My lack of enthusiasm for AMD

G

gaffo

Tony said:
If you're talking installed base, maybe. However if you're takling
new unit sales AMD bottomed out at about 4% just before teh release of
the K6 (early '97).


Just before the release of the K6 Cyrix was actually outselling AMD
(at least if you count the Cyrix branded and IBM branded chips
together).


The first Centaur Winchip came out in Oct. '97 according to
www.sandpile.org. At some point i think they might have managed to
creep over 1% of sales around early '99 or there abouts. I rather
liked this chip, VERY simple and cheap but offered not altogether
terrible performance for the time.

The Winchip design is essentially still around in the form of the VIA
C-series chips, though obviously they've diverged quite a bit since
VIA bought 'em out many moons ago.


I'm not sure that Rise ever really sold any meaningful quantities of
chips.


None of the alternatives ever matched Intel in terms of performance,
and they only matched or beat AMD at times when AMD was really
struggling (ie the K5 days). Cyrix and the IDT/Centaur/Winchip both
got bought out by VIA and that's the only real 3rd player left in x86
chips, but they're really targetting some specific niches. They still
have the VERY low cost design from Winchip so apparently they might
still be making money with their 1% marketshare, but that's about it.


Transmeta's design was a really odd-ball way of doing things that had
a lot of people scratching their heads from the get-go. I don't think
I went so far as to say that it wouldn't work out well, but I
definitely didn't have very high hopes for their idea. It turns out
that my low hopes were overly optimistic. It was just an odd-ball way
of doing things, it was a REALLY bad way of doing things! At best
they were matching the performance of VIA chips while using 4x as many
transistors and costing at least 4x as much to build!

Transmeta now seems to have taken the Rambus approach to business and
have stopped concentrating on engineering in order to focus their
efforts on litigation and questionable patents.


The Winchip-2 was a K6 equal but two years too late! By the time IDT
had much volume of their 200MHz Winchip, AMD was selling their 350MHz
K6-2. Even then the Winchip2 could only match the performance of the
K6 on integer workloads, the floating point performance was weaker
than the already so-so K6 FP.

I did like the design of the chip because it was SO cheap. It was
kind of elegant in it's simplicity, but it was never anywhere close to
the performance level that AMD or Intel offered at the time. What it
DID offer was a really good low-cost part that was a drop-in
replacement for MANY old motherboards. At they were selling this chip
there were lots of people with older Pentium 75-133MHz boards that
could drop one of these Winchips in for a VERY noticeable improvement
in performance for only ~$50. It was an EXCELLENT deal for these
people and I recommended it highly for this exact reason. However for
anyone building a new system from scratch it made no sense at all.
Only a few dollars more got you an AMD K6-2 or Intel Celeron (which
had cache by this time) based system with MUCH better performance.


AMD, like Intel, highered several old Alpha guys.


Speed increases haven't actually slowed down that much, though they
aren't necessarily as obvious anymore because most chips are "fast
enough" for so many applications. However if you look at a plot of
something like SPEC CPU2000 (and especially CPU_rate) vs. time you'll
see that the performance is still doubling every 24 months or so.
Pretty impressive.


I'm glad I don't share your pessimism for computer chip development! I
still expect noticeable performance improvements for at least another
5-10 years. Beyond that it's too tough to predict, however you can
bet that both AMD and Intel aren't going to just back and give up on
things. New performance improvements might not come from the same
sorts of obvious ways that we have seen in the past, but they aren't
going to stop.

Howdy there!


good post, alot of info:

one thing about the winchip-2 though: True it did come out two years
after the k-6 (win-2 not win-1), but its FPU was equal to (and in fact
usually 5-10 percent FASTER) the k-6.

win-1 had a dog fpu,

but the win-2 had a pipelined fpu and could run x86 games which were
compiled for the Pentium Classics fpu 5-10 percent faster than the k-6
could even though technically the winchip2's fpu was "slower" than the
k-6.

but that "slowerness" only showed when running games written for the
486's fpu, and then it was "fast enough" since it was running faster
than any 486 clockspeed wise.

Winchip2 was offered in 200?mhz and 240 mhz. at the time the lower end
k-6's were offered at 233 and were slower ;-)........and cost more and
needed a new motherboard............and had to run on doggy VIA
chipsets.

- you can tell I never had a k-6 box. ;-).



--
 
T

Tony Hill

good post, alot of info:

one thing about the winchip-2 though: True it did come out two years
after the k-6 (win-2 not win-1), but its FPU was equal to (and in fact
usually 5-10 percent FASTER) the k-6.

win-1 had a dog fpu,

but the win-2 had a pipelined fpu and could run x86 games which were
compiled for the Pentium Classics fpu 5-10 percent faster than the k-6
could even though technically the winchip2's fpu was "slower" than the
k-6.

but that "slowerness" only showed when running games written for the
486's fpu, and then it was "fast enough" since it was running faster
than any 486 clockspeed wise.

As always, measuring the exact performance of one FPU vs. another
isn't a straightforward thing, but I don't recall any of the Winchips
ever having a particularly impressive FPU. At best they were sorta-ok
for some situations.
Winchip2 was offered in 200?mhz and 240 mhz. at the time the lower end
k-6's were offered at 233 and were slower ;-)........and cost more and
needed a new motherboard............and had to run on doggy VIA
chipsets.

The very first Winchip2 was released in Sept. of '98, a month after
AMD released their K6-2 350MHz and two months before they released the
K6-2 400MHz.

The Winchip and especially Winchip2 was a nice and extremely low-cost
upgrade solution. It had a lot of good points, but it was never
anywhere close to competing with either Intel or AMD at the high-end.
 
G

gaffo

Spoon said:
Dirk Meyer?



YES!! thank you!




........seems that there is a prototype "Quantum" computer too.
whatever/however that works.....................................

a different animal or so we've been told.



GaArsinide (using laser light within the chip instead of electrons) is
not moving forward after 30 yrs.........but you never know, maybe some
century.


Like Plasma TVs - been around since 1960's!!!!!!! - only now do they
"work" well enough and cheap enough to make to be viable.
--
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top