new AMD chip to compete with Conroe?

[Nick]

I'm an AMD loyalist, have been for years and I'm wondering what AMD plans on
doing to compete with intels new core 2 duo (conroe). My biggest complaint
about AMD lately has been them asking too much for their dual core chips
compaired to intel. I was building a server for work about a month ago and I
had to bite the bullet and build an intel pentium D 930 rig. it was the
first intel computer I've ever built (and I've been building computer for 10
years, all AMD's) but the price point and overclockability was too much to
pass up. so my question is, whats AMD doing to regain it's crown. I heard
about them pushing up the 45nm chips to early 2008. but is that it? are they
going to sit back for a year and a half and let intel beat them?

 

[General Schvantzkoph]

I'm an AMD loyalist, have been for years and I'm wondering what AMD plans on
doing to compete with intels new core 2 duo (conroe). My biggest complaint
about AMD lately has been them asking too much for their dual core chips
compaired to intel. I was building a server for work about a month ago and I
had to bite the bullet and build an intel pentium D 930 rig. it was the
first intel computer I've ever built (and I've been building computer for 10
years, all AMD's) but the price point and overclockability was too much to
pass up. so my question is, whats AMD doing to regain it's crown. I heard
about them pushing up the 45nm chips to early 2008. but is that it? are they
going to sit back for a year and a half and let intel beat them?

First off unless you are an AMD employee there is no reason to be
particularly devoted to one brand or the other. As a consumer you should
buy twhichever processor best suite your needs at the moment.

That said, the answer to your query is that AMD just slashed their prices.
All they can do for the next year or so is compete on price, they've
pretty much lost the performance market until they get a new core out. In
fact they've made the situation worse by discontinuing all of their 1M
cache A64 parts (with the single exception of the FX62). They did this
because Intel is using a 65nm process and AMD is still using a 90nm
process. The die sizes of the new Intel parts are considerably smaller
then the die sizes for the A64s which means that Intel's costs are lower.
The 1M cache parts are bigger then the 1/2M cache parts so AMD has dropped
the larger parts. This kills performance on compute bound applications but
it has little effect on most desktop applications so AMD has made the
decision that costs are more important than performance. The Opterons
still have 1M caches and they still have some advantages over Intel in
four socket and higher systems so AMD is still competitive in servers.

Next year AMD has four core parts coming out. This is great for servers
but it won't be helpful for desktops. The K8L core will have some other
improvements also, no one outside of AMD knows if those improvements will
be enough to catch up with Intel.

It might take a few weeks before the new prices show up in the channel. It
will also take a while before the new Intel parts show up in the channel.
They announced Woodcrest a month ago but I only see one supplier of
Woodcrests listed on Pricewatch and chances are they don't have any parts
in stock. I'm betting that the Dell and HP are getting all of the
Woodcrests and Conroes that Intel can produce at the moment. My plans are
to wait until September and then get a Conroe or Woodcrest system.

 

[Wes Newell]

I'm an AMD loyalist, have been for years and I'm wondering what AMD plans on
doing to compete with intels new core 2 duo (conroe). My biggest complaint
about AMD lately has been them asking too much for their dual core chips
compaired to intel. I was building a server for work about a month ago and I
had to bite the bullet and build an intel pentium D 930 rig. it was the
first intel computer I've ever built (and I've been building computer for 10
years, all AMD's) but the price point and overclockability was too much to
pass up.

So, you think you saved some money? Now figure up the extra cost in
electrity that you'll be payinf each month for that Pentium D cpu.. I
don't know what you pay per KWH there, but it's getting pretty high here.
A single 60W light bulb left on 24/7 cost about $7 a month here to
operate. So how much is that Pentium D really going to cost you for 2
years operation? If it uses just 60W more than the AMD cpu then you paying
an extra $168 in electricity for that 2 years of service. I'm guessing you
paid about $200 for the CPU, so add the $168 to it fro $368. now how would
the X2 3800+ at $300 look. If you are considering cost, you must consider
all cost to operate the CPU. Given enough time, the AMD X2 would have been
free when you consider the extra cost for electricity. Now that Intel has
finally wised up and dropped the netburst Pentium platform things are more
even energy wise. With the new price cuts, it puts AMD on a fairly even
plane with Intels new cpu's energy wise and cost wise.

 

[RDN]

I'm also a AMD fan. Ever since Intel started to put CPU and personel info
over
networks and not inform the public many years ago.

But, the new chips from Intel are appealing. Loyalty to AMD will only
last until
they can't compete with price / perform ratios.

I just built a new system last week, before the AMD price drops. (should of
waited)

Asus AN8-E nForce 4 ultra
AMD Athlon 64 3500 (venice)
Kingston HyperX 512 CL2
MSI - nVidia Geforce 6600 256Mb
DvD writer Samsung
Seagate 160Gb 7200

My old system. An Abit KR7A with an Athlon XP 1700+
and 1024Mb Ram.

 

[Benjamin Gawert]

* Nick:

I was building a server for work about a month ago and I had to bite
the bullet and build an intel pentium D 930 rig. it was the first
intel computer I've ever built (and I've been building computer for
10 years, all AMD's) but the price point and overclockability was too
much to pass up.

Overclocking a server??? *shudder*

so my question is, whats AMD doing to regain it's
crown. I heard about them pushing up the 45nm chips to early 2008.
but is that it? are they going to sit back for a year and a half and
let intel beat them?

It's very unlikely that AMD just "sits back" and lets intel "beat them".
You said you're building computers for 10 years but still didn't notice
that the "performance leadership" always hops between AMD and intel. AMD
has had it's time, now it's intels time. AMD of course will follow with
something faster, as will intel. So what?

Even as AMD fanboy you should be happy that intel now has the
performance crown. Only competition between these two manufacturers
ensures that you can get fast hardware at good prices. Or do you really
believe that any of these manufacturers would put money in product
improvements if there were no competition?

Benjamin

 

[Frank]

The general price for consumers is a bit high. Allthouigh AMD is killing
Intel on the server side of the market. by some 18% last qtr.