why no love for AMD?
#11
Things changes over time, at first AMD (era athlon x pentium until recently) was way faster for the same clock (a more complex architecture). Was Intel that needed to pump clocks to keep the pace.

The panorama inverted again with i7, that uses the same concept introduced by AMD long ago, and now is AMD that falls behind and it's known the current architecture is not a concurrent for the Penryn. Strangely AMD is too quiet and reserved in it's roadmap, the only real sign of changes is the announce of advances in interfacing the CPU-GPU on die.

I'm not an Intel or AMD fanboy, much by the contrary, I see the competition as good for technology and mainly for the end user. The reasons I avoid Intel products today are from other nature and irrelevant to the current discussion (notice than whatever it comes the competition is yet and always good, the worse scenery is without one of them).

It's deceptive to think that integration between the CPU-GPU is meant to substitute the video card, It would be stupid for AMD and ATI if that was the real purpose (still it will look as such for starters). The evolution on nowadays processing power is less focused on raw speed and the revolution almost certainly will come from hardware implementation of the PPU concept, something not so new but not well implemented yet. Besides it's an answer to Nvidia advances in Cp and Cuda.

Maybe it is not faraway the day where complex physics and codes relying on feedback from actions and consequences will be reality in a level not possible today... simulators, and I'm not talking about games, are a main target to that.

PS: In a wild guess it would not be a surprise Nvidia and not Intel is the main AMD today concern.
Imagination is where we are truly real
Reply

Sponsored links

#12
I think the main problem here is that people think SSSE3 and SSE4.1 plugins to make their games run 20-30% faster all the time which is a mistake. SSSE3 vs SSE2 at least makes it faster just in some scenes in some specific games making it not much of a speedup at all.

Just for the record Phenom II and Core 2 are about the same speed for PCSX2 so it's not like there's "no love for AMD". Now that the newer core i3/5/7 are even faster but with higher pricetags, well that would go saying "no love for AMD or older intel CPUs" instead (AMD just have to come with something better again Tongue2).

(07-15-2010, 12:04 PM)SamSoNight Wrote: Simple as that. About customer friendliness: AMD does not let down people with old mainboards and gives new CPUs backwards compability. In addition, there are rumors that Intel's current sockets will already be replaced 2011...

Uh I'm sorry but both AMD and Intel tend to make old mobos useless overtime, it's just the way the technology goes.


(07-15-2010, 01:40 PM)nosisab Ken Keleh Wrote: I'm not an Intel or AMD fanboy, much by the contrary, I see the competition as good for technology and mainly for the end user. The reasons I avoid Intel products today are from other nature and irrelevant to the current discussion (notice than whatever it comes the competition is yet and always good, the worse scenery is without one of them).

I agree with the competition being good, just have to remember old days when Intel was the only side (well mostly) and they decided to bring us Pentium 4... a CPU which was slower and used more power than their own Pentium 3, good thing AMD was around to show it was possible to actually improve and have relatively good prices.
Well... I agree except I avoid AMD today cause of stability I've experienced over the years where Intel just made me stick.
Core i5 3570k -- Geforce GTX 670  --  Windows 7 x64
Reply
#13
Nope, there are even old AM2 boards that accept AM3 CPUs, which is unthinkable for Intel. Here for example is such one: http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=AM2NF3-VSTA
Of course technology sometimes make a change of socket inevitable, but it is possible, to keep backwards compability.
Intel i5 3450
AsRock B75-Pro3-M
Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X OC
8GB DDR3-1333 RAM
Sandisk Ultra Plus 256GB
Seagate 7200.14 1TB x2
Enermax Triathlor 450W PSU
Reply
#14
Yeh so down to Athlon 64 right? (Sempron/Athlon 64, Phenom triple/quad, Athlon/Phenom II)

Same thing with Intel, there are boards that support from Celeron/Pentium 4, Pentium/Celeron D and up to core 2 duo/quad (well and the pentium/celeron dual-core which are just another core 2 duo basically). But nothing higher like the core i3/5/7, it's just inevitable... someday AMD will have incompatible ones again just like intel did and AMD did before but right now AMD seems stuck which doesn't mean they won't surprise with new architecture again Tongue
Core i5 3570k -- Geforce GTX 670  --  Windows 7 x64
Reply
#15
(07-15-2010, 12:04 PM)SamSoNight Wrote: Simple as that. About customer friendliness: AMD does not let down people with old mainboards and gives new CPUs backwards compability. In addition, there are rumors that Intel's current sockets will already be replaced 2011...

Sandy Bridge will be using new sockets. It's not exactly rumor once it's already been confirmed and several prototype motherboards have already been demoed at Computex.

As for the socket, the only reason AMD is still able to use the same socket is because they haven't really made significant architectural changes that warrants the use of a new socket.

I have a socket 939 build and that got obsolete pretty quick. The reason I even went with 939 instead of 754 was to future-proof. That got shot pretty quick so nowadays, I don't even bother with futureproofing.
Reply
#16
I don't even try to future proof. I upgrade about every two years. The rigs I build and overclock easily lasts that long. Hopefully, AMD's Orachi is good so I can build another AMD rig. I loved my Opteron 165 at 3ghz for it's time.
Intel E8500 @ 4.3ghz 1.32v w/ Tuniq Tower
DFI LanParty Dark P35-T2RS
G. Skill 4GB PC2-8000
BFG 8800 GTS 512
Creative X-Fi XtremeGamer Fatal1ty Pro
Thermaltake ToughPower 750W
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)