Information

Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
AMD Athlon 64 4800+ Anew: AMD Masters 65nm Technology

Started by: Kaz | Date 01/04/07 10:47:27 AM
Comments: 30 | Last Comment:  03/12/08 05:11:19 PM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-4]

1. 
Strange conclusion.

When you reviewed AMD 90 nm first processor (Winchester) 11/25/2004 you said:

"The new Winchester core used for the new Athlon 64 processors should be considered a success."

"The performance advantages ensured by the new 90nm Winchester core compared with the predecessor, 130nm NewCastle core, are minimal and sometimes the CPUs based on the new core are even slower than the predecessors."

"Since the K8 core design remained the same despite the use of finer 90nm production technology, the major trump of the new Winchester based CPUs is not their performance but their low heat dissipation."

I think strange that some got "strange" conclusions after seeing a deja vu.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/04/07 10:47:27 AM]
Reply

2. 
AMD better smarten up and come up with the new k8L architecture as soon as possible. As it is, it has dropped to second place with the Intel Core 2 duo leaving AMD dual core x2 in the dust. AMD'S newest 65nm fabrication process didn't help any. We are staying loyal to AMD only if the company makes their processors as good as Intel's for the same price, and that is not what we are seeing in tests after tests not only from you guys but also from several other independents, like Amanda tech, etc. Look here in this article, you only used an slower Intel Core 2 6400 and even that one beat the best AMD has to offer in 11 out of a total of 15 different tests. Therefore my previous loyalty to AMD is now gone. If I was in the market to buy a new PC right now I would go with Intel Core 2 Extreme for sure. There is absolutely no doubt about it. That is no doubt the Intel core 2 Extreme is the very best processor in the entire market right now. The same goes for Intel's Core 2 Quad processors as well. I just hope that when the time comes for me to upgrade to a new PC perhaps in 3 or 4 years from now AMD will be on top again, otherwise like I said I will go with Intel.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/04/07 05:11:11 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
"my previous loyalty to AMD is now gone"
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/09/07 09:13:34 PM]
Reply

3. 
before: AMD rules!!!
now: INTEL rules!!!
future: INTEL RULES!!!
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/05/07 04:20:04 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
AMD Sempron vs Intel celeron: AMD rules!!!
AMD Athlon64 vs Intel P4: AMD rules!!!
AMD Athlon64 X2 vs Intel PD: AMD rules!!!
AMD Athon64 X2 vs Intel Core 2 Duo: Intel rules!!!
AMD QuadFX vs Intel Core 2 Quad: Intel rules!!! (Both super expensive solutions)
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/05/07 10:00:35 AM]
Reply

4. 
AMD Needs to get their act together first. wth is with the ridicolous naming scheme? 4800 being slower than a 4600 and how the hell are the average consumers supposed to know the difference between 4800 @ 2.4 or 4800@ 2.5 or all the EE and Small form factor or which is 65nm and whichis 90nm and which has more cache and whiich has less and what not....

Its an absolute mess.

Intel on the other hand, has it laid out plain and simple.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/05/07 09:09:22 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Hahaha...

Nice try. Intel is even more complex!

http://www.intel.com/products/processor_number/proc_info_table.pdf
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/05/07 09:53:59 AM]
Reply

[1-4]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment