What's up with AMD???

Discussion in 'Rants-N-Stuff' started by Cyborg, Jul 22, 2007.

  1. Cyborg 3A5UX5

    Contributions:
    125
    Processing:
    Graphics:
    Delayed products, weak offerings, and quarterly losses - it's all you hear about when the name AMD is splashed on the headline. From website to website, everyone seems to be rating AMD as almost dead. But is it all hopeless or is something else going on here. I'll call it the way I see it right from the start, AMD's competitors are out a lot of money and products to pay for all the Bullsh!t PR that's floating around as 'news'. Can't get more blunt as that.

    Let's begin our tale with the birth of the Core architecture. AMD knew Intel's new offering was much better than theirs, so they slashed their prices to stay competitive. This has been the common model of business in hardware for a long time. Very few websites mention that part of the story, most just took to reporting AMD's losses for reducing the prices and Intel's market share gain. You have to dig long and hard to see the reports on how AMD is still the leader in the server market and that dollar for dollar most of AMD's offerings are equal or better than Intel's. Yes, Intel does have the fastest CPUs at the moment, but how much does that really matter to the average home user? Let me pass on a story about myself and a friend. I have an AMD 4400 dual core - he has a Core2Duo running at a gig faster than my proc. We both have Nvidia cards in Sli, we both have 2 gigs of ram, and we both play Battlefield 2. Sure his rig crushes mine in 3dmark and other benches, but when running the same settings in BF2 - he cranks out a whole 5-8 fps more than me. Yeah, his proc is much faster than mine, but I'd never notice the difference on my pc with the programs I run. I also want to point out I saved around $100 + mobo costs for the AMD. But yet the tech. sites in their reviews will note that while the AMD 'keeps up' with the Intel offering, the Intel overclocks better so it wins. Let me ask you - does your mother overclock her pc? Does your sister? Hell for that matter do you even overclock anymore? Long gone are the days were your tried to squeeze every ounce out of your system to keep up with the software you are using. Today's processors from both camps are more than powerful enough, even in the budget range, to handle anything you throw at them. My system is water-cooled and I don't even overclock anymore. It's fun to do to see what your proc can push, but in the end of the day all but 1% of us would rather have our computer parts live a long life.

    But the CPU area is old news, AMD's new architecture is coming out soon, so I'll save anything else I need to say till then. What really set me off on this rant is AMD's new GPUs. You CAN'T find a decent review of these things anywhere on the net. At least one that doesn't have it's own agenda ( Fudo ). You had sites leaking numbers from early samples calling the card crap when it's still 2 revisions away from release. You have sites buying stolen OEM preview copies off E-Bay and releasing reviews as legit hardware. You have sites reviewing the cards purposely with old drivers to effect the scores. You have sites posting only the scores where AMD loses but none of the ones it wins in. Hell you even had a site that considers itself a Hard overclockers site that didn't even bother to try overclocking the card, just simply called it crap.

    Well enough of that, lets get into some truth. First up, what happened to the 2900 XTX flagship card? To put it quite simply UMC couldn't get a clean die out at 65nm like they were supposed to. The initial release to OEMs was to be at 90nm but retail versions of both the xtx and the xt were to be fabbed at 65nm. UMC couldn't deliver, so AMD was forced to use the 90nm that they could produce on the XT giving it bad thermal and power levels. Understand this core was not meant to be produced at 90nm so it's clock speeds could not be pushed up to where AMD wanted them. This left them with a mid-range card and no high end offering. No real fault of their own, but still they were stuck - so they priced it accordingly. UMC has since been canned from making AMD chips and TSMC is now their fab of choice. With that out of the way, let's look at the 2900 xt....

    The little engine that they say couldn't really can, so to say. First let's get what is wrong out of the way. These cards do truly suck at AA/AF. It's gotten better with newer drivers, but still the card takes a major hit when turning on even the slightest AA in a game. Second, yes these cards can cook an egg/heat a house/boil water.... you get the point. Third, the fan is way too loud for even a deaf person. And fourth, the decision no to include UVD in this level of graphics card. The 3 starting this all off are a direct result of not getting 65nm chips out the door. Better thermals, slower running fan, and with the way AMD handles AA/AF the faster clock speeds would have solved that problem as well. The fourth is simply stupidity by AMD's staff, but one that is shared by Nvidia as well. Note to both companies, just because you can run video decode in the processing units, doesn't mean you should! Now let's look at what was done right.

    I can't express how great the HDMI connection is. For anyone running a home theater set up having full digital video and audio out of one card is a godsend. There are dvd players much more expensive than even the XT version of the card that can't even claim to fully support 1080p. But what about gaming. Well with AA/AF turned off the XT can beat both versions of the 8800 GTS in most games, and it can keep up or beat them both with it turned on in around 60% of the games out now. In reality only a few handful of games does the GTS kill the 2900 ( guess which ones keep showing up on review sites ). I've seen almost no sites point out that with a different cooler ( ie. not stock, such as a 3rd party retail card ) and a little overclocking it catches up to the performance of both the GTX and the Ultra. There is a ton of headroom in this card, if you can keep it cool. Which brings me back to some harder overclocking, what can these cards really push out when someone takes the time to let it breathe a little? Let's check out some of these numbers: http://www.futuremark.com/community/halloffame/
    I'm not going to sit here and claim 3dmark shows any real world performance, and in-fact I can't stand the benchmark myself. What it is good for is showing just how much you can increase the performance of a card. As of July 22nd the 2900xt has the 4th place spot in '06 - only being beaten by a mere 450 points by the top overclocked Ultra set up. As this is one of the first 2900xt scores to show up, I expect that top spot might not be safe for long. How do I know that, lets look at the '05 scores so far. Out of the top 10 scores, the 2900xt has 5 of them - including 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th. So much for calling this overclocking beast a Hard dud. Funny how when Intel 'overclocks' better than AMD, they win - but when AMD pulls out more juice than nVidia they still suck. Man I love corporate payoffs!!!

    So to sum up this long rant, I'm not an AMD fan. Nor do I particuraly have any bias against Intel or nVidia. I own 4 Intel procs and 3 AMD, 2 ATI/AMD cards and 5 nVidia cards. But I'll call FUD when I see it, and I'll call all the paid off websites BS any day of the week. I was planning on linking in my examples, but for obvious reasons I didn't want to piss off some one's lawyer. Feel free to search the web for yourself, really read some reviews, look at all the advertising on the site, check when drivers were released and you will more than see what I'm getting at. At the end of the day, I'm not pissed at poor reviews of AMD or competitors reviews being exaggerated. What I'm pissed about is sites that I once regarded as above reproach, with honest values and a solid reputation have sunk to giving the best review to the side that offers them the most.
  2. Petey Founder/CEO of San Diego

    Contributions:
    122
    Processing:
    Graphics:
    PREMIUM
    I Donated
    altho all my AMD's have been great for me, I'm definately going with Intel next time around
  3. Bdbodger ***** squatter

    Contributions:
    144
    Specialties:
    Scripting
    Processing:
    Graphics:
    PREMIUM
    I Donated
    the Nvidia 8800 gtx cards are really resonable in price now adays . I use a amd socket 939 fx60 cpu with a 8800 gtx and I am as happy as can be only running the single card . AMD's socket am2 stuff dropped prices just after they came out and are a good buy . So yes the new stuff is faster but who cares really they are more powerfull than just about any home user needs anyway . Even a single core would do most users only running games and not much else .
  4. neillomax Captain

    Contributions:
    363
    A friend of mine puts custom computers together. recently, on a whim, he put a 4300 on cheap gigabyte board, with cheap ddr2 800 memory
    and overclocked, yes, I did say that nasty word, overclocked, the memory. Took the chip up over 3.3 in less than ten minutes, and the machine
    not only remains stable, no matter what you throw at it, it's a heck of a lot faster than the 4400. I have a 4400 in one of my boxes so I know the difference.
    The faster chips, not overclocked, will noticably be faster than amd top o' the line chips. You, being a gamer, should realise the value of a faster
    processor. I know not all games can take advantage of a processors raw speed, but the faster the better......... by experience.

    those 3dmark BS, don't even read'm. Useless to real world .................


    When amd/ati released the long awaited "top of the line" graphics card, I'm sure 99% of the people were extremely disatisfied with what they
    were handed. I know I was, which made me go out and buy an 8800. It was an energy hog, got much hotter, etc., but what really turned me off, is
    that the MSRP wasn't concidered by the vendors upon release. I,m sure I would have taken the plunge if it was 350 bucks as "advertised" all over
    the web. If amd/ati wanted to take a good part of the market with their release, they should have mandated that the MSRP not be exceded.

    Early next year, "ahem", intel is supposed to be releasing chips with an on die memory controller. If this comes around, the already faster intel
    chips will be faster yet. Uh-oh to amd/ati. How are they going to compete with that ? Their newer chips are advertised as being slower, and I have
    doubts that the hyperthreading 3.0, ( or whatever it's called ), or it's l3 cache, is going to be a benefit over intels 2008 release. The only thing
    amd/ati can hope for is a samsung buyout. That would hurt intel greatly. Not much out there on this though.


    All my machines are oc'ed. All of my machines are 939 amd based. ( sorta ). my intels are disassembled and boxed up. Old and useless. I'm not
    quite ready to make the transition to the c2d. Have to wait and see If I can get a q6600 for the "advertised" price of $266.

    As far as video......... don't know anything about it so I can't comment.

    By the way, your rant, take a valium, drink a few beers, and chill out........ lol
  5. GiffE Gunnery Sergeant

    Contributions:
    188
    Specialties:
    Modeler, Scripting, Programming
    Processing:
    Graphics:
    PREMIUM
    I Donated
    I personally am an AMD fan all my prior machines (that had any quality) were amd. But it just seems they gave up and are just sitting there in the corner with their "64" While intel races ahead.

    They need to put out a competitor chip series which can match the core 2's
    I had to go with intel (i dont have anything against them, i just like amd) as they are just the superior piece of equipment.
  6. unholy_destroyer Private

    Contributions:
    8
    Processing:
    Graphics:
    i own 2 AMD procs whit nvidia grapgic cards i have nothing against both brands at the time i bought the AMD chips they where the best around at that time.

    Know intel seems to have the better hand but i also read about the new barcelona chips and the new AMD roadmap and that also looks greate .


    its like all years in a row they keep staying real competiteve as a consumer im glad that there are 2 brands out there that pushing eacher to the max ...
  7. neillomax Captain

    Contributions:
    363
    its like all years in a row they keep staying real competiteve as a consumer im glad that there are 2 brands out there that pushing eacher to the max ...[/quote]

    If they were pushing things to the max, we'd already have 4+ gig chips, and not have to overclock to get there. amd really fouled up when they didn't push the 939 further, which I'm sure alot of people think thay should have done. The am2 line really isn't a big improvement over the 939's at all, and imo, a waste of time and money.
  8. Cyborg 3A5UX5

    Contributions:
    125
    Processing:
    Graphics:
    They weren't really left with a choice on the 939/am2 socket change. Intel and ram companies forced the switch to ddr2, even though at the time it offered less performance. AMD didn't have the fab headroom to create almost exact cpu's for both platforms, so it had to drop the 939.
  9. brendank310 Staff Sergeant

    Contributions:
    37
    i personally think amd will be fine. although i did recently purchase an intel based laptop, though i had no choice really, as i wanted a mac. even if apple did offer an amd laptop, im not sure i would pick it over intel, as their mobile solutions have always lagged intels.
  10. GiffE Gunnery Sergeant

    Contributions:
    188
    Specialties:
    Modeler, Scripting, Programming
    Processing:
    Graphics:
    PREMIUM
    I Donated
    i hear amd's barcelona chips will be amazing, i also heard they're already working on core 8's aswell as quad core. For now though they dont have anything :(
  11. willwearing Private

    Contributions:
    0
    I personally am waiting for AMD to release the barcelona chip set which I also hear is amazing. But I've also seen things like they liturally just stuck two fx60 chips on top of each other to make the quad core. Anyone else heard this?
  12. spectratwo Private First Class

    Contributions:
    1
    Specialties:
    Pure Gamer
    Processing:
    Graphics:
    Not true the new Phenom is a completely new design where all 4 cores are on the same die with independent l2 cache and a shared l3 cache, whereas Intel took two dual core chips and stuck them together for there orignal quad core proccessors i think thats where you heard that at.

    As for the AMD chips not being able to overclock as well i think your talking about the 6000+ windsor core yes it didnt overclock very well because it was pushed to the limits already but the new 6400+ black edition which retails for under 200 bucks is an unlocked chip and the brand new phenom black edition is unlocked aswell and its under 300 havent seen intel put out an unlocked chip for under a thousand yet but correct me if im wrong.

    As for the new radeons there comparable to the 8800 gt cards and the 3870 in particular cost about half as much as an 8800gt and they are designed for crossfirex and they perform better with antialiasing and the like than the 8800s do. Also with the radeons crossfirex is more scalable then sli you can have 4 3850s or 3870s in a system where as to do nvidias tri sli you have to get the ultra or gtx edition which kinda puts an end to most users wanting to scale up there graphics performance.

    AMD also just released there 790 chipset allowing for quad crossfire and socket am2+ for the new Phenoms which have an onboard memory controller as do all the am2 proccessors the only difference is the Phenoms support DDR2 1066 whereas the Athalon X2 only supported up to 800. Look around you tell more of a performance difference on the AMD processors when you use faster ram then you do on Intels.

    Which brings me to my conclussion all of the above mentioned AMD products the Phenom, the Radeon 3870, and the 790 chipset were designed to work together as AMD's new Spider platform which was designed for each part of the system to push the others to the limit equaling amazing performance.

    I could go on for another page and a half on this but ill leave it at this.

    PS Im an AMD fanboy alway have been always will be but i take a look at both sides and go with what i think is superior.

Share This Page