Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 78

Thread: Intel seen gaining edge over AMD

  1. #16
    Ultimate Member MadPistol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    In your thoughts, or AL
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by lv2wk
    not happening, for next 2 years, AMD cpu is out performed INTEL.
    If you can't prove it, you're more than likely wrong. Intel is probably going to have the upperhand by a pretty healthy margin in a couple of months. If a $315 chip by intel is on par with a $1000+ chip from AMD, you know there's going to be some fierce competiton to come. Either AMD releases something amazing (they've said nothing so far) or they're going to have to drop prices dramatically to compete with intel.
    Last edited by MadPistol; 04-24-2006 at 01:03 AM.

  2. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    72
    Bang for the buck is whats gunna win this battle... simple as that.

  3. #18
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    3,723
    Quote Originally Posted by Mood
    Bang for the buck is whats gunna win this battle... simple as that.

    If Intel vs AMD market share was equal, then i'd agree with you. However Intel still dominates the market, even though AMD has gained a good amount of market share, its still not enough. The only way they will continue to gain market share is if they have the BETTER product period, not a better "value" product.

  4. #19
    Ultimate Member AllGamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    16,305
    hmm... over in the other website there was a really good article about the AMD Quad vs. Intel Quad, and AMD is out performing Intel by at least 38% in the same test.

    Server tests

    later this year both Intel and AMD are coming out with the Octaron or whatever they will call that, so 4 core in 1 cpu, times 2 cpu in 1 board = 8 cores.

    i'll like to see those going head to head again

    our company had to adjust our software selling model to match these ever increasing cores per CPU

    some times next year Intel announced (not in the media yet) already a 1 cpu x 8core, so that will make a dual cpu board 16 core

    but AMD couldn't answer us on the 16core thing.... so hmm... maybe Intel might eventually have a lead again, if AMD doesn;t do anything
    i7-3970X, Corsair H80, 32GB G.SKILL, ASUS RAMPAGE4 Formula, VG278H(3x27")+3D Vision2, EVGA GTX 690(x2), OCZ ZX1250W, 256GB Vertex4(x2), Seagate 3TB(x5), Antec LanBoyAir, Logitech G510, G600, Z560THX, T.Flight Hotas, PZ35, Sennheiser PC163D, TrackIR5

  5. #20
    Senior Member pandaz3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    Posts
    865
    Well likely each core will have less capability and cache so what's the point?
    Rig 1, MSI K9A2 Platinum, 6400 Blackie, 2 X 2048 AData, MSI 3870; Rig 2, MSI K9A2 CF, 5000 Blackie, 2 X 1024 Patriot PC6400, ATI X1900 XT, Rig 3, Abit AN8 Fatal1ty, Opteron 185, 2 X 1024 Corsair PC3200C2PT ATI X1950 XTX Rig 4 Abit UL8 3800 X850 Pro

  6. #21
    Ultimate Member AllGamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    16,305
    not quite, everytime they bump another core they double Independent cache and bandwidth for each core (AMD)

    Intel was the only one that had problem with Cache and bandwidth per Core.

    although their most recent, and more expensive versions of the Cache per Core (copy-cat AMD) fixes that issue.

    it'll be interesting to see how they can fit 16 meg of L2 cache in the entire Dice
    i7-3970X, Corsair H80, 32GB G.SKILL, ASUS RAMPAGE4 Formula, VG278H(3x27")+3D Vision2, EVGA GTX 690(x2), OCZ ZX1250W, 256GB Vertex4(x2), Seagate 3TB(x5), Antec LanBoyAir, Logitech G510, G600, Z560THX, T.Flight Hotas, PZ35, Sennheiser PC163D, TrackIR5

  7. #22
    Ultimate Member herosrest's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Authorised personnel only
    Posts
    2,281
    The hardware advances are fantastic but.....

    until the software programing catch's up nothing is going to change greatly.
    There is no real innovation in parallel programing for x86 multiple core processors.
    Best to date, just seem to hog a single core.

    Who ever figures it out will be a star of the 21st century.

    Going from 4core to 8 is perhaps not that clever a move.
    4power2(16) is the hurdle worth concentrating on.
    After that simply take each 16 core processor 3d.
    Stack 'em on top of each other up to 16 high in chip.

  8. #23
    Senior Member pandaz3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    Posts
    865
    I think past four there will be serious heat problems
    Rig 1, MSI K9A2 Platinum, 6400 Blackie, 2 X 2048 AData, MSI 3870; Rig 2, MSI K9A2 CF, 5000 Blackie, 2 X 1024 Patriot PC6400, ATI X1900 XT, Rig 3, Abit AN8 Fatal1ty, Opteron 185, 2 X 1024 Corsair PC3200C2PT ATI X1950 XTX Rig 4 Abit UL8 3800 X850 Pro

  9. #24
    Ultimate Member AllGamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    16,305
    Quote Originally Posted by pandaz3
    I think past four there will be serious heat problems
    as this rate, soon enough Liquid cooling will be a Standard for Desktop/Home PC, and Liquid Nitrogen for Servers at work places

    those liquid cooling companies will be rich!
    i7-3970X, Corsair H80, 32GB G.SKILL, ASUS RAMPAGE4 Formula, VG278H(3x27")+3D Vision2, EVGA GTX 690(x2), OCZ ZX1250W, 256GB Vertex4(x2), Seagate 3TB(x5), Antec LanBoyAir, Logitech G510, G600, Z560THX, T.Flight Hotas, PZ35, Sennheiser PC163D, TrackIR5

  10. #25
    Ultimate Member herosrest's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Authorised personnel only
    Posts
    2,281
    Item here re programing technique.. we r saved..

    http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:...0&client=opera

  11. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by RamonGTP
    If Intel vs AMD market share was equal, then i'd agree with you. However Intel still dominates the market, even though AMD has gained a good amount of market share, its still not enough. The only way they will continue to gain market share is if they have the BETTER product period, not a better "value" product.
    I didnt say anything about a value product... im saying bang for the buck... period... if intel and amd make a chip that is equal in specs but one of them costs less... then that company is the one thats going to be on top... It used to be that because intel was the name in the game that it didnt matter... people payed out the money for the same thing.,

  12. #27
    Ultimate Member RockNRoll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    John 3:16
    Posts
    1,949
    I own an AMD, and I love it. When I bought it it was better than what intel had out and AMD was for a while better. Just like ATi and NVidia, gains will bounce back and forth between the two. I guess what it really comes down to is, you want something fast, affordable, and solid, and be it from AMD or Intel if it's the way to go then why the heck not abandon all brand bias and go git yerself one!

  13. #28
    Ultimate Member AllGamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    16,305
    eggxactly... just buy what is fastest for the buck, when you are going to build, and forget the brands
    i7-3970X, Corsair H80, 32GB G.SKILL, ASUS RAMPAGE4 Formula, VG278H(3x27")+3D Vision2, EVGA GTX 690(x2), OCZ ZX1250W, 256GB Vertex4(x2), Seagate 3TB(x5), Antec LanBoyAir, Logitech G510, G600, Z560THX, T.Flight Hotas, PZ35, Sennheiser PC163D, TrackIR5

  14. #29
    Ultimate Member MadPistol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    In your thoughts, or AL
    Posts
    1,359
    I have been reading some runs they've been doing with Conroe's overclocked to 2.9 GHZ @ www.xtremesystems.org and I must say those chips are monsters. If this is what is in store for us from Intel in just a few short months, this may be a very golden time for processors. I can't wait to see how AMD counters this. Expect massive price cuts

  15. #30
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    3,723
    Quote Originally Posted by Mood
    I didnt say anything about a value product... im saying bang for the buck... period... if intel and amd make a chip that is equal in specs but one of them costs less... then that company is the one thats going to be on top... It used to be that because intel was the name in the game that it didnt matter... people payed out the money for the same thing.,
    Then enlightn me as to the difference between "value" and "bang for the buck" and to put it quite simply, you are wrong. AMD currently has not only the better "bang for the buck" product but also the better product overall and they are still a LONG way away from being on top. Intel still dominates the market. People are STILL paying for the Intel name, sysopt members make up an incredibly small portion of the worlds population, the VAST majority of people still are unfamiliar with AMD. Sad but true. Atleast when AMD has the better product, the few that are "in the know" can recommend AMD over Intel to the less tech savvy folks, that is how AMD gained market share with the A64 line, by haveing the BETTER product. Having the better value OR "bang for the buck" product is simply not enough to overtake Intel.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •