AMD Dodeca-core

[nn_step]

Well, now Intel has the aggressive "tick-tock" strategy, that is almost impossible to up

notice the key word, almost...
Any company given enough pride will up, the one thing that is supposed to be up free

[twilyth]

12 cores huh...
that 4 to play with and 8 for F@H

Hell, can you imagine a 4P server board with 12 cores each - 48 cores - OMG, it's better than Viagra - not that I would know.

[awdrifter]

6 and 12 cores are useless for us desktop users, but it should help AMD get back some server marketshare. I really hope they don't mess it up this time. (delays, TLB bugs, etc)

[fireice2]

even 4 cores for desktops is quite overkill for most applications right now.

[tbone8ty]

I've been telling people I know to buy some stock in AMD. I'm almost tempted to just buy 10 shares, just to see how it'll end up.

i bought 30 shares at 5.90 already made 30 cents a share

[Brother Esau]

I don't see how exactly that could even remotely be possible.
Also, let us just assume for a second Intel Wins and AMD is gone...
Then we will all be seriously ed, then Intel would stop funding their R&D departments as heavily and just soak up as much profit as the market could bare. Which effectively means Windows and most of our games will stagnate on a platform that virtually stopped advancing

They just don't get it nn_step and apparently never will until its too late! Mark my words though this will be the exact same people singing the blues and ...snip -Vapor

[Periander6]

I don't see how exactly that could even remotely be possible.
Also, let us just assume for a second Intel Wins and AMD is gone...
Then we will all be seriously ed, then Intel would stop funding their R&D departments as heavily and just soak up as much profit as the market could bare. Which effectively means Windows and most of our games will stagnate on a platform that virtually stopped advancing

No. Nvidia would either buy Via or pick up the remains of AMD in bankruptcy. Nvidia is Intel's real long term competitor now, with the financial strength and profitability that AMD never had and can only dream about now. Barring something close to a miracle AMD has blown its chance to be any kind of real competition for Intel.

[Hawkeye4077]

You cant say that AMD isn't bad. If you look at the typical market computer:

Dual Core, IGP Video

AMD Wins. You take Each companies sub 100 CPU. In this case you see a Intel Pentium Dual Core E2200 vs an AMD Athlon 64x2 5600+. (prices from Newegg)

The AMD is cheaper, faster and I dare-say that its platform in a typical environment offers more for less than a Intel System. THe problem is, that Brick and Mortal stores still are predominantly Intel and even some Catalog/Online (read Tigerdirect.) If you look at the most recent Tigerdirect catalog you will see about 70% of the pre-configured systems are Intel and offer one of the E2x00 series processors. But you see only a handful of AMD systems and even then they are single core or lower speed X2s.

With the ecomony in such a state of flux do you think the consumer is going to spend $500+ for a computer? Not unless they absolutely need to. These AMD systems can be sold quite cheap but still do what you need, and even play some games on the side for the kids or whatever. AMDs non-server division has always made its most money from the sale of the cheaper chips in high quantities, not the high end chips.

As the cheaper Quad Cores come out if AMD can still get decent ASPs for them, then they will do fine. AMD has always been more about quantity than price. THe high-end stuff matters in server rooms and workstations, not so much in the home area

[Schneider]

No. Nvidia would either buy Via or pick up the remains of AMD in bankruptcy. Nvidia is Intel's real long term competitor now, with the financial strength and profitability that AMD never had and can only dream about now. Barring something close to a miracle AMD has blown its chance to be any kind of real competition for Intel.

Nvidia picking up Via will only help in competing in the mini pc segements.
Even if Nvidia took the left overs of AMD they can't get the x86 licence.

We need AMD.
As pointed out many a time, AMD ain't bad at all for the general population.

[cegras]

A64 didn't crush P4 clock for clock?

Or A64 didn't crush P4 when the P4 was oc'd unimaginably?

I'm genuinely curious here, I haven't read benchmarks that date back that far.

[Tulatin]

A64 didn't crush P4 clock for clock?

Or A64 didn't crush P4 when the P4 was oc'd unimaginably?

I'm genuinely curious here, I haven't read benchmarks that date back that far.

The problem is, that these battles don't really end up won based on who's chip can overclock. A large chunk of chips go to OEMs, where customers want 1 of 2 things : Cheap, or Fast.

Usually, the latter is what they get based on what the MFG says, or what their friends reccomend, and the former is whoever is willing to put out a part that can work effectively with other cheap parts.

Then comes the server market - again where OCing doesn't matter... That's really the problem - for the enthusiast, the K8 was solid gold. It spanked any Intel offering when OCed - in just the way that an OCed e2200 can beat a 5600+ now days...

[triple_A]

I hope AMD can get the power consumption down and their clocks up.
I think that will be enough to keep up with intel, though top-end cpu's will still be intel-only territory for a while..

[largon]

Dodeca-core? Hum, never saw that coming.
Given AMD's financials, I hope they're not planning on "releasing" a Dodo-core.

[gallag]

Whats changed from the x2 days though? It was faster and more expensive than the Intel p-d but it still helped AMD gain market share. So why do people believe being crap compared to Intel will not matter?

[Brother Esau]

They just don't get it nn_step and apparently never will until its too late! Mark my words though this will be the exact same people singing the blues and ...snip -Vapor

C'mon dude You asked for Bananas and I gave you Bananas now whats the situation? Now you (snip) my freaking Bananas would you prefer Juggling Cats or something?

[Origin_Unknown]

Intel will have Nehalem, which will be pretty much the death blow.

EVERY and i mean EVERY time intel announces / amd announces something this is the same rubbish i hear. IF this was true then amd would of been dead along time ago.

do people just abuse AMD becuase they are the only competition to INTEL? Via has less market share / profit and no one gives them the same amount of stick.

I'm not a fan boy of either - I've owned an XP-m and then my Xeons then C2d but hearing the same retarded nonsence is ing annoying now.

[eric66]

EVERY and i mean EVERY time intel announces / amd announces something this is the same rubbish i hear. IF this was true then amd would of been dead along time ago.

do people just abuse AMD becuase they are the only competition to INTEL? Via has less market share / profit and no one gives them the same amount of stick.

I'm not a fan boy of either - I've owned an XP-m and then my Xeons then C2d but hearing the same retarded nonsence is ing annoying now.

same here hate doomsayers i am intel fan but i am sure amd will survive

[Boissez]

Meh... I'd rather see fewer but faster power-efficient cores. The marketing boys would surely disagree.

And while people talk a lot about the average Joe and what he buys fact is that his next PC will most likely be a laptop... and AMD doesn't even have a roadmap thats competitive in that regard.

But anything that keeps their boat floating is good news I guess.

[saaya]

quad channel memory access, HA!
if only numa worked that way...

besides, if they are on the same package, and the package only has 2 memory channels routed, just like the socket and the mainboard only have 2 memory channels routed... how should 4 channel access be possible?

still, shanghai sounds promising

i REALLY REALLY REAAALLLYYY wanna know WHY amd abandoned dual chip in one package research back in the k8 days. WHYYYY????

[xlink]

quad channel memory access, HA!
if only numa worked that way...

besides, if they are on the same package, and the package only has 2 memory channels routed, just like the socket and the mainboard only have 2 memory channels routed... how should 4 channel access be possible?

still, shanghai sounds promising

i REALLY REALLY REAAALLLYYY wanna know WHY amd abandoned dual chip in one package research back in the k8 days. WHYYYY????

agreed. we could've had quad core setups on old 939 back before c2d was even out.

[naokaji]

AMD doesn't need superior performance to grab market share, it just needs a cost competitive product and guess what they do.
Heck soon we will have sub $100 Quad cores, combined with $60 mobos with the 780G chipset, make killer budget boxes

How much money does amd make though from selling their quads at such low prices? I doubt its enough to pay off debts + cover cost of production + fund r&d for new products.

[Shintai]

AMD doesn't need superior performance to grab market share, it just needs a cost competitive product and guess what they do.
Heck soon we will have sub $100 Quad cores, combined with $60 mobos with the 780G chipset, make killer budget boxes

So killer budget boxes it also killed anything called profit.

[Donnie27]

Originally Posted by cegras
A64 didn't crush P4 clock for clock?

Or A64 didn't crush P4 when the P4 was oc'd unimaginably?

I'm genuinely curious here, I haven't read benchmarks that date back that far.

That's the problem, P4 NEVER competed with XP, A64 and X2 Clock for Clock=P AMD used Price Rates to sell Athlon of all kinds. Then they used we're Frakkin superior price rates to sell X2. I can't believe Green Team guys on this sight complaining about Prices after bragging about 4400+ ONLY costing $750, 3800+ going for $439, and the FX-55 for $850 The 8400 I'm looking at cost less than my 3500+ after they launched X2, $208 from Newegg.

The market only cares about Price, Performance and Stability. As long as AMD does that, they'll sell products. Again, they aren't going away.

[Donnie27]

The problem is, that these battles don't really end up won based on who's chip can overclock. A large chunk of chips go to OEMs, where customers want 1 of 2 things : Cheap, or Fast.

Usually, the latter is what they get based on what the MFG says, or what their friends reccomend, and the former is whoever is willing to put out a part that can work effectively with other cheap parts.

Then comes the server market - again where OCing doesn't matter... That's really the problem - for the enthusiast, the K8 was solid gold. It spanked any Intel offering even when it was OCed - in just the way that an OCed e2200 can beat a 5600+ now days...

QFT! I added the bold words The problem is when the same is pointed out now, flames start. Turn-about isn't Fairplay

[flippin_waffles]

EVERY and i mean EVERY time intel announces / amd announces something this is the same rubbish i hear. IF this was true then amd would of been dead along time ago.

do people just abuse AMD becuase they are the only competition to INTEL? Via has less market share / profit and no one gives them the same amount of stick.

I'm not a fan boy of either - I've owned an XP-m and then my Xeons then C2d but hearing the same retarded nonsence is ing annoying now.

IMO the answer is very simple and stares us right in the face day in and day out on every forum on the web. Just have to ask yourself one question: Who gains if AMD fails; and there's 1 and only 1 answer to that question. I think the bigger question here is if this is akin to a certain other companies Focus Group campaign...