The Near Future of Intel 136
wh0pper wrote to mention a Design Technica story about the near-term future of Intel. They've been getting beaten in the press pretty soundly by AMD of late, and at the Intel Developer's Forum they did their best to convince attendees they were on the comeback trail. From the article: "It wouldn't be IDF if there wasn't a solid performance message. This time, Intel clearly had AMD in their sights. By a series of their products' massive performance improvements, Intel hit the ball back into AMD's court. With Microsoft's Vista operating system coming out at the same time, Intel showed how they have the higher performing solution. Clearly, we won't know until final systems ship. But Intel presented their case strongly, suggesting they can match AMD, if not beat them."
Intel has been catching up lately... (Score:4, Insightful)
Clearly, we won't know until final systems ship. (Score:5, Insightful)
Need we discuss this any further?
Article is drivel. (Score:5, Insightful)
Typical quote:What? What are you talking about? Are you suggesting manufacturers will ship games on flash chips? And what the hell do laptops have to do with anything?
Nothing I've heard about intel's plans to use flash technology would improve any system performace other then boot time.
You really think it works that way? (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason chip companies sometimes hold back on new product is because they can't always be certain of the exact time at which breakthroughs in these other areas will be made. Their companies depend on having a solid, reliable revenue stream, so they have to use release schedules to smooth out the apparent advances in chip speed. If they didn't do this, we'd all be sitting around, hoping against hope that this month would be the month the new chips come out, and worried about buying in case they come out tomorrow.
Which is more or less how Apple worked for a long time, because IBM wasn't able to smooth out its development curve. It wasn't pleasant.
Anyway. Overall chip development does not just scale depending on the moods of the employees at chip companies. Intel went off-track by being overconfident at one point, sure, but that was a five year thing involving a bad choice of roadmap. The idea that AMB is sitting on their laurels after a year is ridiculous.
interesting quote (Score:5, Insightful)
But Intel presented their case strongly, suggesting they can match AMD, if not beat them.
AMD (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh...they haven't?
AMD? (Score:1, Insightful)
Some important things (AKA garbage article) (Score:5, Insightful)
"By a series of their products' massive performance improvements, Intel hit the ball back into AMD's court."
These are products that are not out yet. Benchmarks look good, but you are comparing a product on the shelves (that's been there a while) with one that is not OK.
And by the time they come out, AMD will likely have moved on to. This is a fast paced space, so 6 month time gaps matter when doing comparisons. Product matchups in the actual market are what matter.
AMD's M2 platform looks good. The performance / watt issue matters a lot, and it will be interesting to see how that develops. Both companies are clearly chasing the power/watt area, so should be a lot of fun. The notebook space especially which is currently dominated by intel will be fun.
"Intel showed how they have the higher performing solution." This should read intel MAY have a higher performing solution sometime in the future.
I'm tired of the big announcements of victory on non-shipping parts. ATI with crossfire (lunched twice). The hype around the P4 "netburst" architecture. The itanium hype of course. PS2 movie like visuals (still a nice platform, but please).
Fun to watch, great it's a great race.
Re:AMD - Time to wakeup (Score:4, Insightful)
Whatever criteria you are using to judge amd64 as the same core as k7 would also label merom a 686 core. And that is an old ass core.
Re:You really think it works that way? (Score:3, Insightful)
Intel and Amd have fallen into a game of releasing microscopic advancements to pass each other. It's easier and it offers the long term potential of selling chips.
There aren't many doublings in power left before people just don't need anymore power.
For the average user who doesn't need to compile code there is already way too much power for basic apps.
umm... how is that cheating? (Score:2, Insightful)
So let me get this straight... Intel could have left the AMD chip at the factory clock settings and thrashed it by a mile or it could have OVERCLOCKED it to give it an advantage against Intel's upcoming chip. This leads me to believe that you are just another retard who doesn't know what OVERCLOCK means. OVERCLOCKING from Wikipedia:
The 2.8 ghz AMD processor speed level is where AMD will be at when Intel's latest gen Core processor comes out. Even then, that would be AMD's highest end part compared to Intel's middle-high end. A true test would have been to pit a 3.0ghz or higher Intel processor and overclocked AMD or not, the Intel processor would have wiped the floor.
Your comment is the reason why the moderation system sucks here. You are clueless and yet you get modded up.
Just a note for AMD fanbois (Score:3, Insightful)
AMD may have had the upper hand on processor designs for the last few years, and even Intel is practically admitting that by switching their mainline core architecture to the Pentium M derivative (which is a PIII derivative). But Intel has had them beat in one area and probably will for a very long time: production capacity. Intel's fabs can crank out processors in a day that matches AMD's production in a year (exaggeration, but run with it). There is NO way that AMD could meet the demands of the business world in sheer scale of orders. If Intel closed up shop, computer CPUs would triple or quadrupal in price overnight due to scarcity. Fabs take YEARS to build, and can take even more years to full ramp up to full production while shaking out the process bugs. Intel has a LOT of experience with this due to the shear number of fabs that they own and operate.
Competition is good, for everyone. Give props where they are due though. Intel is turning around after making a very bad roadmap choice many years ago, and I think it will only benifit consumers in the long run. AMD had very good designs and will probably have some more good ones in the future. But don't pick on or the other exclusively and wish for the other to disappear. That would lead to a VERY bad situation for everyone, even you.
Re:Just a note for AMD fanbois (Score:3, Insightful)
Plus if Intel closed up shop, suddenly there'd be lots of fabs and extra supplies up for sale...
Nobody claims that Intel should not exist, but their squeezing over the last few years has been good for everybody. (well, except Intel maybe)
Re:You really think it works that way? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Intel has been catching up lately... (Score:3, Insightful)
Specifically: movies playing in a shorter time may not be important, but how about movies at real time? MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 can easily push current processors to the limit at HD resolutions when encoded with maximum codec complexity.