AOA Forums AOA Forums AOA Forums Folding For Team 45 AOA Files Home Front Page Become an AOA Subscriber! UserCP Calendar Memberlist FAQ Search Forum Home


Go Back   AOA Forums > Hardware > AMD Motherboards & CPUs

AMD Motherboards & CPUs Questions or comments on AMD products?


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 10th June, 2007, 06:05 PM
Member
 
Join Date: April 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 2,446

LOL. When AMD was in a position to charge top dollar for their products I don't remember seeing any discounts for the AMD faithful. I paid $230 for an X2 3800+ at one point, they are a lot cheaper now but AMD was forced into a price slash.

I'm not a fanboy of either company, given the chance either one would screw us to the end of the earth for a few more dollars. Buy the product that you want from the company you prefer, there really is no reason to justify your actions for buying a CPU, it's your money. At the end of the day as long as it boots into your OS of choice and runs the apps you choose it really doesn't matter who's CPU is in your box.
__________________
Biostar TForce X58 - Core i7 920 - 12GB Corsair Dominator DDR3 - EVGA 560ti - PCP&C 750W - Dual boot, Arch Linux/WinXP
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 10th June, 2007, 06:51 PM
Samuknow's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Posts: 8,941
Send a message via MSN to Samuknow

Very true and very well said. I guess I am a fan boy. Oh well. I am just familiar and comfortable with AMD.

I really hope they pull out of this.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel ~ View Post
It's OKAY WE accept you as you think you are here! ":O}
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 11th June, 2007, 01:09 AM
Member
 
Join Date: April 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 2,446

Nothing wrong with being a fan boy. I have love for AMD as well and agree that AMD is an exceptional value right now, especially with the prices of DDR2 today. If barcelona turns out to be a Conroe killer (which is highly unlikely) I will buy one and have fun with it. I seriously doubt I will be able to get one for $59 though.

Come July 22nd I will be able to get a 2.4Ghz C2D Quad Core for $266, tell me that isn't an exceptional value. The battle between AMD and Intel will only bring better things are way, be objective and purchase from the company that actually offers the better product. Money drives the companies, a lack of it forces them to bring better products to the table.
__________________
Biostar TForce X58 - Core i7 920 - 12GB Corsair Dominator DDR3 - EVGA 560ti - PCP&C 750W - Dual boot, Arch Linux/WinXP
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 11th June, 2007, 01:28 AM
dsio's Avatar
Steve Jobs
 
Join Date: October 2002
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Posts: 8,037

Or forces them out of business.

The majority of users will get better performance out of that $59 Athlon X2 @ 3Ghz than they will out of a $266 2.4Ghz quad core, simply because four cores on the desktop is not as useful as raw clockspeed with two. The same applies to Barcelona as well, the only reason I'm interested is because I use an alternative OS and a variety of very multi-threaded applications.
__________________
Notebook: Apple Macbook Pro 13" i7 2.7Ghz (3.4Ghz max) 8GB DDR3 1333Mhz (Mac OSX 10.6.7)
Desktop: ASUS Rampage Formula X48
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 (Yorkfield) @ 3.60Ghz (Folding SMP Linux)
Running Fedora 15 Linux (GNOME 3)
Dual Dell 2407WFP
AOA Team fah

Drivers, Games, Demos, Mods and Overclocking Tools At AOAFiles
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 11th June, 2007, 01:49 AM
Member
 
Join Date: April 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 2,446

I use linux myself, Gentoo is my flavor of choice, so that argument won't fly this way, unless there is a reason why binaries are better than building from source code. Other than time of course.

How do you figure the majority of users will get better performance from a $59 X2 @ 3.0 ghz than they would a Q6600, a C2D at 2.4 is still faster than an X2 at 3.0. If the user is capable of clocking a X2 up to 3.0 then he is proficient enough to clock a quad as well. Other than saving 50 bucks on a CPU there really is no argument for why AMD is better at this point, every other component costs the same. An E4300 for $100 will easily clock to 3.0 and will smoke an X2 at 3.0.
__________________
Biostar TForce X58 - Core i7 920 - 12GB Corsair Dominator DDR3 - EVGA 560ti - PCP&C 750W - Dual boot, Arch Linux/WinXP

Last edited by ccperf721p; 11th June, 2007 at 01:50 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 11th June, 2007, 02:44 AM
Member
 
Join Date: October 2004
Posts: 568

I think dsio means that for a majority of users, the speeds available with dual cores and big GPU's, etc. are just not needed for most tasks.

And remember, we're still waiting for games that take advantage of multi-cores.
__________________

Last edited by aztec61; 11th June, 2007 at 02:46 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 11th June, 2007, 03:23 AM
Member
 
Join Date: April 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 2,446

I agree with that statement aztec61. I'm not convinced that is what dsio is trying to say, it seemed more like a biased attempt at baiting to me.

When we are talking about the majority of users, we are talking about the average person who buys a pre-built unit, runs it at stock speeds, checks email, web surfs, and maybe does a little home video or picture work.

I think any debate about AMD vs. Intel on an overclocking site should be limited to the type of people that frequent those sites.
__________________
Biostar TForce X58 - Core i7 920 - 12GB Corsair Dominator DDR3 - EVGA 560ti - PCP&C 750W - Dual boot, Arch Linux/WinXP
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 11th June, 2007, 05:16 AM
Gizmo's Avatar
Chief BBS Administrator
BassTeroids Champion, Global Player Champion, Aim & Fire Champion, Puzzle Maniax Champion, Othello Champion, Canyon Glider Champion, Unicycle Challenge Champion, YetiSports 9: Final Spit Champion, Zed Champion
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Webb City, Mo
Posts: 16,178
Send a message via ICQ to Gizmo Send a message via AIM to Gizmo Send a message via MSN to Gizmo Send a message via Yahoo to Gizmo Send a message via Skype™ to Gizmo

I think what Dsio is driving at is that the $59 X2 will provide better bang for the buck than the $266 QX6600.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that you overclock the X2 to 3.0 GHz. Let's also assume for the sake of argument that you overclock the QX6600 to 3.0 GHz.

Does the QX6600 give you better bang for the buck? Granted, the IPC on the QX6600 is slightly better, so even if you only use two cores, you'll still have better performance at the same clock speed. But consider that if Dsio's assertion is right, and quad-core is really overkill for the desktop, which chip offers the better deal?

I'm not convinced quad-core is overkill for the desktop, or at least not for the kind of users that would be likely to be overclocking to start with. But if you accept the notion that dual core is sufficient, and quad-core is overkill, then a 3 GHz X2 for $59 certainly sounds to me like a better deal than a 3 GHz quad for $266.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 11th June, 2007, 06:06 AM
Member
 
Join Date: April 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 2,446

I agree that AMD is an incredible value at the moment, I won't argue that for one minute. I've built a couple of AM2 rigs, the latest for my nephew using a 3600 Brisbane and T-force board. It's a great rig but, I wouldn't give up one of my C2D rigs for it.

We all have different budgets, so it's hard to debate something solely based on cost. Compared to that 3800+ X2 I paid $230 for sometime back a Q6600 at $266 sure is a bargain to me. Timing is everything.
__________________
Biostar TForce X58 - Core i7 920 - 12GB Corsair Dominator DDR3 - EVGA 560ti - PCP&C 750W - Dual boot, Arch Linux/WinXP
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 15th June, 2007, 05:25 AM
funnyperson1's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: September 2002
Location: Blacksburg, VA aka Vtech
Posts: 592
Send a message via AIM to funnyperson1

Its true, AMD doesn't do us any favors on pricing when they have the performance lead, but thats mainly because they took such huge losses when they don't, they need to milk that lead for all the money they can get. Now I do think they would have been better off if the dual cores were a bit cheaper when they were the fastest chips on the market (would have gotten more market share imho), but the current prices are KILLING their bottom line.

Intel on the other hand has a huge bankroll and can afford tiny profits or even losses on processors as long as they can make AMD bleed for a while. I think right now Intel is squeezing them with the price cuts to weaken AMD and ensure that they will never be a legitimate contender.

Right now AMD does offer a great deal at the low end, especially with the 690g boards, I built my parents a homeoffice machine and the whole thing cost $400 and thats with case, psu (80+% efficient), mobo, X2 3600+, 2gb DDR2667, 160gb sata, and DVDRW and extra 120mm fan.

Intel is giving great price/performance at the mid-high end. The entry level C2Ds do 3g+ pretty much guaranteed and at 3g they offer better performance than even the best AMD overclocks can achieve.

The Q2D 2.4ghz will be a great deal for a lot of power users, especially folders. The average user is fine with an X2, heck even many power users are fine with an X2 .
__________________
Biostar TForce550
A64 X2 3600+ (65nm)@2.9 (1.4V)
TR Ultra 90
2GB Crucial Ballistix 6400@ DDR2 1000 C5
Geforce 7900GS
2x160gig hdd with WinXP, Vista, and Ubuntu
member of FOLDING@HOME team 32
Latitude D620 with XP, Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 15th June, 2007, 11:32 AM
keithwalton's Avatar
Member/Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Southampton, UK
Posts: 2,257
Send a message via ICQ to keithwalton Send a message via MSN to keithwalton Send a message via Yahoo to keithwalton

Roll on next month when the Core 2 Quad QX6600 drops to $266. One may just end up under my watercooler
__________________
ASUS P5W DH (i975X) - Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.40GHz) Currently 3GHz under water hit 3.3GHz so far - 2x 1GB OCZ PC6400's - 2x Seagate 7200.10 320GB's - Sapphire Radeon x1900xt now water cooled
AOA Team fah
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 15th June, 2007, 04:34 PM
Chaz's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: March 2005
Location: England
Posts: 208

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsio
THIS is what got me into AMDs in the first place. Cheap, cheerful, and brilliantly fast, especially when overclocked. Screw your E6600 Conroes, this is where the real overclocking is at.
Yeah... except my E6400 is at 3.4GHz on air
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 15th June, 2007, 11:41 PM
dsio's Avatar
Steve Jobs
 
Join Date: October 2002
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Posts: 8,037

Ah, but the thing is your E6400 is still over three times the price of a 3600+,

$187 on newegg as opposed to $59 and the motherboard you will be using will be far more expensive than the AM2 board for the 3600+ as well.

We're talking bargain basement overclocking here. This is the Lotus 7 of overclocking
__________________
Notebook: Apple Macbook Pro 13" i7 2.7Ghz (3.4Ghz max) 8GB DDR3 1333Mhz (Mac OSX 10.6.7)
Desktop: ASUS Rampage Formula X48
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 (Yorkfield) @ 3.60Ghz (Folding SMP Linux)
Running Fedora 15 Linux (GNOME 3)
Dual Dell 2407WFP
AOA Team fah

Drivers, Games, Demos, Mods and Overclocking Tools At AOAFiles
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 16th June, 2007, 06:43 AM
mookydooky's Avatar
AOA Staff
 
Join Date: December 2001
Location: Everywhere you want to be.
Posts: 7,903
Send a message via MSN to mookydooky

Here's a couple things to consider. Intel stock is at or near it's 52 week high, and Goldman Sachs put a "buy" recommendation out on them. Analysts typically get shown a lot of stuff before even before press releases get sent out. I'm guessing that the Goldman analysts were shown some pretty impressive things for them to actually put Intel on their "buy" list even though the stock is currently flying high already and Intel announced serious price cuts next month. Something is going on.

AMD on the other hand.... It's just too depressing.... They have made some serious managerial mistakes in the past year or so. They really need to do something and very soon. Remember, with each new die shrink Intel is ahead of AMD on, they produce twice as many chips per wafer. Given almost equivalent cost to produce a single wafer, Intel takes in at least twice as much revenue assuming the chips sell for the same price, which they don't......
__________________
Need a laugh? Take a peek at
AOA's Mookydooky's "Just for laughs!" Joke Topic


AOA Team fah

我喜欢大屁股, 我不能骗你..... 他们弟兄不能否认......
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 16th June, 2007, 08:03 AM
Member
 
Join Date: October 2004
Posts: 568

Intel could have stomped the guts out of AMD anytime it wanted, by virtue of its market share and/or if it hadn't been so lethargic and non-chalant in the past. That may be what we're in for now tho'.

I like AMD lots and sorely wanted to go with a X2 6000 or FX for my upcoming build, but it's just a no-brainer right now for C2D in that price range. Besides, I just wanted to try a completely different platform this go round.

I will def be back to AMD in the future and for less expensive boxen.
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 17th June, 2007, 07:39 PM
cloasters's Avatar
Asst. BBS Administrator
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 21,956

AMD has a quantum less pile of cash for R&D. Bad English there, sorry. Is it possible for them to design a superior processor at all with their paucity of resources?
__________________
When the world will be better.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 17th June, 2007, 08:22 PM
mookydooky's Avatar
AOA Staff
 
Join Date: December 2001
Location: Everywhere you want to be.
Posts: 7,903
Send a message via MSN to mookydooky

I really don't know what AMD is thinking with their forward looking roadmap. Their plan for the next few years is to basically develop co-processors on die. Basically, let's say you have a quad core CPU, 2 of those can be general purpose as in what you see today, 2 of those can be specialized to something like video or audio. The past few years have seen more and more integration of components rather than specialization. With the exception of video, everything is being integrated back to the main general purpose processor. Look at a modern motherboard, it comes with audio, NIC, USB, HD controller, and ton of other components. All of these things use pieces of the CPU to run them. Instead of going with the general trend, AMD wants to go in the opposite direction. I really have doubts about how that's going to work out for them.

Basically, AMD is going to create niche machines. If they have a core optimized for video encoding, they market one machine as a video encoder. They'll make one that's a MP3 core and sell it as an MP3 coder/decoder. The problem with this idea is that unless you have insane customer demand for those products and the difference in performance is significantly better for those functions while at the same time not suffer any significant performance penalties in other areas, nobody's going to buy the things. The main driving force the last 20+ years for PC's has been that you can do whatever you want with them, not just what the thing is designed for.

There's also another point to consider. Let's say AMD makes a machine that's 3X faster at video encoding to Divx. 3X faster than what? Basically, you have a core in there that's specifically designed to encode Divx, but there has to be a point where the generic cores catch up given either more Ghz or cores.

AMD had a chance last year. They won over Dell, their market share was at an all time high, they were selling great products. Now though, they're at a crossroads and deciding to go back instead of forward.
__________________
Need a laugh? Take a peek at
AOA's Mookydooky's "Just for laughs!" Joke Topic


AOA Team fah

我喜欢大屁股, 我不能骗你..... 他们弟兄不能否认......

Last edited by mookydooky; 17th June, 2007 at 08:24 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 17th June, 2007, 10:29 PM
dsio's Avatar
Steve Jobs
 
Join Date: October 2002
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Posts: 8,037

AMD's integrated designs do look a little odd in today's market, but when you think about it, the mobile market could benefit greatly from this type of thing. Currently you have a CPU, a Northbridge, and a GPU in a laptop. If the CPU, northbridge and GPU can all be on the same die, with the same power management system, a more effective cooling system can be used, saving weight, there could be less motherboard area required.

The GPU could stand to benefit performance wise, particularly if it is a chip that uses mainly, or exclusively system ram, in which case the GPU is right next to the onboard memory controller.

My ideal laptop is an ultra portable, with plenty of CPU power, adequate, but by no means great GPU power, 6-10 hours battery life, less than 1.8KG and cool running.

If AMD can build a chip with integrated northbridge, and say X2400 type graphics, inside a power envelope of about 10W, they will be onto a real winner.

Laptops aside, the potential uses for seriously powerful system-on-chip machines is limitless.

If they have correctly predicted a shift in the market towards a demand for this type of product, then there is a chance that they could catch Intel with their pants down.
__________________
Notebook: Apple Macbook Pro 13" i7 2.7Ghz (3.4Ghz max) 8GB DDR3 1333Mhz (Mac OSX 10.6.7)
Desktop: ASUS Rampage Formula X48
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 (Yorkfield) @ 3.60Ghz (Folding SMP Linux)
Running Fedora 15 Linux (GNOME 3)
Dual Dell 2407WFP
AOA Team fah

Drivers, Games, Demos, Mods and Overclocking Tools At AOAFiles
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 18th June, 2007, 01:10 PM
keithwalton's Avatar
Member/Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Southampton, UK
Posts: 2,257
Send a message via ICQ to keithwalton Send a message via MSN to keithwalton Send a message via Yahoo to keithwalton

Analysts can get things wrong but here are a few reasons as to why they might be happy.
Market share is increasing Q on Q, in all sectors what little amd had is vanishing fast (dual cpu workstations amd went from 12% to 8% ish in Q1)
45nm roll out is either on target or early and with amds recent delays may now beat barcelona to market which will leave amd with another r600 on its hands.
Q2 sales could be looking good and expecting a nice healthy profit. We'll find that one out in a months time.

If intel have shifted over a million quad core cpu's now but can afford to halve the prices of most chips... thats alot of profit!

On the note of the 45nm chips, intel apparently had alot of them around at computex running at 3.33GHz and were as good as ready to go with them, mobo's are now out there which support them.
__________________
ASUS P5W DH (i975X) - Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.40GHz) Currently 3GHz under water hit 3.3GHz so far - 2x 1GB OCZ PC6400's - 2x Seagate 7200.10 320GB's - Sapphire Radeon x1900xt now water cooled
AOA Team fah

Last edited by keithwalton; 18th June, 2007 at 01:13 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 18th June, 2007, 01:31 PM
Member
 
Join Date: October 2004
Posts: 568

I'm going to see when it arrives on Wed. just how "terrible" the R600 is. I paid a bit too much, but then with 8800GTX being so ridiculously priced it's the next step up from GTS cards.
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PS3s hidden magic trick - If this doesn't impress you, nothing will aghastpumpkin GAMES! OH YEAH! 39 16th May, 2007 05:37 PM
Help me impress my boss (board&CPU) Repo Man Intel Motherboards & CPUs 11 10th April, 2007 05:02 PM
AMD's no angel, but Intel's public usage of benchmark data is feloniously misleading Samuknow Benchmarking 3 20th March, 2007 11:28 PM
AMD's 'Barcelona' cuts power one core at a time Gizmo AMD Motherboards & CPUs 5 13th February, 2007 05:37 PM
Quick & dirty cooler idea David Shh! Cooling & Temperature Monitoring 6 18th January, 2003 05:26 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:10 AM.


Copyright ©2001 - 2010, AOA Forums
Don't Click Here Don't Click Here Either

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0