this sounds like something that was rushed, a few months ago Intel was saying how 64-bit was no use to consumers at this point in time, now theyre feeling the need to rush a chip out? Was Intel incorrect on their previous statements perhaps? Also, any estimate on price? Given the steep price tag of the 3.2 EE I dont imagine these are going to be "Practical" for some time to come if they even compete with AMD's 64-bit offering's. 1 more question, care to answer who was in the "driver's seat" this round? Seem's to me Intel is scampering to get a product out. Not looking for a flamewar but theres really not a whole lot of room to cut down AMD right now, and the remark about the compiler, Intel's compiler does in fact disable optimizations when a program compiled with it is run on a non-intel processor. There was a hidden flag which basically doesn't allow non-intel processors to use the optimized algorithm's/routine's. Im not a fanboy so to speak either, just very impressed with the Athlon 64, just switched from a P4 2.6C to a A64 3200+ and am currently thrilled with my purchase, really hoping tommorrow's nV Driver release brings us an updated 64-bit display driver because i'll be switching back to 64-bit XP at that point.

If I were you, I would dual boot it up. :D That way you can play now, and later with the non 64bit XP. Intel always has alot of projects going on. AMD Hammer was suppose to come out 3 years ago. So for this to be all of a sudden is quite rediculous when considering. This is not like ATi with the R300, in that respect.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20040217105329.html

Interesting read:
Reportedly, leading server makers, such as HP, already have Intel-powered 32-/64-bit servers in the roadmap expected to be available in the first half of the year.

That seems awfully fast to pull something out of their *** if it is to be produced in the first half of the year. Ofcourse, we might hear of delays like we are hearing about all around.

Peace,

:afro:

[DPGX]

My main drive is a 36gig WD Raptor so I havent bothered dual booting yet, I might pick up one of the 72(4?) gig models so I can do that, I've tried it, but the 52.14s have huge issues with Nforce boards unfortunately.

Mike

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Malfunction
HT is PR huh.... ya... ok, right. :rolleyes: Run a demo in windowed mode, take a screen shot of your desktop with Task Manager open. I will run the same demo and take the same screen shot, ok?

HT is PR, we will see then huh... :o

Peace,

:afro:

I'll tell you right now... HT is great compared to a socket A processor... it certainly helps in some situations...

BUT... HT sucks compared to the a64 processors... multi-tasking or no multitasking... gaming or no gaming...

in any real world application I have used... there was not much discernible difference between my 1900+ and my 3.0c... if anything it was in fact SLOWER for windows related tasks (ie office)... but was definitely faster for gaming and running games with apps open in the background...

otoh when I played with f@h running I would get occasional lag and what not...

now... my a64 cpu is not only worlds faster (and yes... it really is a very noticeable difference) in office and the like... it is also much better @ multitasking... f@h does not produce any lag hits when I play ET @ 16x12 with everything maxed as it did before with the 3.0C...

HT is effectively PR coz it is useless unless something is programmed to utilise it... otoh out of the box the a64 rips the p4's a new one... w/o requiring specialised coding or whatever else to take advantage of its architecture...

marchitecture to marchitecture... amd has the better and more innovative design and it is clearly faster...

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Malfunction
If I were you, I would dual boot it up. :D That way you can play now, and later with the non 64bit XP. Intel always has alot of projects going on. AMD Hammer was suppose to come out 3 years ago. So for this to be all of a sudden is quite rediculous when considering. This is not like ATi with the R300, in that respect.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20040217105329.html

Interesting read:


That seems awfully fast to pull something out of their *** if it is to be produced in the first half of the year. Ofcourse, we might hear of delays like we are hearing about all around.

Peace,

:afro:

intel's engineers are not as great as you think they are :)

they have collabarations with all the major companies out there like HP and Dell... and those engs routinely provide feedback to improve upon intel's design due to various flaws...

the ideas are great and certainly the fab's and sheer monetary might of intel allows them to do things fast... but companies like Dell have quite a decent impact on the QC of intel's parts... especially server-side...

so keep in mind all these processors they 'announce' and setups they 'introduce' have been already reviewed and tweaked by various OEM's and the like to enable them to introduce the best solution possible...

[Malfunction]

Originally posted by Sazar
I'll tell you right now... HT is great compared to a socket A processor... it certainly helps in some situations...

BUT... HT sucks compared to the a64 processors... multi-tasking or no multitasking... gaming or no gaming...

in any real world application I have used... there was not much discernible difference between my 1900+ and my 3.0c... if anything it was in fact SLOWER for windows related tasks (ie office)... but was definitely faster for gaming and running games with apps open in the background...

otoh when I played with f@h running I would get occasional lag and what not...

now... my a64 cpu is not only worlds faster (and yes... it really is a very noticeable difference) in office and the like... it is also much better @ multitasking... f@h does not produce any lag hits when I play ET @ 16x12 with everything maxed as it did before with the 3.0C...

HT is effectively PR coz it is useless unless something is programmed to utilise it... otoh out of the box the a64 rips the p4's a new one... w/o requiring specialised coding or whatever else to take advantage of its architecture...

marchitecture to marchitecture... amd has the better and more innovative design and it is clearly faster...

Then you are saying you have no problem in producing a screen capture of say: Far Cry demo playing, UT2K4 Demo playing, Temp monitoring software showing your CPU temps, CPU-Z and Task Manager showing the CPU usuage then right?

I really want to see this and yet no one with either a AMD 64 or Barton will produce the screen captures of their desktops. As far as not meeting my end of the bargin like I have, I consider anything you have to say about Intel or AMD complete BS.:mad: *So please, produce the screen captures of your desktop while running those processes. Thank you.

example (http://www.battlefieldgrunts.net/graphics/Screenshots/Isthatrightstill.JPG)

Peace,

:afro:

[Sazar]

I no longer have my 3.0c but my system runs cooler and runs more apps faster than my p4 3.0c could ever dream off...

but for sh!ts n giggles I will run the stuff you want me to introduce and post a cpu-z cap for your amusement... however I don't have farcry on my rig and am not about to dl it :)

[Malfunction]

Originally posted by Sazar
I no longer have my 3.0c but my system runs cooler and runs more apps faster than my p4 3.0c could ever dream off...

but for sh!ts n giggles I will run the stuff you want me to introduce and post a cpu-z cap for your amusement... however I don't have farcry on my rig and am not about to dl it :)

So what's the point Sazar? If you are unwilling to participate fully... then what's the point of wasting time? Ya ever hear that saying, "Do it right the first time?" Like I said, I will now hold what you believe about Intel and AMD with the least regard, thanks.

Peace,

:afro:

[Skuzzy]

There is some misinformation in this thread I would like to clear up.

1) AMD has to license the various Intel specific features before they can implement them. For example, AMD had to pay Intel a license fee before they could add SSE2 support to thier processors. AMD cannot arbitrarily add support for an Intel created feature.

2) You cannot add support for CPU instructions without having an assembler that will support them. For instance, there is a processor pack update for Visual Studio 6, but if you install it, you cannot use the MFC libraries, which many developers simply will not do (personally, I am not crazy about MFC). With this pack, you get support for SSE, SSE2, and 3DNow.

Just an FYI.

[Malfunction]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
There is some misinformation in this thread I would like to clear up.

1) AMD has to license the various Intel specific features before they can implement them. For example, AMD had to pay Intel a license fee before they could add SSE2 support to thier processors. AMD cannot arbitrarily add support for an Intel created feature.

I don't like going on a persons word, so care to provide a link to an announcement or news when they did purchase MMX, SSE and SSE II. I am certain it would have made the news at least. Thanks

Peace,

:afro:

[ReDeeMeR]

Malfunction, you're such a fanboy and what's worse you blaberish usualy goes way off topic or just some random "I love my intel, they dont get hot" bs, I read the posts here sometimes and almost everywhere you're either in a fight for intel's "honor" or just ranting something no one cares to reply :rolleyes:

Anyway I see you still got a 5200FX in your badass, cold as winter intel machine, lol keep up the crusade ;)

[Malfunction]

Originally posted by ReDeeMeR
Malfunction, you're such a fanboy and what's worse you blaberish usualy goes way off topic or just some random "I love my intel, they dont get hot" bs, I read the posts here sometimes and almost everywhere you're either in a fight for intel's "honor" or just ranting something no one cares to reply :rolleyes:

Anyway I see you still got a 5200FX in your badass, cold as winter intel machine, lol keep up the crusade ;)

What? What does my videocard have to do with this discussion? Care to take up the challenge if you believe so much in your systems ability? $1 says you won't. :D

It's called accountability. Someday, when you get all grow'd up you will understand what that means. ;)

Peace,

:afro:

[Sazar]

http://upload.store.mdsalih.com/cpu%20usage.JPG

far cry @ 12x10 res.... ut2k4 @ 16x12 res... both remained playable

core center temps show averages... keep in mind I have not installed any of my case fans save 1 (blows over hdd's)

unfortunately I did not manage to take a shot of cool n quiet adjusting my fsb from 190-200 mhz as cpu usage went up :D

also keep in mind your cpu usage argument is flawed because even with f@h on 100% cpu usage... I was never able to get cpu usage to that level... :cool:

-edit-

btw considering the case temps and cpu temps... I spose it is fair to say that amd rocks your intel cpu's boat :confused:

:D

[Malfunction]

Originally posted by Sazar
http://upload.store.mdsalih.com/cpu%20usage.JPG

far cry @ 12x10 res.... ut2k4 @ 16x12 res... both remained playable

core center temps show averages... keep in mind I have not installed any of my case fans save 1 (blows over hdd's)

unfortunately I did not manage to take a shot of cool n quiet adjusting my fsb from 190-200 mhz as cpu usage went up :D

also keep in mind your cpu usage argument is flawed because even with f@h on 100% cpu usage... I was never able to get cpu usage to that level... :cool:

-edit-

btw considering the case temps and cpu temps... I spose it is fair to say that amd rocks your intel cpu's boat :confused:

:D

Woohoo! Thank for stepping up Sazar! :thumbsup: Holy cow, 100% CPU usuage huh, I never see that happen and I provided the screen shot showing just that. That wouldn't relate to decent Multi-Tasking imho though. :) As far as my CPU temps, retail HSF baby!!! :D 700Mhz overclock and that is coolio... burr. :cool:

I don't see how my method is flawed, if you look at the history of the line it had been at 100% for awhile, not just all of a sudden.

Interesting, I really want a A64 but don't wanna loose my Multi-Tasking abilities... decisions.. decisions. Thanks again, I am very happy you pulled through for the sake of education!

Peace,

:afro:

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Malfunction
Woohoo! Thank for stepping up Sazar! -snip-

I didnt do it for the sake of education :)

I run my system with 215mhz fsb with a gain in temp of @ most 3c... stock cooling... I fail to see how stock cooling has anything to do with this :D

besides I posted my pic after a match of onslaught played with the items open as you say :)

the whole point being the multithreading is working quite well thank you very much... much better than it did on my p4 3.0C... ie... the lag I got when running games while background apps were open is now gone...

your opinions of the p4 and HT and what not are based on your sole use of that processor and your erroneous understanding of the a64 as well as multi-threading... :)

if you readup about multi-threading in detail... you will find that yes... # of processors makes a difference but also you have to take into account latencies and the like..

there are 5 forms of multi-threading afaik...

1: a traditional superscalar,
2: a 2-way On-chip multiprocessor (CMP),
3: a 4-way Coarse-grained Multithreading (CMT),
4: a 4-way Fine-grained Multithreading (FMT),
5: a 4-way Simultaneous Multithreading (SMT).

amd employs method 2... an on-chip multiprocessor (cmp)

what the p4 does is afaik SMT... it is a more efficient method since it reduces horizontal and vertial waste as opposed to just horizontal waste for the CMP but it is being done to an extent to hide the latencies... were the pipelines reduced and latencies less this would have a far greater impact...

anyways back to teh whole p4 HT v/s a64 situation...

the cpu gives me enough juice to run my apps @ a high performance level... again.. I reiterate... from my experience of the p4 3.0c vis-a-vis the 3400+... there is a large performance boost I did not expect... ESPECIALLY considering no HT and no dual-channel... :)

it all comes down to the design of the cpu and what it can handle... I loved my 3.0c... I love this cpu more... and I would appreciate it if you would think a little more carefully before just blabbing stuff out about one cpu or another :) some of us have used both... :D

btw bear in mind also that in your system the bottleneck is clearly the gpu :)

[Harnagel]

Malfunction, I am not certain about this but it just occured to me that your video card actually could be having an effect on these results. If the games are bottle necked by the Video Card then that may be one of the reasons your CPU is not being fully implemented.

For my purposes the Athlon64 would be a far better choice. I don't run 2 games and 30 other programs simultaneously very often and the integrated memory controller significantly lowers memory latency making the Athlon64's responses very snappy. That's something I like. For this reason I tend to turn off all the extras in Windows with my current setup(which badly needs upgrading).