Intel Inside no more

[Yousuf Khan]

The new phrase is "Leap Ahead".

Inside Intel
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_02/b3966001.htm

Eric Kim is proposing getting rid of the Pentium name, and getting rid
of the "Intel Inside" tagline, replaced with the "Leap Ahead".

The reason? Kim's plan, cooked up with new CEO Paul S. Otellini, was a sharp departure from the company Grove had built. Essentially, they were proposing to blow up Intel's brand, the fifth-best-known in the world. As Otellini looked on from a front table, Kim declared that Intel must "clear out the cobwebs" and kill off many Grove-era creations. Intel Inside? Dump it, he said. The Pentium brand? Stale. The widely recognized dropped "e" in Intel's corporate logo? A relic.

Intel is also becoming a more humane place apparently.

 

[nobody]

The new phrase is "Leap Ahead".

A tacit recognition of being left behind? Under Andy Grove, there was
no need for INTC to "leap ahead" of anyone, IIRC.
;P

Inside Intel
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_02/b3966001.htm

Eric Kim is proposing getting rid of the Pentium name, and getting rid
of the "Intel Inside" tagline, replaced with the "Leap Ahead".

Remember the thread "Question about 'intel inside warnintg(sic - NNN)'
on PC"? Even though the OP used the greeting "High" and the sig "Sue
Meht" most likely ment "use meth", it was really good laugh
;-))))))))
Yes, "Pentium" became associated with "loser" ever since K8 was out.
Ditto Xeon and especially Itanic.

Intel is also becoming a more humane place apparently.

Let's see if the marketeers will succeed where the engineers failed
(or were not let to succeed, which is basically the same).

NNN

 

[Yousuf Khan]

A tacit recognition of being left behind? Under Andy Grove, there was
no need for INTC to "leap ahead" of anyone, IIRC.
;P

These days, every little marketing phrase change or change in wording
seems to be something that can be used against them. Damned if you do,
damned if you don't.

It wouldn't be such a problem if Intel wasn't such a laughing stock
these days.

Remember the thread "Question about 'intel inside warnintg(sic - NNN)'
on PC"? Even though the OP used the greeting "High" and the sig "Sue
Meht" most likely ment "use meth", it was really good laugh
;-))))))))

Again, everything can be used as a joke against them these days. An
Intel manager can't say a thing these days without somebody turning it
around and making it joke. Or sometimes even turning it into an
admission of guilt of something.

Let's see if the marketeers will succeed where the engineers failed
(or were not let to succeed, which is basically the same).

Going to the "admission of guilt" side of the conspiracy theory, the
"Intel Inside" campaign was associated with illegal co-marketing dollars
and monopolistic stifling of competition. With the lawsuit, it must be
pretty obvious to Intel by now that those days are over, and it's time
to come up with something new before it's taken away from them by force.
If after a guilty verdict, Intel will likely be asked to stop the
campaign, but now it can simply say "way ahead of you, we've already
reformed, the campaign is already gone." This is possibly a face-saving
gesture.

Yousuf Khan

 

[dannysdailys]

Yousuf Khanwrote
The new phrase is "Leap Ahead"
The Writing's On the Wal

Yes, did you also read that they're not a processor company an
longer, now they're a platform company? Because of one lousy chipse
called Centrino, now they're a platform company? AMD's laughing al
the way to the bank. The lawsuit is just icing on the cake. An
guess what? I think Intel's going to lose that big time. They kno
what they did, just as Microsoft knew what it did. They're going t
get pounded in Europe. Look what they did to Microsoft? Intel i
the other half of WinTel you know. Their mouthes have to b
watering. US politicians aren't going to protect them; especially a
inferior product. We'd look like the Chineese or the Russians

It sounds to me like Intel is entering a final phase. Maybe they kno
they're never going to catch up with AMD and are trying to shift th
center of attention. Whatever they do, it's not going to work, it'
too late for that. Failure to talk the world into the BTX forma
doomed Intel. What doomed BTX was it was too late. Intel's therma
problems were well known by that time. No one bought the crap. Th
BTX was only a stop gap to try to cool their antique designs an
everyone knew it. When the common man starts calling Pentiums "Hous
burners,"

The writing's on the wall

They've always ran at least 1/3rd less efficient. Today, it's almos
1/2! This is evidenced by the huge clock speed differences with AM
while the performance is the same. Why is it no one at Intel seeme
to notice? Or worse, care..

The writing's on the wall

Their P-4 was slower out of the box then the P-3. What sense did tha
make? Simple, they thought they were a monopoly and "tiny AMD alway
loses money, how long will they last?" Where could you go? Well
people like me were the believers and stuck by AMD and they're makin
money now. A lot of it

The writing's on the wall

I understand you can buy AMD processors at the Dell web site now. No
computers mind you, but the processors. Who'd of ever thunk that?
Dell had better do something, their numbers are starting to look th
same way

The writing's on the wall..

This usually happens when a company milks the cow for all it's worth
and ends up stuck with a dead cow. Instead of forward thinking an
actually breeding cows, they have a dead cow

Sound familiar? They lose their identity

Obviously, Intel has certainly lost theirs

It's funny, all us Athlon people were laughed at and scoffed at on al
the boards for so many years. The scoffers are dead silent now. Th
X2 4800 has shut them up perminently. As of today, Intel has n
answer for it and AMD says they're going to have quad cores by th
end of 2006. And you just know, Nvidia will be busy building Nforc
chipsets for them and they will be killer. I'll take an Nforc
platform over an Intel any day

The writing's on the wall in capital letters

Maybe "platform company" will still convince some....

Dumping the Pentium name? Maybe that tells you more of how tarnishe
they've made it. Even changing corporate logo's? Wow, is this th
book of Revelations? Logo's become God and ar
never changed. Those people have to b
crazy..

The writing's on the wall

Sorry if I sound cheerful. I am! It's about time! After all thes
years of harrassment? Vindication is sweet..

Cheer

 

[Yousuf Khan]

It sounds to me like Intel is entering a final phase. Maybe they know
they're never going to catch up with AMD and are trying to shift the
center of attention. Whatever they do, it's not going to work, it's
too late for that. Failure to talk the world into the BTX format
doomed Intel. What doomed BTX was it was too late. Intel's thermal
problems were well known by that time. No one bought the crap. The
BTX was only a stop gap to try to cool their antique designs and
everyone knew it. When the common man starts calling Pentiums "House
burners,"

Well, BTX was hardly their major turning point. More important
developments were its inability convince the world to go with Rambus
memory and instead following the world into DDR. Also their inability to
convince the world about their IA-64 64-bit technology, and instead
having to follow the world into AMD64 64-bit technology.

I understand you can buy AMD processors at the Dell web site now. Not
computers mind you, but the processors. Who'd of ever thunk that?
Dell had better do something, their numbers are starting to look the
same way.

That's nothing new, at various times in the past you could buy AMD
computer systems from Dell too, even laptops. They weren't advertised to
the general public, just to computer publications where Intel was sure
to read about them. Just Dell's typical method of extracting price
discounts from Intel.

Dumping the Pentium name? Maybe that tells you more of how tarnished
they've made it. Even changing corporate logo's? Wow, is this the
book of Revelations? Logo's become God and are
never changed. Those people have to be
crazy...

The Pentium name does seem to have become tarnished these days. From
anecdotal evidence, it looks like the teenyboppers are asking their
parents to buy AMD systems for Christmas, over the Intel systems. Looks
like they are being told by their friends that the AMDs are the cool
systems.

Yousuf Khan

 

[dannysdailys]

Yousuf Khanwrote:

Well, BTX was hardly their major turning point. More important
developments were its inability convince the world to go with Rambus

memory and instead following the world into DDR. Also their inability to
convince the world about their IA-64 64-bit technology, and instead

having to follow the world into AMD64 64-bit technology.

If I'm not mistaken, DDR was already around when Rambus came out.
Intel tried to take the world away from it. As is their pattern.
Yes, you're right about the others. BTX was a last gasp. I didn't
want to take anymore space then I already did. My point was, Intels
mis-steps span all the way back to the beginning. At least since the
P-3.

When you think you own the world, innovation takes a back seat to
milking the cow. That's why America's so great. Even with all the
illegal crap Intel was pulling, AMD stayed the course. Look where
they are today? And, it's just the beginning.

One thing you'll notice about what you wrote, in each of those, Intel
single handedly tried to change the entire world to their "new" world
of the day. Probably only to give AMD a death knell. They should
have learned the propietary lessons from IBM and Apple. Their very
own business partner Gates, succeeded in breaking the propietary
stranglehole IBM had on the PC. But alas, out of touch people learn
from no one. Why are they out of touch? Because they want to be.
Now, IBM has partnerships with AMD and Intel is supplying Apple.

I predict the new IBM/ AMD merger is just the beginning. IBM had no
interest in shelling out the R&D dollars for a fringe company
like Apple and it's what, 4% market share? Just watch these two cook
now.

The world is just one big crazy circle. LOL

BTX was just the latest fiasco, again proving they've never learned
that lesson and probably never will.

ATI better get their butts in gear as well. Nvidia SLI is tops and
probably always will be. Crossfire? Give me a break, they could
have done much better then that, if they were on their game.

Ah, how the mighty fall...

 

[Yousuf Khan]

If I'm not mistaken, DDR was already around when Rambus came out.

Well, not entirely; DDR's predecessor, SDR, was already around, and
Rambus came out towards the end of SDR's era. But it was out ahead of
DDR by at least several months, if not about a year. They had even tried
mating Rambus to the P3, but it actually made P3 slower, since the P3
couldn't take advantage of the additional bandwidth, but it was severely
affected by its additional latency. P4 and Rambus were a much better
combination, as P4 was bandwidth hungry, but not as affected by latencies.

But P4 and DDR were also a good combination with each other. But here
Intel tried to pull a few tricks to make it look like Rambus was the
better combination. Intel's first P4-DDR chipset was single-channel
only, and it was compared against the dual-channel P4-RDR chipset --
obviously an unfair comparison. Even when dual-channel DDR chipsets came
out, they were initially detuned to not make the RDR chipset look bad.

One thing you'll notice about what you wrote, in each of those, Intel
single handedly tried to change the entire world to their "new" world
of the day. Probably only to give AMD a death knell. They should
have learned the propietary lessons from IBM and Apple. Their very
own business partner Gates, succeeded in breaking the propietary
stranglehole IBM had on the PC. But alas, out of touch people learn
from no one. Why are they out of touch? Because they want to be.
Now, IBM has partnerships with AMD and Intel is supplying Apple.

IBM is a schizophrenic disjointed organization. Some parts of IBM are
helping Intel out more, for example, their chipset division makes the X3
NUMA chipset for Xeon processors; this group hopes to see AMD fail.
While another division of IBM is collaborating with AMD, helping them
out with their manufacturing technology. And of course other parts of
IBM are competing against Intel, such as their processor division; the
processor division was the one affected when Intel stole away the Apple
contract from IBM.

Yousuf Khan

 

[David Kanter]

The Writing's On the Wall

Yes, did you also read that they're not a processor company any
longer, now they're a platform company? Because of one lousy chipset
called Centrino, now they're a platform company?

No, because AMD cannot with platforms, since they only offer
componenets.

AMD's laughing all
the way to the bank. The lawsuit is just icing on the cake. And
guess what? I think Intel's going to lose that big time. They know
what they did, just as Microsoft knew what it did. They're going to
get pounded in Europe. Look what they did to Microsoft? Intel is
the other half of WinTel you know. Their mouthes have to be
watering. US politicians aren't going to protect them; especially an
inferior product. We'd look like the Chineese or the Russians.

Yes O MIGHT FUDSTER.

It sounds to me like Intel is entering a final phase. Maybe they know
they're never going to catch up with AMD and are trying to shift the
center of attention. Whatever they do, it's not going to work, it's
too late for that. Failure to talk the world into the BTX format
doomed Intel. What doomed BTX was it was too late. Intel's thermal
problems were well known by that time. No one bought the crap. The
BTX was only a stop gap to try to cool their antique designs and
everyone knew it. When the common man starts calling Pentiums "House
burners,"

You want to make a wager on AMD's marketshare in 3 years?

They've always ran at least 1/3rd less efficient.

You're funny. Ever heard of the K5? Besides, IPC doesn't matter
IPC*Frequency/instruction count is what matters.

Today, it's almost
1/2! This is evidenced by the huge clock speed differences with AMD
while the performance is the same. Why is it no one at Intel seemed
to notice? Or worse, care...

Maybe because IPC is only one part of the equation. IBM is designing
the POWER6 as a high frequency MPU (4.4GHz or so)...they seem to know
what they are doing. High frequency is a fine way to get high
performance.

Their P-4 was slower out of the box then the P-3. What sense did that
make?

Look at SPEC CPU, the P4 was substantially faster...twink.

Simple, they thought they were a monopoly and "tiny AMD always
loses money, how long will they last?" Where could you go? Well,
people like me were the believers and stuck by AMD and they're making
money now. A lot of it.

Thank you captain Jihad.

I understand you can buy AMD processors at the Dell web site now. Not
computers mind you, but the processors. Who'd of ever thunk that?
Dell had better do something, their numbers are starting to look the
same way.

Dell has sold AMD MPUs for a while...nothing new.

This usually happens when a company milks the cow for all it's worth,
and ends up stuck with a dead cow. Instead of forward thinking and
actually breeding cows, they have a dead cow.

It's funny, all us Athlon people were laughed at and scoffed at on all
the boards for so many years. The scoffers are dead silent now.

Consider yourself scoffed at, for being a total dumbass. Athlon is a
great MPU, but it's not going to be a big problem for Intel for a while
yet.

The
X2 4800 has shut them up perminently. As of today, Intel has no
answer for it and AMD says they're going to have quad cores by the
end of 2006. And you just know, Nvidia will be busy building Nforce
chipsets for them and they will be killer. I'll take an Nforce
platform over an Intel any day!

That's certainly your choice.

The writing's on the wall in capital letters.

Dude, you are even ****ing crazier than Yousuf...you have no clue do
you?

Why don't you tell us AMD's market share (either by units or by $s) for
laptop, desktop and server for the future? Let's see how good your
crystal ball is.

DK

 

[nobody]

If I'm not mistaken, DDR was already around when Rambus came out.

No, Rambus came out together with ill-fated 820 chipset simultaneously
with PC133 SDRAM in 1999. The first DDR chipset from AMD came out
early 2001, IIRC. Intel adopted DDR waaay later.

Intel tried to take the world away from it. As is their pattern.

Rambus memory was overpiced (for reasons including, but not limited
to, the royalties built into the price of each chip) even when there
were sound competitors around - PC133 and, later, DDR. Imagine how
expensive it would become if it managed to kill off the competition.
In that case, the price of a complete system would be so sky-high that
the difference in CPU prices would be largely negated. The less would
be the insentive for the average Joe to take the unknown Athlon brand
from no-name company over well-known Pentium from famous Intel.

NNN

 

[dannysdailys]

David Kanterwrote
[quote:62d7d1b46b]The Writing's On the Wal

Yes O MIGHT FUDSTER

You want to make a wager on AMD's marketshare in 3 years

twink

Thank you captain Jihad

Consider yourself scoffed at, for being a total dumbass

Dude, you are even *** crazier than Yousuf...you have no clue d
you

Why don't you join this group, so we can keep track of the kind o
posts you make. Somthing tells me, insulting people you don't kno
is your normal fare

I would dare say I've been working with these systems since before yo
were an itch in your daddy's pants. Kid

At least get a vocabulary. Sheesh..

Me, I'm lov'n it. Intel is the laughing stock of the tech industr
and will remain so in the foreseeable future. If, by engaging i
illegal activities to stifle competition, thereby artificiall
keeping their stock price high. Constitutes exactly what was goin
on at Enron. Whether management will go down like they did at Enron
is another question

I hope they fry. AMD can claim billions of lost revenue if this i
the case

I wonder what Dell would do? Better yet, I wonder how AMD would trea
them. I know how I'd treat them, but that would probably put me i
jail. LO

Still want to sleep with Intel

 

[dannysdailys]

(e-mail address removed)

wrote

If I'm not mistaken, DDR was already around when Rambus came out
No, Rambus came out together with ill-fated 820 chipse

simultaneousl
with PC133 SDRAM in 1999. The first DDR chipset from AMD came ou
early 2001, IIRC. Intel adopted DDR waaay later

Intel tried to take the world away from it. As is their pattern
Rambus memory was overpiced (for reasons including, but not limite

to, the royalties built into the price of each chip) even when ther
were sound competitors around - PC133 and, later, DDR. Imagine ho
expensive it would become if it managed to kill off th
competition.[/quote:e84af029fb

Yes, now I remember! Thanks for posting. Yes, in the typical Inte
fashion, they tried to get everyone to switch to Rambus because o
the residuals! I forgot about that. Yes, flexing the muscle to mak
even more money. Can you say RCA? Or Sony? Sony's having their da
too, eh? LO

As usual, they just shot themselves in the foot

Thank

 

[nobody]

Going to the "admission of guilt" side of the conspiracy theory, the
"Intel Inside" campaign was associated with illegal co-marketing dollars
and monopolistic stifling of competition. With the lawsuit, it must be
pretty obvious to Intel by now that those days are over, and it's time
to come up with something new before it's taken away from them by force.
If after a guilty verdict, Intel will likely be asked to stop the
campaign, but now it can simply say "way ahead of you, we've already
reformed, the campaign is already gone." This is possibly a face-saving
gesture.

Been to the gym - the only place where I watch unadulterated TV with
all the ads. Is it a sign of the new era? - I watched an ad for a
midrange Dell system ($599 IIRC) that didn't even mention Intel by
name, and didn't show "Intel inside" logo in the end accompanied with
the jingle (not sure about the jingle - the sound was off).
The ads for $299 lowest end Dell OTOH proudly presented Celeron
"Intel inside" logo (and probably the jingle as well). Ditto HP ads
for some laptop - ended with full screen Centrino butterfly.

NNN

P.S. Happy New Year, folks!

 

[Yousuf Khan]

Look at SPEC CPU, the P4 was substantially faster...twink.

There were a few things that P4 was faster at than P3, and that was one
of them. However, most other things P4 was slower Mhz-for-Mhz than P3,
including most other FPU stuff. As it turns out the very linear
algorithms in SPECfpu benefit from higher clock speeds.

Consider yourself scoffed at, for being a total dumbass. Athlon is a
great MPU, but it's not going to be a big problem for Intel for a while
yet.

I thought it already was.

Dude, you are even ****ing crazier than Yousuf...you have no clue do
you?

Oh gee, thanks.

Yousuf Khan

 

[David Kanter]

Look at SPEC CPU, the P4 was substantially faster...twink.

There were a few things that P4 was faster at than P3, and that was one
of them.

SPECcpu is more than just one "thing". It's a collection of many.

However, most other things P4 was slower Mhz-for-Mhz than P3,
including most other FPU stuff. As it turns out the very linear
algorithms in SPECfpu benefit from higher clock speeds.

Lower IPC is not slower. I never said the P4 had higher IPC, I said it
was faster. That means better performance, not better per clock
performance. Nobody cares about the latter. Performance is what
matters; if you build a 10GHz CPU with low IPC, that's fine. If you
build a 1GHz CPU with high IPC that's fine. Ultimately, it doesn't
matter except for the power/heat issues.

I thought it already was.

Yes and no. Even before there was serious competition in the server
markets, Intel had better ASPs and margins on the mobile segment than
in server. AMD has had very good desktop market share starting with
the K6 (in fact, AMD has less market share today than it does when the
K6 was out). The problem was getting into the more valuable markets.

Now today, AMD has made inroads into the server market, but you really
want to ask yourself, how much of a thread is this to Intel? The moron
I responded to seems to think that Intel is doomed and will be gone. I
seriously doubt AMD can hold > 25-30% of the x86 server marketshare.
They caught Intel at a very bad point in time WRT product line ups.
Intel has rectified this flaw; Bensley will be a reasonable start, at
least putting them in the right neighborhood for performance and
price/performance. It certainly won't get them ahead, but when
Woodcrest comes out, things will be interesting.

So, up until recently AMD had a strong technical advantage over Intel.
I think history has shown that when AMD can present a significantly
stronger product (say ~30-100% better, not just 10-15%, by whatever
your metric for better is), they tend to do well. The issue is that
historically, when AMD and Intel's products are very close (under 30%
difference) Intel has done very well. A large part of this is due to
marketing, channels of distribution, etd.

If AMD wants to be able to take and hold marketshare they need to have
a plan for dealing with Intel when they have no technical advantages.
They also need to be able to deal with Intel when they have technical
disadvantages. Intel is currently a year ahead of AMD in process
technology. They will have an advantage for that year or so, and then
AMD will likely end up ahead when they finally get 65nm worked out.
The question is how will AMD fair this next year? I remember when
Intel had Northwood out, and AMD was still using 180nm parts...it sure
wasn't pretty and Intel took back all their marketshare and then some.
Of course, the cycle then reversed itself with 90nm.

Ultimately, AMD wants to be able to break the cycle, but I'm not really
seeing how they can.

Oh gee, thanks.

Sorry, but I find your POV to be consistently biased towards anyone
that isn't Intel. Certainly you think your opinions through more than
most folks, but I certainly don't consider them to be anything close to
objective. I definitely find value in your posts, whereas this new guy
seems to be far too dogmatic to say anything useful...but hopefully
I'll be proven wrong.

DK

 

[George Macdonald]

The new phrase is "Leap Ahead".

Inside Intel
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_02/b3966001.htm

Eric Kim is proposing getting rid of the Pentium name, and getting rid
of the "Intel Inside" tagline, replaced with the "Leap Ahead".


Intel is also becoming a more humane place apparently.

Yeah it's gonna be like Santa's workshop... making (high-tech) toys for
girls & boys.

I dunno how they expect to do anything productive by distributing
chip/semiconductor designers/engineers out into the final product groups -
I'm thinking the article must have gotten that bit wrong,,, otherwise
there's gonna be a shitload of resumes hitting the desks of the rest of the
industry. This whole thing has the reek of a corporate shrink-job... I
wonder who might have done that for/to them?... McKinsey maybe?

Hmm, I wonder if they'll still have "disagree and commit"?... or does that
involve yelling at each other too? My favorite bit, about their new
hires, is: "sociologists, ethnographers, even doctors". Geez, doesn't it
make you wish you were an ethnographer? Christ are they actually convinced
that wan... err, think tanks really work and do anything useful?

IMO, if all true, this is a catastrophe - I sure hope that AMD gets their
new production up to capacity, including Chartered, quickly.

 

[Keith]

If I'm not mistaken, DDR was already around when Rambus came out.
Intel tried to take the world away from it. As is their pattern.
Yes, you're right about the others. BTX was a last gasp. I didn't
want to take anymore space then I already did. My point was, Intels
mis-steps span all the way back to the beginning. At least since the
P-3.

No, remember DDR is dead, DEAD, *DEAD*!

 

[nobody]

Hmm, I wonder if they'll still have "disagree and commit"?... or does that
involve yelling at each other too? My favorite bit, about their new
hires, is: "sociologists, ethnographers, even doctors". Geez, doesn't it
make you wish you were an ethnographer? Christ are they actually convinced
that wan... err, think tanks really work and do anything useful?

IMO, if all true, this is a catastrophe - I sure hope that AMD gets their
new production up to capacity, including Chartered, quickly.

This would be a real catastrophe. Imagine for a second that Intel
self-destructs and leaves all of the market to AMD. Rather sooner
than later the new monopolist starts charging an arm and a leg for the
chips. Instead of thinking how to get more market share through
innovation and speed ramps, they will think how to milk the market the
most efficient way. As much as I support AMD I don't want them to
become another Intel.

"Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Lord
Acton

NNN

 

[dannysdailys]

David Kanterwrote
[quote:6f990196d7]Sorry, but I find your POV to be consistentl
biased towards anyon

that isn't Intel. Certainly you think your opinions through mor tha
most folks, but I certainly don't consider them to be anything clos t
objective. I definitely find value in your posts, whereas this ne gu
seems to be far too dogmatic to say anything useful...but hopefull
I'll be proven wrong

D

Yes, and one certainly could say the same thing about you

While I'm hardly "new" to these boards, when it comes to Intel I a
quite dogmatic. I've been watching them since the beginning. Yo
follow their religion of numbers and d*mned the clock speed. Well
the clock speed has just done them in and many of us have known thi
for a great many years. How many more power plants would you have u
build for your house burners? I say none... I'd be very curious
just how much electricity has Intel wasted in the aggregate?
Aggregate meaning every machine out there, that a low power AMD coul
have done. If some numbers guru reads this, he'll figure it out an
post. Then what will you say? Hello? It's called thermal heat an
I believe there might be almost a 50 to 70 watt difference for lik
performance in the high end. How long did you expect this to go on?
Especially with all the wacko's screeming about wasting electricity

Us Athlon folks have taken much more abuse then you can possibl
imagine, and now it's your turn. We were laughed at for just havin
them. But when our case badges started to say P-4 killer inside.
They stopped laughing

People who blindly support Intel as you do, and don't see what'
happening in the market right now, are just as Intel is. One thin
is certain, AMD will never be "fringe" again. As each day passes
Intel is who's seen, and truly is on the fringe. This can only go o
for so long

Intel is much further ahead of you though; they've been in panic fo
quite some time. The BTX was the example of this

AMD is more then just a problem for Intel these days. Where have yo
been

Nividia is also more then just a problem for ATI as well

It's the market and it works. Let's see what the market has in stor
for Intel this year. Should be an interesting time. Especially i
AMD can gear up production quickly

Today, it's hip to have AMD, who'd have ever thought we'd see tha
day.

It's hip because of people like me. Word of mouth always catches u
in the end. As a result, it's internal and can't be changed wit
marketing. Especially if that word of mouth is for a company tha
does nothing but work hard on the edge. Efficiencies have to win fo
the market to work.

Quad cores out by the end of the year? That's going to settle som
scores, I'll tell ya. Intel still doesn't even have a decent memor
bus for 1, let alone 4; what is this, Jurassic Park

Yeah, I'm rubbing it in... LO

Despite the gloating, you totally mis-judge me. Remember when you
mama told you to never do that?

I'm not pro AMD or anti Intel. I'm pro competition, something tha
Intel tried very hard to squash. There was a reason for that. But
I wish no ill on Intel. I hope a scandel at Enron proportion
doesn't happen. The company could never survive it

If Intel were to go down, AMD would become the next one. It'
inevitable and the circle just continues. I don't want to see tha
happen

I don't wish any ill on ATI either. I hope they do get their ac
together. But, Crossfire "ain't" it..

Competition is always good. If it wasn't, we'd all still be drivin
Pintos and PC's wouldn't even exist as we know them

 

[David Kanter]

While I'm hardly "new" to these boards, when it comes to Intel I am

quite dogmatic. I've been watching them since the beginning. You
follow their religion of numbers and d*mned the clock speed. Well,
the clock speed has just done them in and many of us have known this
for a great many years.

Uh huh....perhaps you'd like to show some evidence of you having known
this all along?

How many more power plants would you have us
build for your house burners? I say none... I'd be very curious;
just how much electricity has Intel wasted in the aggregate?
Aggregate meaning every machine out there, that a low power AMD could
have done.

You know this is why I consider your opinion to be so blatantly biased.
Up until the P4, Intel's P3 was actually the low power solution, they
used much less power and gave off less heat. So it seems to me that
you are a hypocrite, since if you care so much about power and heat,
you should be advocating a P3 over a K7/8 over a P4. Or perhaps a
Pentium M.

If some numbers guru reads this, he'll figure it out and
post. Then what will you say? Hello? It's called thermal heat and
I believe there might be almost a 50 to 70 watt difference for like
performance in the high end. How long did you expect this to go on?
Especially with all the wacko's screeming about wasting electricity.

Well, that all depends on the price of electricity, the bulk price that
most server farms face.

Us Athlon folks have taken much more abuse then you can possibly
imagine, and now it's your turn. We were laughed at for just having
them. But when our case badges started to say P-4 killer inside.
They stopped laughing.

Uh huh. "We were abused, so now let's **** everyone else?" That's
incredibly mature, what are you, 8?

AMD has a very competitive product, it is much better than the P4P for
code that has a large I-cache foot print (where the trace cache doesn't
work so well), and for stuff that strongly depends on random access
latency (where the memory controller helps). It also does very well on
legacy code, but I don't see that as a big issue. The biggest
advantage of the core is that it is a more consistent performer; the P4
performance tends to vary a bit more because of some of the neat tricks
used. For example, the L1D is sort of 4-way associative, but only if
you pack in your data right. If you have bad data layout, then it's
effectively direct mapped, which increases miss rates. Darn neat
trick, but increases the variance of performance. Ditto for the trace
cache.

People who blindly support Intel as you do, and don't see what's
happening in the market right now, are just as Intel is. One thing
is certain, AMD will never be "fringe" again. As each day passes,
Intel is who's seen, and truly is on the fringe. This can only go on
for so long.

Actually, I don't blindly support Intel, I just think that most fanboys
lack the appropriate perspective. If technical prowess was all that
counted, then the Alpha should be powering all computers...

Nividia is also more then just a problem for ATI as well.

Nvidia and ATI are close to a 50% marketshare split. AMD has about 20%
of the market...there's a big difference there.

It's the market and it works. Let's see what the market has in store
for Intel this year. Should be an interesting time. Especially if
AMD can gear up production quickly.

Ok, so let's see your predictions.

Today, it's hip to have AMD, who'd have ever thought we'd see that
day.

It's hip because of people like me. Word of mouth always catches up
in the end. As a result, it's internal and can't be changed with
marketing. Especially if that word of mouth is for a company that
does nothing but work hard on the edge. Efficiencies have to win for
the market to work.

LOL. Yes, guerilla marketing at it's finest. Funny that somehow that
hasn't convinced Dell to use AMD...

I'd also point out that it's hip to use Apple, but that company still
doesn't have much more than 5% of the desktop/laptop market...and they
are using Intel.

Quad cores out by the end of the year? That's going to settle some
scores, I'll tell ya. Intel still doesn't even have a decent memory
bus for 1, let alone 4; what is this, Jurassic Park?

AMD might have quad cores out, but they won't be in volume. THey won't
have volume 65nm shipments till 2007, even their CEO said so.

Yeah, I'm rubbing it in... LOL

Despite the gloating, you totally mis-judge me. Remember when your
mama told you to never do that??

I'm not pro AMD or anti Intel. I'm pro competition, something that
Intel tried very hard to squash. There was a reason for that. But,
I wish no ill on Intel. I hope a scandel at Enron proportions
doesn't happen. The company could never survive it.

If Intel were to go down, AMD would become the next one. It's
inevitable and the circle just continues. I don't want to see that
happen.

You still haven't answered quite a few of my questions, so I'll repeat
them.

1. If you think AMD has such a huge advantage, what will their
marketshare be in terms of units and dollars in 1,2 and 3 years from
now? Preferably, I'd like to see predictions for desktop, laptop and
server., since they are separate markets.

2. How long do you think AMD will have a performance advantage per
socket over Intel?

3. How long do you think AMD will have a performance advantage per
core over Intel?

4. How long do you think AMD will have a power/thermal advantage over
Intel per socket?

I'll be waiting...

DK

 

[Yousuf Khan]

I dunno how they expect to do anything productive by distributing
chip/semiconductor designers/engineers out into the final product groups -
I'm thinking the article must have gotten that bit wrong,,, otherwise
there's gonna be a shitload of resumes hitting the desks of the rest of the
industry. This whole thing has the reek of a corporate shrink-job... I
wonder who might have done that for/to them?... McKinsey maybe?

Who is McKinsey?

As for distributing the engineers among the product groups, I've seen
management do a lot of unorthodox things, which then get reversed when
the next generation of managers come in. Carly Fiorina combining the HP
printer and PC groups together and then Mark Hurd reversing that, for
example.

Hmm, I wonder if they'll still have "disagree and commit"?... or does that
involve yelling at each other too? My favorite bit, about their new
hires, is: "sociologists, ethnographers, even doctors". Geez, doesn't it
make you wish you were an ethnographer? Christ are they actually convinced
that wan... err, think tanks really work and do anything useful?

It does sound like something out of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy,
doesn't it? For example in Hitchhiker's they had a race called the
Golgafrinchans who decided to get rid of all of their useless people. So
they sent all of their hairdressers, management consultants, telephone
sanitizers and marketing people up into a big spaceship telling them
that a giant space goat was coming to eat their world. Those
Golgafrinchans eventually landed on a primitive Earth, where they were
told to invent fire and the wheel. They broke up into subcomittees to
study what consumers want from fire and how they relate to it. The wheel
subcommittee broke up because they couldn't decide on what color the
wheel should be. Ironically, the original Golgafrinchans back on their
homeworld died out due to complications arising from dirty telephones.

IMO, if all true, this is a catastrophe - I sure hope that AMD gets their
new production up to capacity, including Chartered, quickly.

As long as AMD keeps their telephones clean, I can't see how they can't
help but be successful.

Yousuf Khan