PDA

View Full Version : More AMD Awesomness (Barcelona & R600)


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

DMx
05-12-07, 09:33 PM
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31977/135/

AMD had two systems on display, a single-socket "Hammerhead" quad-core Agena FX system as well as a "Wahoo" dual-socket eight-core system, which extends AMD's dual-socket enthusiast system approach. Details about Agena FX, which is rumored to launch with clock speeds up to 2.9 GHz, were not disclosed and AMD avoided showing any benchmark performance numbers. However, the eight-core system was able to convert 720p video from one format to another (the company declined to comment on file formats) in real time - while maxing out all eight cores at the same time.

AMD demonstrated real-time face recognition on a GPU

More info:

Anandtech: AMD - The Road Ahead (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2986)
The Inquirer: ATI 65 nanometre RV630 is not ready yet (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39540)
Neal Nelson Benchmarking Laboratory Test Results: AMD Opteron Processor Faster than Xeon in SQL Database Test (http://www.worlds-fastest.com/wfz995.html)
The Inquirer: AMD to offer speed boosts on Barcelona (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39440)
HEXUS.net: Details on Phenom Emerge (http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=8688) < - NEW
AnandTech: AMD Names Athlon's Successor: Phenom (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2987) < - NEW


Looking good so far :captnkill: :captnkill: :captnkill:

jAkUp
05-12-07, 09:36 PM
Why is AMD avoiding to show any benchmark numbers?

DMx
05-12-07, 09:37 PM
See first post for more links

Amuro
05-12-07, 10:55 PM
Good for AMD, but I think Intel's gonna come up with a native 8-core Nehalem sometime in Mid 2008.

Madpistol
05-12-07, 11:07 PM
honestly, based on Intel's roadmap, I don't think that they (intel) have anything to worry about. They're sitting back wondering what AMD's next move is so they can counter it with something else of equal or more awesomness.

I mean, we're talking about the chip team that designed the Pentium M that started this mess about getting the most performance per watt. They've designed the Pentium M, Core, and Core 2 so far, with no doubt that Core 2 45nm or Core 3 around the corner. The Pentium line is extinct. Intel has nothing to worry about.

EDIT: The "Core" based Pentium e's are being released as super lowend chips. I guess I spoke too soon about the Pentiums. At least they're not netburst.

Arioch
05-12-07, 11:09 PM
Well let's see some performance numbers before we all start patting ourselves on our backs. I would like to see AMD put the heat on Intel though as competition is a good thing.

Tygerwoody
05-13-07, 12:34 AM
*yawn* AMD is going to blow Intel out the water like they promised the R600 would do to Nvidia's 8800GTX right?

Wake me up when AMD actually has benchmarks.

nrdstrm
05-13-07, 12:48 AM
*yawn* AMD is going to blow Intel out the water like they promised the R600 would do to Nvidia's 8800GTX right?

Wake me up when AMD actually has benchmarks.

QFT...And these arn't even hitting until Q4 right? Or am I mistaken? Intel's 45nm part will be out by then...It will be an interesting winter, thats for sure...

DMx
05-13-07, 01:06 AM
QFT...And these arn't even hitting until Q4 right? Or am I mistaken? Intel's 45nm part will be out by then...It will be an interesting winter, thats for sure...

If you actually read: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39440

We were told that the B0 stepping was due a few weeks ago, early April to be inexact, and they've been returned for inspection. If they were clean, they would be the launch stepping, and the Q2 date was do-able. If not, add in another few months, and you were looking at the end of Q3, maybe.

Amuro
05-13-07, 01:09 AM
If you actually read: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39440
I don't trust that souce, not to mention AMD already said the chips would be ready by Christmas.

a12ctic
05-13-07, 01:19 AM
*yawn* AMD is going to blow Intel out the water like they promised the R600 would do to Nvidia's 8800GTX right?

Wake me up when AMD actually has benchmarks.
Just because you have a grudge doesn't mean AMD wont dominate for another 3+ years.

$n][pErMan
05-13-07, 01:56 AM
4 cores .... 8 cores ..... hell.... only just now are games coming out that use 2 cores! New tech always excites me, but the OS's and games need to catch up quickly.

DMx
05-13-07, 02:12 AM
Good for AMD, but I think Intel's gonna come up with a native 8-core Nehalem sometime in Mid 2008.

As a matter of fact, 4x4 platform is obviously going to be better than a native 8 core CPU.

I don't trust that souce, not to mention AMD already said the chips would be ready by Christmas.

Quoting picture from other thread: http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/3740/4622largestarslistwq0.png

QUARTER 3 for FX CPUs. Not quarter 4.

Mr_LoL
05-13-07, 02:17 AM
[pErMan']4 cores .... 8 cores ..... hell.... only just now are games coming out that use 2 cores! New tech always excites me, but the OS's and games need to catch up quickly.
I dont understand it myself tbh. Its all getting a bit silly. Soon we will have 24 core cpu's.

nekrosoft13
05-13-07, 02:32 AM
a12ctic and DMx are you brothers? or some weird side effect of some genetic experiment.

you just seem to be the same

DMx
05-13-07, 03:11 AM
a12ctic and DMx are you brothers? or some weird side effect of some genetic experiment.

you just seem to be the same

Uhh, I'm not a fanboy, I'm just excited on what I have heared so far.

nrdstrm
05-13-07, 04:30 AM
If you actually read: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39440

Looks more like the later part of the Inq's statement...Late Q3...

Barcelona is still at least a quarter away

If you read Anand's lateste article : http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2986&p=1

Anand would be a MUCH more reliable source, as he actually sat down with the CTO's of AMD to help put together the article :P

Amuro
05-13-07, 04:40 AM
As a matter of fact, 4x4 platform is obviously going to be better than a native 8 core CPU.
Fact? You're a AMD fan boy aren't you? It's been proven that 4x4 with two dual-cores is slower and a single socket Core 2 Quad, so what makes you think two quad cores are gonna be better than a native oct-core? Not to mention Intel could have two Nehalem dies slapped togther to make 16-core.


Quoting picture from other thread: http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/3740/4622largestarslistwq0.png

QUARTER 3 for FX CPUs. Not quarter 4.
Quarter 4 for the desktop parts.
http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+Claims+Quadcore+Desktop+CPUs+Ready+for+Christm as/article7232.htm

radekhulan
05-13-07, 06:03 AM
AMD Awesomness? No way. I never want to see AMD again. Intel CPU + Intel chipset = pure godness.

Some time ago, I bought my first AMD, X2 4400+, because I wanted NVIDIA SLI (2x6800, 2x7800, 2x7900, etc.) with dualcore, so Pentium D(ualcore) was not an option (NVIDIA chipsets for Intel are even worse than for AMD, if that is possible). Had 15+ Intel CPUs before.

X2 was more expensive than my current quadcore, Q6600, and performed really BAD in all things except games. I truly hated that CPU, while paying about $850 (including VAT) for it. For audio and video processing, it was a horrible CPU, worse than my previous P4 Northwood with HT, bought for $100, not to mention unstable NVIDIA nForce4-SLI(32) boards, SATA problems, NVIDIA firewall problems, X2 multitasking problems, etc.

I think only people without true 20+ years IT experience can "love" something as broken as AMD. AMD copied all Intel patents, due to their "exchange". They copied x86 instruction set, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, and many others. Intel was the first to come up with 64-bit Itanium, true new platform, while AMD came up with primitive x86_64 extension (basically just doubled registry, not really innovative). Their K7/K8 project was nothing more than a purchased NexGen CPU.

AMD was know for years as "unstable solution for poor people who cannot afford Intel". They had a lot of ads for Athlon 64/X2, and a lot of positive press from fanatics playing games and doing no real work, so I thought I give it a try, eventhough their CPU costed a small fortune. Never again, I am cured for my life from AMD "infection"...

My last AMD-based PC: http://hulan.cz/temp/sestava.jpg

mullet
05-13-07, 10:05 AM
(popcorn)

a12ctic
05-13-07, 10:14 AM
AMD Awesomness? No way. I never want to see AMD again. Intel CPU + Intel chipset = pure godness.

Some time ago, I bought my first AMD, X2 4400+, because I wanted NVIDIA SLI (2x6800, 2x7800, 2x7900, etc.) with dualcore, so Pentium D(ualcore) was not an option (NVIDIA chipsets for Intel are even worse than for AMD, if that is possible). Had 15+ Intel CPUs before.

X2 was more expensive than my current quadcore, Q6600, and performed really BAD in all things except games. I truly hated that CPU, while paying about $850 (including VAT) for it. For audio and video processing, it was a horrible CPU, worse than my previous P4 Northwood with HT, bought for $100, not to mention unstable NVIDIA nForce4-SLI(32) boards, SATA problems, NVIDIA firewall problems, X2 multitasking problems, etc.

I think only people without true 20+ years IT experience can "love" something as broken as AMD. AMD copied all Intel patents, due to their "exchange". They copied x86 instruction set, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, and many others. Intel was the first to come up with 64-bit Itanium, true new platform, while AMD came up with primitive x86_64 extension (basically just doubled registry, not really innovative). Their K7/K8 project was nothing more than a purchased NexGen CPU.

AMD was know for years as "unstable solution for poor people who cannot afford Intel". They had a lot of ads for Athlon 64/X2, and a lot of positive press from fanatics playing games and doing no real work, so I thought I give it a try, eventhough their CPU costed a small fortune. Never again, I am cured for my life from AMD "infection"...

My last AMD-based PC: http://hulan.cz/temp/sestava.jpg

People that make statements like this one and claim people to be fan boys are incredibly hypocritical. To even compare a P4 to a X2 is completely outrageous, in server, desktop, and gaming situations the X2 will win in EVERY benchmark. You can tell me "well my desktop feels smoother" give me proof, there is none except for blind approach to a company that monopolized cpu chips for dozens of years.

radekhulan
05-13-07, 10:28 AM
You can tell me "well my desktop feels smoother" give me proof,

I did own P4 3.2GHz (HT), Athlon 64 (3200+ Venice, while waiting for X2 4400+), X2 4400+, E6600, and now Q6600. I work on computer 98% of time, not playing games. You have obviously no experience of what is a good system, having 3000+ in your signature. You should learn.. Many teenagers are like this, having their 2nd cheap AMD system, donated by parents, they want to believe nothing is better. :captnkill:

Try running several ffdshow filters on you obsolete AMD, it will choke at 90% CPU utliization, while old P4 HT will fly at 20%. I did that (and hated AMD). Try video encoding. Try RAID. It will be unstable. Anything, except few games, is faster even on P4 HT than singlecore AMD. Add instability of AMD-platform chipsets, poor drivers, poor multitasking (remember late dualcore AMD drivers? Intel did not need any for stability), and you have a definitive looser (except for some teenagers playing games 100% of time and beleiving AMD propaganda, never actually having Intel).

If you really work on computer, not just play games, you need performance (delivered by C2D) and stability (delivered by P965/ICH8 chipset). AMD does not have any of these, X2 is slow, chipsets are behind Intel.

KasuCode
05-13-07, 10:38 AM
http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/5903/nvforumsfunny1ew9.jpg

wollyka
05-13-07, 11:36 AM
http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/5903/nvforumsfunny1ew9.jpg
LOL :D

a12ctic
05-13-07, 11:57 AM
I did own P4 3.2GHz (HT), Athlon 64 (3200+ Venice, while waiting for X2 4400+), X2 4400+, E6600, and now Q6600. I work on computer 98% of time, not playing games. You have obviously no experience of what is a good system, having 3000+ in your signature. You should learn.. Many teenagers are like this, having their 2nd cheap AMD system, donated by parents, they want to believe nothing is better. :captnkill:

Try running several ffdshow filters on you obsolete AMD, it will choke at 90% CPU utliization, while old P4 HT will fly at 20%. I did that (and hated AMD). Try video encoding. Try RAID. It will be unstable. Anything, except few games, is faster even on P4 HT than singlecore AMD. Add instability of AMD-platform chipsets, poor drivers, poor multitasking (remember late dualcore AMD drivers? Intel did not need any for stability), and you have a definitive looser (except for some teenagers playing games 100% of time and beleiving AMD propaganda, never actually having Intel).

If you really work on computer, not just play games, you need performance (delivered by C2D) and stability (delivered by P965/ICH8 chipset). AMD does not have any of these, X2 is slow, chipsets are behind Intel.

How about this, I don't play games (Often, the last game I've played through is Quake 4), I have raid on both my computers, and I multitask all the time. Before I owned this I had 2 P4 systems, both garbage the chips burned out after a few months of use and I had to RMA them, finally I got fed up and used AMD chips for the first time in my life.

After using P2's, P3's, and P4's while eating all of Intels bull**** that if it doesn't have the "Intel Inside" sticker its garbage. That is all the biggest load of crap. My AMD64 @ 2.2ghz destroys my P4 /w HT @3.2ghz in ANY application, but a large margin. Also, my sisters Sempron 64 @ 1.6ghz also destroys the P4 in encoding situations. It costed me about 40$, and it has a very small margin of the clock speed AND cache of the P4, and it still encodes a DVD to a 700mb AVI about 10 minutes quicker, if not more.


And to claim that NV chipsets aren't stable, my boxes uptime is over 7 months thank you very much.