PSX5Central
Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: nataku on November 24, 2002, 08:11:56 PM
-
http://slashdot.org/articles/02/11/24/0556252.shtml?tid=142
"Forbes Magazine is reporting that AMD will no longer compete with Intelto make faster, smaller, and more efficient processors. Just as Mac users would be worse off if Windows didn\'t exist, Intel users will be much worse now that AMD will no longer compete. You see, there\'s this thing called demand, and when there are no competing products in a market, a good or service will always increase the price to the economic equilibrium, unless forced not to by the state (forget that right now, communists!!). In English: you\'re going to get less new technology, and higher prices on existing technology."On the other hand, AMD is definitely not exiting the chip business -- they\'re just trying to branch out from chips for microcomputers.
This sucks. :(
-
hmm.. seems strange to me.. When amd are just about to release the barton and hammer processors. There\'s also no info on the amd site.. I\'d say this is all bullsh@t. but if they are indeed gonna stop making processors.. Say hello higher prices intel processors.
-
Sounds fishy to me. Although it\'ll be a sad day if it happens - then ALL PC lovers are f#cked - Intel or AMD lovers alike. Even if you don\'t like AMD they\'re helping driving Intel prices down.
I hope it\'s teh fake.
-
cyrix - "welcome back to the closet AMD, i missed you"
-
Yeah, I bet you\'re real happy now mm. :)
Well, I do see the charm in paying $300 more for a processor because of the lack of competition... Let\'s get back to the old days of overpriced CPU\'s. LONG LIVE INTEL!
-
a company should not be rewarded for losing money, even if they sell you things real cheap.
this is one of the fundamentals of capitalism.
if you dont wanna pay for a new CPU, dont
we dont see m$ lowering the costs of its OS\'s cause its competition is coming on strong. in fact, they raise thier prices [not that i would actually pay for one, :rolleyes:]
-
Coming on strong? LOL, from where? Sorry, but I don\'t see an alternative for a MS OS for Joe Sixpack anywhere.
Besides, Intel have been bending you over and taking you in the ass enough over the years. Now you\'ll ask for more? Pfft. Suit yourself.
-
bending me over?
do you think paying $20,000 for a hunk of steel, rubber, and plastic that we drive around = bending over and taking it in the ass? or $100,000 for a stack of bricks and wood we live in?
alternative for joe sixpack - apple
in fact, apple is designed for morons
yes, i said coming on strong. did u miss the report that has hacked out of m$\'s servers last week that stated Unix is superior to what m$ has? remember the \'halloween documents"? i give m$ 3-5 years and thier in deep shit
ripped from pricewatch
$145 - Pentium 4 2.0GHz Sock 478
(which is more CPU than 95% of what people need)
lets compare fastest from pricewatch:
$346 - Athlon XP 2700 333 (only 2.17 ghz actually)
$385 - Pentium 4 2.8GHz (only 2.8 ghz actually)
:rolleyes:
-
...and an XP 2000+ (a comparable processor) is $74. :rolleyes:
When Linux (or whatever *nix) is as userfriendly and supports as many programs, games and hardware devices as Windows, THEN I see a broad market for non-MS OS\'es. Until that happens - no chance in hell.
Oh, and regarding your latest edit. Do you think the 2.8 GHz would be $385 if it wasn\'t for AMD?
:rolleyes:
-
lol, the clockspeed on that xp 2000 is only 1.6ghz (i hope you knew this)
comparible intel chip is $109
30$ extra = peace of mind
intel has always been priced highed that thier competion. you tell me why all thier competition dies off.
any product is expensive when it comes out. what kind of market would we have if stuff came out cheap and then got more expensive? ask standard oil about that
look at DVD burners. noone is complaining when they costed 400$+ when they came out. hell, i remember then CD burners cost that much and blank cd\'s were almost 2$ a piece. now u can get a CD burner for 25$ and a DVD burner for under $200
the computer industry is driven by price
AMD backed themselves into a corner and now thier suffering for it
-
So now you\'re saying that the XP 2000+ isn\'t comparable to a P4 2 GHz? And yes, of course I know it\'s not 2000 MHz (actually it\'s 1.67 GHz. But you knew that right?). But come on... even you can\'t be that silly.
And for a guy as supposedly \'1337\' as yourself I\'m sure you remember the good old days where Intel didn\'t have any competition at all and were able to rape consumers in the behind. I sure as hell won\'t put hundreds of dollars worth of profit in their hands, just because they think it\'s ok to overprice their products.
-
leet?
i remember my computer not having a color monitor, a 5.25 floppy and no HD way back
not sure if that makes me "leet"
computers (like cars) are expensive to upgrade/purchase. its just the way it is
do you honestly think intel is gonna suddenly raise thier prices now that AMD backed out?
-
I\'m not saying Intel will immidiatly increase their prices (well, yet), because that won\'t be a very smart move. AMD is not exactly dead yet - they have plenty of processors out there. And next year we\'ll see the Athlon 64. What I was saying is how Intel would have higher prices if it wasn\'t for AMD (or at least - they\'d drive the technology further, faster - if it was only Intel we\'d prolly be stuck at 1 GHz still because there wouldn\'t be any other (faster, or cheaper) products to choose from.
-
intel has 10ghz CPU\'s already
it\'s in thier best interest to stagger thier releases (hence thier roadmap)
lack of competition will slow the drops in prices, nothing more
-
Bah, don\'t tell me we would be @ 3 GHz now if Intel didn\'t have ANY competition. If they had a complete monopoly, it would only make sense to keep the current products on the market as long as possible to maximize profits. Why spend so much on R&D and push the limit every couple of months (weeks?). The answer is they wouldn\'t. They earn top bucks on the top of the line CPU\'s. Why undercut their current top of the line products? Because of competition. It\'s simple business.
-
the RD is already done. thier prepared for up to 10ghz (if not secretly higher)
demand is what controls the prices and market, NOT supply
THATS simple business
again, why does overpriced intell kill any competition that tries?
-
Originally posted by mm
the RD is already done. thier prepared for up to 10ghz (if not secretly higher)
Yeah that\'s true now. I\'m doing a \'what if\' scenario. But it\'s clear that we see differently on things, so let\'s just agree to disagree.
Over and out.
-
its all a "what if" scenario
ahh, come on sammy
it was just getting interesting.
if only soully knew wtf he was talking about, i could debate with him
:)
-
Alrighty then, let\'s continue some more. :)
Originally posted by mm
again, why does overpriced intell kill any competition that tries?
Perhaps because some people are narrowminded and conservative - and only want to buy Intel (the old and trusted brand) instead of coming out of the closet and actually getting some value for money?
-
define value?
by being tricked into buying a "misnamed" product?
XP2000 = 1.6ghz?
thats not unfair marketing?
and how about AMD\'s heat problem?
this is why thier backing out, they have nowhere to go, and not enough money to research a new architecture
-
Misnamed product? Lol. Don\'t you think it says more about Intel than AMD, when their 1.67 GHz can MORE than compete with Intel\'s \'real\' 2 GHz? Clock for clock AMD more than spanks Intel. But yeah, it\'s true AMD processors run more hot than Intel\'s offerings (although it gets better with every revision).
By value I mean getting more than $145 worth of value for §75 (our little Pricewatch researches). Here (http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1574&p=6) is a little comparision of XP 2000+ vs. P4 2.0 GHz. Not bad for a 1.67 GHz processor eh? I mean, it\'s faster than the P4 in practically every benchmark.
What are your views on the AMD Athlon 64 btw?
-
Nowhere in that article does it say AMD will stop making PC chips. It simply says they plan on providing chips for other devices to increase their effectiveness. I don\'t know what the dude at /. is smoking.
http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2002/11/19/rtr799607.html
As a matter of fact if you go to AMD\'s stie they are pushing their new 64 bit Athlon. Always check the source guys.
-
that comparison does not list stability
there are other factors also yer not comparing (cache size and system bus speed)
-
Originally posted by mm
that comparison does not list stability
there are other factors also yer not comparing (cache size and system bus speed)
That\'s a pretty weak argument. :)
I\'m going to the movies so I prolly won\'t be able to respond anymore to this thread today.
-
It\'s all bs. if someone posted Intel were not making chips.. mm would be like yea right etc.. It\'s just bs. AMD won\'t stop making cpus. There mad otherwise. Every PC site would have this news if it was so.. I\'ve only seen it on 1 site. The one posted.
MM... my 1.8ghz Xp = 1.53mhz = 1.8ghz p4. You knew that right?
MM, the REASON why they name the chipsets 1.8ghz + etc is because there on PAR with a 1.8ghz p4. Otherwise intel would look pretty stupid when a 1.53ghz AMD processor is competing with a 1.8ghz p4 not a 1.5 etc... Think about it..
As the cache bs.. It means little all these days.. When GFX cards have there own memory and there\'s a thing called Virtual mem/paging files etc. With the sidebus speeds if u look at there multiplier the AMD processors have higher multipliers to intels.. Mine is 133x2 (266fsb) x 11.5 etc. P4s are around 100x4 x whatever. Amd are releasing new processors with bigger FSBs anyway.
I want to buy a Northbridge fan.. I wanna overclock my fsb and get atleast a 2.1ghz speeds. :)
-
like i said sammy, i wish soully knew wtf he was talking about
anyways, the reason (in case you didnt know) that lower clocked AMD chips can compete with higher clocked intel ships is a process called threading. its the basis of thier architecture, and AMD hasnt found a way around the heat defect (strong argument)
intel has a new trick of thier sleeves for thier 3ghz+ line
its called hyper-threading
look it up, it may suprise you
-
I have a question for u.... are u using the standard sink/fan or did u buy a new one?
As for there heat problem.. They are making new boards and cpus with thermal diodes. They do the exact same thing intels do.. Hotter they get less power supplied. but that also brings the problem of the cpu underclocking itself as it gets hotter. I\'ve had people bring in P4s that run like my old celeron 500. Mainly because they were getting to hot and the diode kicks in. I think personaly they should set up mbs to shut off comps when they get too hot. I\'ve only seen it on amd boards. Simple idea that will help people figure out why there comps run so slow etc.
Hyper threading is not for desktop market. As far as i know intel only plan to use it in Workstation/servers.. P4s are ALREADY able to use it.. but there\'s no bios option etc. Seems a waste to me..
Why do they leave it disabled? does it shorten the life of the processor or something?
Also i\'ve heard AMD will be making hammer processors with DUAL CORES which will kill hyper threading..
-
dual cores? something new to the market?
:rolleyes:
my p4 (OC\'d to 2.2) never hits over 90 F with stock cooler
cant push the mobo any farther, but the chip begs for more
-
Get a new MB.. It\'ll never get of 90f because the diode doesn\'t allow it. Example.. when you go up to 91, it\'ll drop alittle power to get back to 90.. when it gets to 92, it\'ll drop alittle more then that etc.. I\'m not sure what the threashold is on a p4 processor or when the diode kicks in. But when it does get to a certain temp it\'ll never get hotter.
I never said Dual cores are new, i said it\'ll kill hyper threading. New or not.
-
Actually Souly, Hyper-Threading will be introduced (or rather enabled) on desktop CPUs with the 3.06 GHz Pentium 4. :)
It\'s quite nice too.
*wants a 3+ GHz PC*
-
like i said sammy, i wish soully knew wtf he was talking about
:p
-
hmm.. I\'ve read that only Server/workstations would enable it. Ohh well.
mm u say i don\'t know what i\'m talking about.. U think hyperthreading is a "new trick" It\'s not new mm, it\'s on ALL P4s.. It\'s just not enabled.
Where have u proved me wrong anyway. Most things u just ignore.. Typical mm bullshit.
-
its not about proving you wrong
i love you soully
:)
-
Yes, i\'m just a lovable guy.
and my mum still says i\'m cool.