AMD also enters the quad-core CPU market
In what’s shaping up as a two-week burst of fast and furious chip news, Intel this week released its new quad-core Xeon 7300 server CPU, codenamed “Tigerton,” adding some competitive spice to this Monday’s highly anticipated launch of “Barcelona,” Advanced Micro Device’s first entry in the quad-core server chip market. And as if that’s not excitement enough for followers of the chip market, Intel is also expected to give the world a first look at its 45nm chip design “Penryn” very close on the heels of AMD’s quad-core launch, perhaps as soon as at the Intel Developers Forum on Sept. 18. The chip giant sent out invites Thursday for what it describes as “a BIG celebration for our tiny chips.”
Tigerton enters the server space as Intel’s top of the line Xeon offering. But some analysts speculate that next year’s planned overhaul of its entire server line means Intel’s Tigerton product is more of a fill-in than a major new addition. For high-performance system builders like Velocity Micro, the Barcelona launch is just a taste of things to come later in the year, when AMD will release “Phenom,” its quad-core processor for desktops, said Randall Copeland, president and CEO of the Richmond, Virg.-based company. Copeland expects that AMD’s quad-core family of processors will put them right back in the running with Intel, which has had the quad-core market to itself for several quarters due to reported delays in AMD’s Barcelona rollout.
Source: TGD, ZDnet
Comments(37)
Too little, too late for AMD. Intel are miles ahead of them at the moment.
Im still happy with my pentium 3
so what is the diffrance between amd an intel more than just price/ like i mean what is a 3.gh/z intel in amd terms ? i dont get it, is a 3000 amd the same clock soeed as a 3.gh/z intel?
@3
In the past that was how AMD marketed their chips. mine is a 3700+ which has a clock speed of 2.4 but it performs as good as a Intel 3.7 (during the P4 wars). AMD has dropped that now (I am pretty sure) as clock speed is not the determining factor now between which is better. In the same series a faster clock speed is always better, but an Intel 1.2 core 2 duo ulv might be as fast as an amd 2.2 turion dual core. (I believe that they are very close, need to seem some benchmarks) basically wait for some benchmarks between amd quad and Intel quad to tell which is fastest/better.
Honestly I don’t know how amd is going to catch up with Intel as Intel is bringing out quad core to laptops, while amd is just now introducing quad core to desktops.
(Having 2 dual core cpus in your computer does not mean you have a quad core machine, stupid amd)
@4
“(Having 2 dual core cpus in your computer does not mean you have a quad core machine, stupid amd)”
You’re obviously confused. Barcelona is a native quad core, while Intel doesn’t have that yet.
I guess Tigerton that was JUST released by Intel is native quad core, but nothing like you said (@4)
Damned, couldn’t edit, but forgot to include:
“Barcelona is the company’s first quad-core CPU architecture and features a native quad-core design. Intel’s previously released Clovertown, Kentsfield and upcoming Harpertown and Yorkfield quad-core processors feature two Core-architecture dies on a single package – effectively quad-core, however, not a native design like Barcelona.”
http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+Unveils+Barcelona+Architecture/article6299.htm
well i’m no expert so can someone explain to me in simple English, Does this quad core have four cores or does it act as two duo core processors?
AMD has flopped totally lately. How they gon catch up with Intel?
There was a time when everybody was buying AMD, because they were much cheaper than Intels and all the ridiculous hardcore gamerz was all over AMD’s dick. Well its time to face the facts: AMD sucks. Big Time.
AMD didn’t even support ddr2 for like centuries, while Intel’s shit did. That’s hilarious.
@ 9
whats more hilarious is that Intel didn’t support ddr2 for like centuries as well.
Only why AMD can catch up is by making faster processors then Intel and selling them at cheaper prices to Intel processors
…Not Going to happen!
quad core has the same theory of a dual core meaning that its not two seperate processors but two-in-one.
AMD will rise up again like they did in the past. I dont find as much of a difference as people say between my intel based PC and my AMD based PC. basically with any processor you buy today you cant go wrong. they are lightning fast and are more that capable of doing whatever you want.
check this link
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-1.html
its an AMD vs Intel Comparison
thanks roofy was looking for something like that :p
i agree with #12. I just upgraded from a P4 3.0EE to an Athlon X2 6000+. added a nice x1950xt for a good price and i can play any game on the market at full settings. i haven’t had any trouble with anything yet. i saved a bundle compared to a comparable intel based system.
i already have a quad by intel… i bought it for 275 euro
AMD didn’t even support ddr2 for like centuries, while Intel’s shit did. That’s hilarious.
and so what?? did you look at the benchmark ddr vs ddr2 lil boy ? the difference is so tiny that they judged not to move now on DDR2 … and yeah intel still on is old principle of FSB shitz …. when something must go to the memory it must pass through the northbridge increasing overall latency thats why they implemented DDR2 when that was available to the market ,,,
let me show ya intel way … CPU –> Northbridge —> RAM
AMD way … CPU –> RAM
when exchanging data…
AMD for awhile (IIRC,, since K8 Athlon 64) have their memory controller embedded in the cpu vs intel embedded in the northbridge.
now do your homework and go read some tech stuff before posting again.
read this
http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-6047412-7.html
the article is 1.5 yrs old but still
It looks like I will be moving back to Intel after years of AMD, unless they get something that competes with the 6850 which can be clocked AS IS to 4G.
I’ve got a few months before I do so we get to see what AMD and now ATI (DX10.1) can do to catch up in next release cycle
Vista waiting for SP1
64×2 4800+
ATI 1950XTX-768
4G-(3.5)
XP-Pro
all you intel fanboys get sucked into clever marketing. i think nowadays who gives a rat’s bottom what technologies there are seeing as how most of us are still using 32bit and dont need 4 cores let alone 2 to surf the internet. of course intel are leading cuz they can squeeze amd out on pricing. Also AMD motherboards have less features than the intel cuz the mobo companies are in cohorts with intel.
@ andrew
remember me the MHZ war that intel marketing started…
and everyone (alot of ppl) did really think that way… jeez
just make it go faster and better..and cheaper.. thats all we want
end of story
AMD got sidetracked when buying ATI and unless they can come out with a good, CHEAP chip then they are not going to make it.
I loved AMD but the Intels are so much faster.
AMD should have bought NVIDIA instead of ATI
… nvidia (first nforce) chipset were develloped at first for amd
You guys act like everybody or at least the majority of the market were buying high-end machines/processors.
Im still waiting for those SPARC processors to come out on desktops then we get some action
GO SPARC! woot !
Intel is pure evil, and makes chite processors. ^_^
SPARC is not a consumer product and will never be
Only VIA,AMD and INTEL are targeting consumer market.
Try running windows on a SPARC cpu and you will understand why its not popular on home desktop
ahhh shit…AMD is fucked up real bad
why the fuck keeps delaying these mudda fucking CPUS? esspecially PHENOM???
anyway il still go for the x2 6000+, cuz i don’t have enough money for intel’s Q6600.
Hopefully AMD gets it shit together and starts putting out product that can compete performance and price wise with Intel processors, otherwise we’ll be back to having Intel overprice its chips.
@ 28 you might not be able to run Windows on SPARC, but Linux runs just fine.
@ xyztynz
i know that but we all know that windows still have a HUGE consumer market share compared to linux.
damn windows !! lol
)
/me still use windows for apps compatibility even if ubuntu is better (WINE made alot of progress but thats not enough for stopping me using win
Ubuntu + Compiz Fusion FTW
!!!
Das any of u read about build of procesors INTELS x4 are not x4 at all they are x2 DUAL CORE they stic 2 dual cores on one die amds shit is the first real quad amd is slower when releasing products but tones more inovative and now when they got some gpu theconlogy i hope they incorporate thet in thers next gen cpus becouse it is like this ms loves intel that is whay intel seems always faster but they are not intel point is just make it faster stres out fsb always whit this dame ram spedds so market for inte is in ram speed not in cpu. anwhays if intel dont get they shit too gether amd will win in long run.
Ok dude… so:
Intel = two dual-core wafers glued toghether = Same shit, bigger price & more heat!
AMD = 4 cores that share a L3 Cache so that processing can be done inside the CPU, among the cores, without the data leaving it (if instructed so)! = In the future, one Core could be a GFX processor, one a PhysX PU and the other two regular CPU’s… CPU name: AMD Fusion
MS doesn’t love intel… that’s why when intel tried to push an agreement between them for it to be the exclusive company to deliver 64-bit PU, MS just pissed on that agreement and released Windows XP PRO 64 with support for AMD64 CPU Family.
INTEL wins with its 8 core, and 32 Core cpu’s out next year…
hahhaha sucked in AMD!!!!!!!!!
AMD are gay end story.