AMD Releases Mobile CPUs 66
epoh writes "AMD has finally released their new (fast, affordable, slick) line of notebook processors. They are supposed to blow the Pentiums out of the water. Check out the full story. Yum. I want one. " It's a shame the K7 runs so hot. I'm sure it's just a matter of time, though.
FP? (Score:2)
When the K6s first came out I was very excited. I knew they were no panacea, but I overclocked my first 166 to a 210 using the newly available 83 MHz bus and I loved that little bad boy.
Is it just me, or is Intel every bit as predatory as Microsoft? Every time I think about that little chip company that could and how much Intel has hurt them it just makes me sick!
Andy Grove is a spawn of SATAN!
; >
Hope for AMD? (Score:1)
Mobile K6-3's... cool. (Score:1)
Those should be _really_ fast... with the 256K of on-die cache, assuming the laptops they go in have good chipsets.
Keep it up... (Score:1)
Damn fine processor for the price. Heck, those 400s are down to $70 now with a fan. Hard to beat that price/performance ratio.
--Bernie
Good For Them (Score:2)
Can AMD compete with Intel in notebooks? (Score:2)
Despite my pessimism, I'd love to see AMD suceed. Let's wish 'em the best!
Re:FP? (Score:2)
It just occured to me how odd this reference, which is often applied to Linux as well, must seem to people who weren't indoctrinated with "The Little Engine that Could" in their preschool years. I'd wager that that book isn't nearly as pervasive overseas as it is in the U.S.
Lo-power: 12 watts!? die, IA32 (Score:1)
As I sit here on my 2.2 volt OC'd celeron, mourning my dead G3, I wonder at how we free-software, open-sourceys still use or rely on this blasted, 20+ year old rube goldberg arch.
The new G4's havent even gone through manufacturing and minor design refinements, nor are they aimed at low-power environments but they still (yield issues aside) draw something like 5.0w typical/11.5 peak. And consider how power consumption varies with the SQUARE of wattage (i believe
its a shame. for my laptops, i look for the most elegant solution and designs. too bad apple doesnt exactly have real competition with powerpc laptops.
ah. sad how quake frame rates drive the market, no? i think i go soak in the tub with gottfried von strassburg's tristan. save my money for some sound system that can work while i bathe so i can enjoy my bach. apparently the world beyond maya has only gotten worse since these "enlightened times"
Re:FP? (Score:1)
Anyway, for some of our non-US friends who may not have heard the story, here's the most info I could find on it.
http://www.uic.edu/depts/geos/littleng.htm
The story is about steam engine who thinks positively and is able to climb a hill. (Of course, that's the zip version of the Reader's Digest version.)
The engine says "I think I can! I think I can!" and when he hits the top and speeds down the hill he's saying "I thought I could. I thought I could."
Of course, they forgot to mention that the bridge was out, but that's just details. Right?
G4? (Score:1)
Keep Innovating, AMD. People are Listening. (Score:3)
News Flash ** Earthquake hit Taiwan ** (Score:1)
Unless God bought up a shitload of RAM before he shifted those plates. Hmmmmmmmm..
-Pika
Re:Can AMD compete with Intel in notebooks? (Score:2)
Re:News Flash ** Earthquake hit Taiwan ** (Score:1)
Is this new? (Score:1)
Re:Can AMD compete with Intel in notebooks? (Score:1)
If anything, I think they might be more popular in the laptop division, simply because laptops are inherently more expensive and anything to make it cheaper would probably be well received.
Re:Is this new? (Score:1)
Are you sure about that? (Score:1)
However, enter the K7. It has a pipelined FPU! (with three units) So, unless Intel's new chips crank up the heat on FPU latency, I believe AMD's new chips will be around (or above) Intel's level.
Review Zone [review-zone.com] has a fairly well flused out discission of the K7's features. Enjoy
Re:FP? (Score:2)
Oh, give me a break. Can we please forget this "little chip company that could" crap?
AMD is a multi-billion dollar company (their stock is at a year-long low right now, and they STILL have over 2.75 billion in market capitalization) with a history of:
1) Filing lawsuits against other chipmakers, some of which have been regarded as frivolous by some analysts.
2) Getting lawsuits filed against them, some of which alledge infringement of other people's patents.
Look, I like AMD as much as the next guy, every single one of my home office PCs uses an AMD chip, and I'll probably buy a laptop with an AMD chip soon.
But I'm not doing it because they're some kind of Saint Chipmaker swooping in to save the industry from the evil Intel. Let's get a little perspective here, folks.
Re:Lo-power: 12 watts!? die, IA32 (Score:1)
Get your facts straight before posting: Power varies as the square of the voltage, not the wattage. Cast your mind back to freshman physics: V=IR -> I=V/R, P=IIR -> P=(V/R)(V/R)R -> P=VV/R. Watts are a unit of power, and power can't vary as the square of itself. This is why you should drop the core voltage on your overclocked Celeries by 3% when upping the clock by 10%.
And what do you mean "Apple doesn't have real competitioin with powerpc laptops?" With the exception of the blasted one button trackpad, the current crop of Powerbooks is a match for anything on the market, IMHO. You can even run Linux on the damn things, what more could you want?
Wattage Crucial for mobile (Score:2)
If the CPU were the only thing to run (I know, this will exagerate the differences) a battery could last up to twice as long if either the G3 or G4 spent most of its time chilling in the low range of usage. User driven tasks like word processing allow such idling to take advantage of the PPC doze and nap power conservation modes, which is appearantly how Apple can claim 6 hour battery life on the iBooks. Other tasks would certainly run it down faster by preventing either the processor or the disk from idling.
Re:Lo-power: 12 watts!? die, IA32 (Score:1)
My current laptop (a Sony Vaio PCG-F270), according to the specs, draws 80 watts maximum; however, the 38.48 Wh battery lasts for about 2 hours (short, I know, but I leave it plugged in most of the time), which indicates an average power draw of about 19 W. I'm sure this has some relevance, but I'm not quite sure what.
AMD is on the way up! (Score:2)
In addition, I can see them hurting Intel with the incredible Athlon. Even if Intel can get stable, faster PIIIs to market, AMD will have the capacity to one up them monthly in both performance and clock speed for years!
(Forgive my toadiness. I have owned far more AMD-based machines in the last few years than Intel, and they ALWAYS give me more zip for less cash)
Hm? (Score:2)
Re:Lo-power: 12 watts!? die, IA32 (Score:1)
Free software is all about letting people use the software. All the free software in the world doesn't do your average Joe any good if he has to pay 2x for a computer that can run it...
And consider how power consumption varies with the SQUARE of wattage Power=watts=current*voltage. You are thinking of P=I^2*R, which is only really useful when you are talking about power vs. current over a fixed resistance. With CPUs, the voltage is fixed (2.0 / 3.3 volts) by the gate technology, while the current varies by power consumption.
In any case, 12 watts is actually pretty good. I don't know what a celeron or a mobile PII run, 2.8 V PII (333 and slower) can hit 40 W, and a 2.0 V PII can be 30W
Branding Issues (Score:2)
I think it's safe to say that most of the informed users realize the decent price:performance ratio that AMD-based systems offer. Either that, or they're already hardcore AMD or hardcore Intel, but they can usually backup their preference with reasons (quality or otherwise).
On to the uninformed clueless folks. The main factor conributing to their increasing lack of Intel bias is the salespeople that tend to not be Intel-pushing maniacs anymore. Comments like, "Well, AMDs aren't as good; they're cheap & have compatibility problems," are less common on a sales floor, as they're usually replaced with, "For a lower cost, you can get equal performance. Same thing, sometimes better, less money." Another contributing factor is that clueless people's friends are no longer saying, in response to, "What kinda computer should I buy?", "Just make sure it's a real Pentium."
There are also more AMD systems for sale, percentage-wise, on any given retail floor. That is, if Joe's PC shop is selling computers, 25-60% of them might be AMD-based, vs. 0-25% 5 years ago.
So where's the problem?
Big companies don't dig anything but `the best'. It is rare to see a highly technical person who is also in direct control of any large portion of a Fortune 500 budget. When the buyer has hundreds of thousands of dollars in a budget that doesn't have much of anything to do with their own pocketbook, they often tend to choose Intel over AMD, because at the moment, most people tend to compare it to Nike vs. Brand X Shoes. It isn't that Brand X shoes won't necessary last as long, or aren't as cool looking, but "everyone knows Nike's are the best." They've used Intel for as long as they can remember, and they also remember when AMDs tended to not be great at all. They also like the Intel guys dancing around in their jumpsuits on TV.. and they're too good to shop at Wal-Mart, so why would they buy AMDs?
So, that's my take on the whole scene: commercial folks don't dig AMD-based systems as much as the wide array of home users do. I'd love to see the breakdown of usage of AMDs across the commercial and private markets, but I think that my evaluation is a functional representation of reality in many instances (and probably common knowledge to most Slashdot folks).
Re:Hm? (Score:1)
Give AMD time to break into the market. Monopolies can be made overnight, but time is required to break a monopoly. AMD has slowly been working on breaking the Intel monopoly, and AMD is succeeding, albeit slowly..
Re:Lo-power: 12 watts!? die, IA32 (Score:1)
dunno. just really would prefer 2-3 buttons on a powerbook trackpad. and maybe a subnotebookish enclosure.
sorry bout my little physics error. never took freshmen physics so thhhbt.
and does anyone know if the current Motorola G4's are really manufactured in copper
Re:Hm? (Score:1)
-Brian
Re:Hm? (Score:2)
At least AMD has some sense (Score:1)
Athlon Prices (Score:1)
AMD K-7 550 - $394
AMD K-7 600 - $494
AMD K-7 650 - $841
No $1000 processors here...
[humor] he must have been talking about those Athlon Xeon chips [/humor]
I was a service tech at BestBuy (Score:1)
AMD Athlon 550
96mB of RAM
25GB HardDrive
S3 8 MB video card (it does OpenGL)
Some Generic soud card... Probably Crystal *****
It gets 64 fps in Quake 2 in OpenGL - Demo2.dm2 at 640x480
the PIII 600 HP w/ 16mb of VRAM (OpenGL) and 128mb of Memory only gets 44 fps in demo2.dm2 at 640x480... I was shocked...
Re:Hm? (Score:1)
Re:What? (Score:1)
I remeber this story from my younger days, as I`m sure most of the other non US readers do.
Re:Can AMD compete with Intel in notebooks? (Score:1)
You just have to beat the competition to really make it work... lower power consumption, smaller, faster, whatever...
Re:G4? (Score:1)
Re:Keep Innovating, AMD. People are Listening. (Score:2)
Re:battery life -- Power/iBooks (Score:1)
Re:Keep Innovating, AMD. People are Listening. (Score:1)
Re:battery life -- Power/iBooks (Score:1)
And what about the 5hours run time of the new powerbook G4.
Also notice that future G4 used for notebook will use the SOI (silicon on insulator) technology, which would permit to clock chips 35% higher while using 65% less energy.
That would make a 3.25W typical, 7.5W peak power consumption for a 550 MHz G4. And rumors are that the cheapest G4 powerbook will cost around 1899$.
Friendly,
Sven LUTHER
Video Cards (Score:1)
Re:Can AMD compete with Intel in notebooks? (Score:1)
Besides, it's got a nice black case
Re:first! (Score:1)
Owned? (Score:1)
:(
My AMD site ... (Score:1)
Especially considering... (Score:1)
-----
Re:Hm? (Score:1)
Re:What? (Score:1)
Not at all. I just don't presume to think you read all the SAME books that we do.