• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD doing things bass-ackwards again?

Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,265
Location
Cornwall
No 45nm dual-core parts until Q3 2009.

Why all the fuss to release quad-core first? Is quad really positioned as the mainstream part yet? I didn't think so. Knowing how many people are still using single core, and seeing how high-street stores are are still pushing dual-core, it puzzles me.

Quad is still overkill for most.

I really wanted to jump from this 939 to another AMD product, but I'm sick of waiting for AMD to actually get its act in gear.

The only good thing about AMD atm is ATI. Sad.
 
No 45nm dual-core parts until Q3 2009.

Why all the fuss to release quad-core first? Is quad really positioned as the mainstream part yet? I didn't think so. Knowing how many people are still using single core, and seeing how high-street stores are are still pushing dual-core, it puzzles me.

Quad is still overkill for most.

I really wanted to jump from this 939 to another AMD product, but I'm sick of waiting for AMD to actually get its act in gear.

The only good thing about AMD atm is ATI. Sad.

I think your thinking about this all wrong. Applications are now finally being made multi-threaded and as has been explained before in other threads, applications that are designed to be multi-threaded will infact scale to the number of cores available.

I think we are now at the point where mainstrain users don't want dual core's anymore, assuming 3 and 4 core processors are at the right price bracket, and this I think is the key thing AMD need to get right. The pricing of their new processors needs to be very competitive considering todays economy.
Unfortunately due to todays economy the Phenom II's may end up being more expensive than we'd like, which is ontop of the price levy we seem to end up paying for AMD processor's in the uk.
 
Although it would be nice for AMD to release an full product lineup it would not really be piratical. They do however have a much larger list of products being released in Feb as AM3 the lowest being an Phenom II X3 710 2.6GHz 7.5MB Cache which will hopefully be priced competitively.

More Info in the screenies in my thread here:

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17942545

They have already produced an Phenom Based X2 the 7750 which although late and is based on the 65nm original Phenom design is still a good clocker and well priced chip...
 

You're missing the point.

AMD do not make processors for people on this forum. They don't make processors for what a small or even reasonably large minority need.

They make (and market) processors to the server/workstation lot and OEMs. The server/workstation lot want virtualisation and quad core fits that particular bill quite nicely, and Joe Average who walks into Purple Hell (or even a big supermarket nowadays) will want either a netbook, a Macbook or a quad core-based system because "it's four times faster than their single core box at home."

The fact that 80% of male customers will be spending their quad core computer's time surfing for pictures of scantily clad women on the internet, and 100% of female customers shopping and i-Tune-ing doesn't really matter.

Bottom line? AMD's range is actually - for once - well balanced for its market. No apparent overlap at all.
 
They make (and market) processors to the server/workstation lot and OEMs. The server/workstation lot want virtualisation and quad core fits that particular bill quite nicely

Which is not where Phenom is aimed that, Phenom is desktop not server
 
the main point is, if you're after average performance, you have that already, there are dozens of chips from both camps that offer fantastic value and great performance in most things. There ARE dual core phenom's(albeit phenom 1's, that aren't bad at all just have bad press) overclock well and are very fast already.

But getting back to the point, new chips are supposed to be fast, they are for people that want the fastest performance you can get, not generally the best value or mediocre performance, theres dozens of chips around. Releasing dual cores first when most people who UPGRADE want MORE performance. Likewise a new dual core will NEVER, in a million years outperform a quad core in most area's these days. Encoding, multithreaded, rendering, multithreaded, gaming, multithreaded by and large with older games that only use single threads not coming close to maxing out a 3Ghz single core anyway.

Not to mention, the dual core parts are made out of, whats that, FULL quad core parts that have 1/2 cores failed. If yields are good, then the number of failed parts isn't that high and it takes time to build up the numbers of failed parts that can be branded as dual core. Why? because you make a 300mm waifer with say 200 chips of quad cores, of which 30 are available to be dual cores. The problem is midrange sales have and always will be FAR higher than high end parts, if you release a dual core part with only 30 chips available no one will be able to get one, prices will be high and it would be pointless. 6 months down the line and you'll have 20k chips built up for a proper release, they won't be limited parts, they'll be cheap and supply will be good all around.

People who buy value don't jump on brand new things at their most expensive, say a dual core version came out at £120, but in 5 months, it would be £80 and offer better value, to someone not looking for the be all and end all of performance, waiting will make no difference except to their pocket.

Almost every release of every new chip, the first one available is an FX, a black edition, an Extreme edition and they are all expensive, as a newer faster part is released every few months the slowest original part slowly trickles down from expensive, to mainstream to value after a year or two, thats how its always been done.
 
The Regor core is not a Phenom II with two cores disabled. It has a smaller die area than the Phenom II.

It has the potential to be a nice performing chip with a low TDP. That's why it could be interesting.

I'm not interested in running a current-gen X2 at 95W or a Phenom at 125W. It's too much.
 
Why wait for AMD dual cores when you can get a Wolfdale. The recent ones do well past 4ghz with ease.
 
Which is not where Phenom is aimed that, Phenom is desktop not server


I take it you stopped reading my post at servers/workstations? ;) The OEMs suck up huge quantities of the chips for places like high street stores and branded e-tailers.
 
Why wait for AMD dual cores when you can get a Wolfdale. The recent ones do well past 4ghz with ease.
not everyone wants intel and the same goes for amd , if im honest amds are gunna do some damage in the mid and low end of the market this year if deneb is as good as they say ill move to it from my Q6600
 
Back
Top Bottom