Perhaps but you should probably read the full article :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoThr3k
Printable View
Perhaps but you should probably read the full article :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoThr3k
No crap. I wonder what would happen if people just forgot about the R600 fisaco (since AMD didn't develop it - blame ATi) and re-thought how successful AMD could be without that negative thought of a product they didn't develop. I bet you enthusiasm for AMD might be higher...just some people get too wrapped up in speculation and rumors...it's depressing. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
Okay, the thing is we don't know how K10 will perform yet. We've got speculated prices, frequencies, and TDP. Keyword: SPECULATED. Just because it's showed up somewhere, doesn't mean it's true. You know what speculation is for? It's purpose usually is to stir up :banana:
We all know how secretive AMD is when it comes to a product launch. We're not going to here anything from AMD directly for a while. I think we all know AMD needs to show us something, because all this speculation is killing them.
And the whole thing about R600, it's not AMD's fault. It was too far into design for AMD to have anything to do with it. The R600 does perform well, but power leakage seems the obvious problem.
Also, if you have the thought to bash AMD, KEEP IT TO YOURSELF. If you want to bash AMD, start a new thread, and have fun. Just don't do it here. We're discussing Barcelona/Phenom, not bashing.
Without AAQuote:
Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan
Shader AA just isn't up to the task at the moment...Quote:
Originally Posted by red
so hes right without aaQuote:
Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan
Guys, the R600 and Barcelona have nothing to do with each other besides the fact that both are released by AMD...
KEEP ON TOPIC!
http://forums.anandtech.com/messagev...readid=2065634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Key, AnandTech Editor
^^ hope it means there will be some benchmarks soon
i read the full articleQuote:
Originally Posted by nemrod
shintai only highlights the stuff he thinks is true.... and are the truth to him
if K10 will perform well,he will go nuts and will not believe it,thats for sure
if K10 performs bad, oh well, then this forum is doomed
because he will post everywhere that he was right,and he knew it all along
so for the sake of this forum, let K10 perform well
Feel free to post the part and highlights where you think the K10 will perform very well.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoThr3k
Instead of just complaining. Try something new and use something to argue with, rather that just the "blabla he suck because he dont think my dream company and favoured comapny wont wtfpwn everyone".
And forum doom if K10 performs bad? Oh my...you really think this forum turns around 1 company?
hehe, i guess my post was too difficult for you :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
i buy what is best,i dont care if the brand is intel or amd,hell even there was a brand called Shintai i would buy it even if i dislike you
If K10 performs bad, you will post everywhere that you knew it all along, etc etc (damn i hate repeating myself)
the article says this
- Quadcore was not the problem,it was the combo of core enhancements and the transistion to QC
- nice virtualization and power usage features
- upgraded core so better performance
I presume that article also was too difficult for you....
you are the biased one, jumping the gun amd's K10 will perform bad etc,
i hope it will perform well, otherwise there will not be a lot of competition in the cpu market which is bad for (us minus shintai)
You should really get over your personal issues. Its getting bothersome and is degrading for the forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoThr3k
If you note, he is not happy to talk about direct performance. And remember he aint an objective view of it. His main focus on virtualization and powersaving features is the thing that worries me. If he had a "conroe killer" so to say, he would be all over the place talking about nothing cept high performance and regain market leadership.
And saying quadcore is not a problem, is a direct counterstatement against some of his own engineers. That said if they knew the MCM approach would be so approved as it did. they would never even have considered native quadcore due to the problems and issues with such a monolith design (283mm2).
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...118193,00.html
*Barcelona shipping in standard/low power are "planned for shipment for launch later this summer"
*Shipping in August for revenue, systems equipped with K10 in September
*"launch up to 2.0 Ghz"
*Higher frequencies in Q4
2Ghz..ouch...
Reminds me of the Opteron launch. Hope the IPC is as good as well, otherwise i dont see how AMD will be able to compete on the desktop
standard/low power at 1.9-2.0 means that's not the highest clock they could squeeze out of the chips.Quote:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...118193,00.html
*Barcelona shipping in standard/low power are "planned for shipment for launch later this summer"
*Shipping in August for revenue, systems equipped with K10 in September
*"launch up to 2.0 Ghz"
*Higher frequencies in Q4
Though, this is server, most of us want the Desktop part, comming with "higher frequencies in Q4".
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/32702/135/
Their sources whisper 2.4,2.5 in Q4, matching the INQ's claims.
lol check this out
http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+to+Laun...rticle7890.htm
why the fing would i pay something thats weaker?? perform less while costs more ...Quote:
By Amiga500 on 6/29/2007 12:11:43 PM , Rating: 2
Sure, you might pay out the same bucks for a slightly slower system (in comparison with Intel) now...
But if AMD went under, what would you have to pay for a decent system next time out?
cuz i highly doubt a 1.9GHz K10 coss $320 in Aug/Sept (which is like 1 to 2 months later than Q6600's July price cut) will beat Q6600 2.4GHz which costs $266
That's an incorrect assumption.Quote:
Originally Posted by alayashu
In this case, power is not the limiting factor on the speed.
1.9 & 2.0 GHz parts will be released at 95W and 68W...
Then they await a new spin that resolves speed path issues to get to higher speeds.
This is a disaster for AMD. Notice they've dropped all rhetoric about outperforming Clovertown.
Now it is: 4 Barc cores will outperform 2 K8 cores by up to 40 to 70%. Big deal.
As for "customers demand low power parts", that's a lie, the reason they are launching those now is that they can't produce faster parts-- the parts run so slowly that many of them just happen to use little enough power to make the 68W bin.
The really funny thing is, they still have that "simulated performance benchmark" graphic on their site-- the one that assumes Barcelona will run at 2.6GHz.
Yeah, that guy is wacked. What is he, a communist? We're all supposed to buy AMD's underperforming parts to keep them alive? How about Hector uses some of his $16M salary instead? Or they sell off ATI for $3B less than they bought it for to raise cash?Quote:
Originally Posted by californian7856
yeah i mean i get his logic but thats totally idiotic ... we should buy AMD's cpu to keep em alive regardless how they perform ... u know thats what pisses me off .. X2 3800 costs like $400 during in Q2 2005 .. i was in the process of buying parts .. and that really pisses me off ... $400 for the cheapest parts of their dual core.. haha now they get what they deserve
and ur right, wtf should i pay u for ur crappy cpu when u, the CEO is making millions ..$ ?? and not making better CPU than competitor ...
hell, $500 is a bit much to spend for me
we can examine the logic behind that statement
2 possible scenariosQuote:
Sure, you might pay out the same bucks for a slightly slower system (in comparison with Intel) now...
But if AMD went under, what would you have to pay for a decent system next time out?
1. K10 beats Core 2 Quad in terms of performance/price in the $300 to $500 segment. in that case im happy to do that, i dont need u to tell me that
2. K10 losses to Core 2 Quad in terms of performance/price in the $300 to $500 segment. in that case im buying ur crap to save ur company?? no thanx
and i highly doubt he was thinking about scenario 1 as he said "if AMD went under".. why would AMD went under if AMD is winning??
"Now it is: 4 Barc cores will outperform 2 K8 cores by up to 40 to 70%. Big deal."
Those are handpicked benches. One is the outdated SPECfp_rate2000
http://i17.tinypic.com/2eq51k5.jpg and the other "OLTP" (usually they should specify if this is TPC-C or H) http://i16.tinypic.com/4d6wjmo.jpg
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1183...googlenews_wsj
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/pro...629&ID=7108474
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200...arcelona_2ghz/
"Mr. Allen estimated that the first versions of Barcelona still will be 40% to 50% faster than existing Opteron chips, which have two processors."
"We will be seeing a performance boost of 40-50 per cent above our highest frequency dual-core products that are available today," AMD VP Randy Allen told us.
Some calculating, the fastest 2P K8 can deliver 4*3GHz=12GHz. 45% (40+50/2) faster than that would be 17.4Ghz. Divided by 8 K10 cores=2.175GHz. 2.175/2=8.75% IPC K10 advantage?
red,why you use 8 K10 cores in calculation?
edit:ahh i see you used 2P for K8.