It's Official: AMD's New Athlon Is an XP

[CMonster]

I suppose the "XP" is for eXtreme Packaging ;) --"1800+" running at 1.533ghz

I prefer AMD, but when will the company learn that you cannot re-educate the consumer? Now even an amateur sales person can easily sell a P4 over the Athlon.....

Customer: " Is this a good system?"

Sales Person:

<sounding indifferent>"Yeah I suppose...but it doesn't actually run at 1800mhz -that's just the way AMD labels them- it's actually ONLY running at 1533mhz."

<perking up> "Now if you want a REAL system, that REALLY runs at 2ghz you REALLY should look at this slightly more expensive P4 system here from our HONEST (as juxtaposed with AMD) friendss at Intel"

[Ritalin Kid]

AMD is tryin so hard... why don't they just ADVERTISE like Intel does... the longer there commercials run the more people start to become curious... Kinda like Kia... the longer they run their commercials the more Kia's I see on the road..

[adl6009]

Why doesn't AMD make a 2 gig processor, call it a 2gig processor and show how much faster it is? :confused:

[Ranma]

AMD cannot currently make a 2GHZ processor under a .18 micron manafacturing processor. The differential between AMD and Intel speeds will only grow, since the Pentium 4 is *made* for scalability, while the Athlon, even by shrinking the die, is not.

It is likely that by the end of the Palomino's run we will see a megahertz difference of at least 1,000 between it and the (what will be) current Pentium 4.

[HeliosZ]

I think half of the problem with AMD is that they dont' advertise... but, I think there are still too many consumers out there who are willing to believe the sales person, who only cares about the large chunk of commision he gets for every P4 he sells.

Maybe if more people did a bit of research in to what they were actually going to buy then AMD would finally reign victorious... At last :D

[hirschY]

Tried to take a look at there web site, this is what I got:

Due to the incredible demand for information concerning the exciting, new AMD Athlon™ XP processor, our servers are unable to keep up with the unprecedented traffic visiting AMD.com. We are currently doing everything in our power to handle the overwhelming amount of requests. Please check back later. Thank you for your patience.

Looks like there getting hit hard for info, or is it to see where they will be giving away chips next:rolleyes:

[lost-and-found]

I guess it's up to us to keep AMD up...

I wonder how many possibilities the new CPU will bring.

[t048]

The title scared me. It sounded like it was built for windows only. Anyway, I hope they do well with this new processor.

[ufrich]

now correct me if im wrong but is the number system that these processors have( 1500, 1600, etc), suppose to compare to the perfromance of intels chips. In other words a Athlon XP 1600 is equivalent to a Pentium4 1.6 chip, however the 1600 chip is really a 1.4ghz or 1.5ghx or whatever. Now if thats the case what is the real advantages of these chips if they perfrom and JUST ABOUT COST the same as their competitors chip? I understand that AMD is trying to tell the public that there chips with a lower clock speed perfrom just as well than a higher clocked Pentium 4, but if the price is just about the same,(WHICH IT IS) why not get a chip that really perfroms at the speed its advertised at. All i know is when i buy a Pentium4 1.6GHZ chip, i buy a 1.6 chip, or a Pentium4 1600.
:)

[Sleep21]

Sorry uFrich, but You Are wrong. The Model Number "1800+ or whatever" is an indicator of how a "thunderbird cored" athlon would perform at 1800 MHz. Currently the highest clockspeed XP is 1.533, but becuase of the new core, 1.5 AthlonXP is what a thunderbird would be if it went up to 1.8GHz. While the change does seem shady, it's really all they can do. I aM one of those sales people who only cares about comission, and I can tell all of you the majority of people see a bigger number and go with it. AMD is now going to show people a bigger number(or at least close). People in the ""In-Crowd" know about AMD, and this labeling system isn't targeted at us. But the fact is, we are not the ones who are going to save AMD, the dummies are.

By the way, while the Pentium4 is the primary reason for the label change, the numbers are obviously not based on the Pentium4's performance. A 1.5GHz XP would crush a 1.8 P4. :-)

And to everyone else: Salespeople don't make that much money to begin with, and the pay difference between a P4 and an AMD is maybe 2 bucks. I would much rather sell a computer that people are going to be happy with, rather than one they are going to return (which I take a hit on), a $2 gap to insure the computer stays out of the store is worth it to me.

[corrupted]

sleep21, with you about the comission amounts, but in my experience the intel boxes have sold with a much higher comission. maybe it's just the australian public, ah well.

we, the "in" crowd, can only do so much for any product. it's up to the consumer at large to see the light in this technological holy war between AMD and intel. personally, i'd like to see VIA move the C3 into a competitive position, or maybe even an entirely new line of processor. with competition, the consumer is the ultimate winner. i could handle that. how about everyone else?

[dmanlyr]

Hmm, seems to me that AMD has dropped the ball a bit so to speak. A year and a half ago they were beating Intel to the punch, now it seems that they are playing catch up. At least in the megahertz race. Kinda reminds me of a few years ago when there were but a few of us touting poor little old Cyrix and their "PR" rated chips. Yes, in some cases the Cyrix MII beat the Intel, in others they fell on their face (floating point operations were the bane of the Cyrix MII) (gamers beware!) Of course, I will continue to use the Athlon system(s) that I have used for the last year or so, but I wil watch from the side lines on this one as I was pretty well beat up defending the Cyrix MII ......

[corrupted]

i remember the cyrix always being the "business chip". i have yet to see anyone who picked a cyrix for it's business capabilities really complain about it's gaming performance, MHZ for MHZ, with anything from the competition. that's why i'm looking to buy a cyrix MII that's at the local shop.

besides, it's faster than the P120 that's currently in my second system, and the 233 that's going into my second system.

[[shawn@localhost /home]#]

ok i already know that T-birds are faster than P4s but does P4 really run at 2ghz or did they just pick a number out of a hat and assign it to each chip?
if it does then why doesn't AMD just make a processor that does as many functions per clock cycle but cycles at 2ghz? it would be like super super fast

that sales guy from the first reply sounds like a futureshop salesman lol :)

[corrupted]

the AMD's have a percentage of functions over the P4's, cycle for cycle. that's why they run hotter, and do more per cycle. to keepthis sort of cycle steady at such high speeds is currently only possible with liquid nitrogen cooling, and then the only documented case i ahve heard about was only at 1.8GHz. to keep it steady at that speed it needed to be cooled to -40C (i beleive, please correct me if i'm worng).

all i hope is that the sledgehammer core, if not already released as the current new core, will be able to compete on the MHz front as well as the capability front. for this, they need to move to a smaller manufacturing process, and i honestly think they'll not do this by halves. intel currently use a 0.13 micron process, and it wouldn't surprise me if AMD went to a 0.10 or smaller process.

the sales guy knows what he's talking about, i know because i've experienced it myself.

side note: in my mind, the ter/initials "XP" will always mean experimental. is this a clue as to the REAL reason behind it's release? is this a modified version of a future core design they wished to test on a stable market before bearing both barrels on intel? i'm watching this closely now :)

[d_b420]

I have been a Computer Tech since '96 & have worked on both AMD & Intel systems, but my money goes to AMD. Clock speed means nothing if you have a better architecture. Based on what I have seen on pricewatch.com AMD is about $30 cheaper than the equivalent Intel CPU. Based on bench marks that have been posted on tomshardware.com & hardocp.com AMD performs better than "faster" Intels. This is not the first time performace equivalent IDs have been used. NEVER TRUST A SALESMAN!

[corrupted]

we'll eat you alive if you're not careful :)

[Lord Sech]

Amd vs. Intel

Its literally a crusade to see who can have the "Fastest" cpu. Amd...is currently pushing the limits on "floating point" type applications,which the new architecture was made for. But what is intel doing. I belive all they are worried about is impressing the People who buy a premade system and only know what actually clock speed means.

Many a people are staring to realize that the amd is a "faster" chip in performance due to the design but wont be-able to compete with Intels "Newbie" crowd.

Just my thoughts :p

-Sech

[corrupted]

i think that's about the size of it. anyone else?