AT Barcelona previews are up

[kknd1967]

Samsung is more likely than IBM to be the buyer
or maybe Qualcomm

 

[darkhorror]

All that really matters for AMD on Phenom is how much they will be able to clock it. As it's not going to be much better if any better clock for clock than what intel will have. If they max out at 3ghz again they are going to be in trouble.

 

[Keysplayr]

Well, I suppose what is really important is that AMD is showing signs of actual activity. A product was released. They are doing something. And the product is not half bad. 15% better than K8 clock for clock isn't bad at all. Consider how good the K8 was/is. Don't look at Intel for the moment. A 15+/- improvement over a previous gen is quite good.

And you can't really go by P4 to C2D because P4 was in big trouble compared to K8's. For all the hardships AMD is going through right now, I have to give them props for even getting that 15%. I was anticipating a flop to be honest. But this wasn't a flop, even though it's not spectacular either.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: darkhorror
All that really matters for AMD on Phenom is how much they will be able to clock it. As it's not going to be much better if any better clock for clock than what intel will have. If they max out at 3ghz again they are going to be in trouble.

Well that has always been true, even for their current desktop offerings...the K8.

The heat from 90nm Prescotts got Intel's 90nm process labeled "broken".

When will the disasterously low clock speeds generated by AMD's 65nm process get it labeled as "broken"?

 

[Pederv]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Pederv
I'll probably get a Phenom, sometime next year or so.
Am I a fanboi? I don't consider myself one.
I do have name brands that I usually purchase, whether it's my Darigold milk, my Ford car or my AMD CPU. Do I stop buying Darigold because I get a bad gallon? No I just buy another gallon of milk.

I don't think I've ever bought a CPU that was past it's expiration date.

Good one Keys.

My wife didn't look at the expiration date on products until she saw me making a point to do so. As a result, the bad gallons are few and far between.

Just as my auto maker of choice went from AMC to Ford, when AMC went out of buisiness. My CPU manufacturer of choice will change if AMD goes out of buisiness, no biggie. Until that happens the CPU I'll purchase is what AMD has that I can afford, when I can afford it. It's not like AMD is going to charge me twice the price for the same performance as Intel would. I just won't have the fastest system on the planet, again no biggie.

That goes beyond idiotic, to purchase based on brand in the computer world. It would have meant that you were using the crap K5 when the Pentium was kicking it's butt. Or using a PMMX when K6-2 was walking all over it. Or a K6-3 when The Celeron 300a@450 made it look like a 386, or perhaps worse.

The *only* logical choice is to pick the best deal at the time that you buy. Buying by brand just makes you a brainless lemming, no offense intended.

Arkaign:

Purchasing by brand isn't any different in the computer world than it is in the clothing world or the automotive world or the food world. Sometimes you get the quality that you're looking for, sometimes all you get is a pretty package.
Yes I did have a K5-166, yes I did have a K6-3-450 because at the time I bought them they were the best bang for the buck, without overclocking. My old systems are spread throughout my family, so they have to last. The K6-3-450 came back to me after I upgraded my mom to a 2000XP system. The K6-3-450 runs Win2K and I use it for software that has a 30 trial period. I just reimage the system when the trial period expires.
Overclocking to me is something to play with, not a way of life. So I don't base my CPU purchases on how far it will overclock, just as I don't choose my car by how fast it will go when floored.

 

[Pederv]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Well, I suppose what is really important is that AMD is showing signs of actual activity. A product was released. They are doing something. And the product is not half bad. 15% better than K8 clock for clock isn't bad at all. Consider how good the K8 was/is. Don't look at Intel for the moment. A 15+/- improvement over a previous gen is quite good.

And you can't really go by P4 to C2D because P4 was in big trouble compared to K8's. For all the hardships AMD is going through right now, I have to give them props for even getting that 15%. I was anticipating a flop to be honest. But this wasn't a flop, even though it's not spectacular either.

I think most people are disappointed that it didn't show as a killer CPU because now the pricewar won't happen and they won't be getting that $199 4GHz quadcore CPU for Christmas.

 

[toslat]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
That goes beyond idiotic, to purchase based on brand in the computer world.....

@Arkaign
I don't think one needs to use such phrases just to make a point, or just because one does not agree with how others choose to spend their own money.

On barcelona, I feel a strong product in a small sized, high margin sector, is one of the best ways for AMD to get themselves moving towards being in the black as, being cash strapped, they would seem to get the most 'bang for their bucks'. With this in mind, I feel Barcelona was quite a success.

I expect Phenom to be a decent product and overall judgment, for me, would depend on its price/performance.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: darkhorror
All that really matters for AMD on Phenom is how much they will be able to clock it. As it's not going to be much better if any better clock for clock than what intel will have. If they max out at 3ghz again they are going to be in trouble.

Well that has always been true, even for their current desktop offerings...the K8.

The heat from 90nm Prescotts got Intel's 90nm process labeled "broken".

When will the disasterously low clock speeds generated by AMD's 65nm process get it labeled as "broken"?

The prescotts weren't just hot, they were a step back in performance in many ways from the p4c. Especially in gaming.

 

[ebeattie]

I wish AMD all the best of luck and hope that after tweaking, Phenom rocks and competes very nicely. However if it doesnt happen and Intel still wears the crown, I will honestly consider intel. But only if they lead by a dominante margin.

Just the way i see it I suppose.

 

[TekDemon]

Originally posted by: fishmonger12
Someone may have already said this, but on the desktop side, few people really NEED the power of a core 2 duo cpu. I would say gamers and other enthusiasts are the only ones that actually take advantage of a chip like that, and they make up what, like 10% of the market? I just bought my girlfriend a laptop with a 1.9 ghz turion x2 and 1 gig of ram, and it plows right through vista, multitasking, movies, etc. Which is what most of the market uses a pc for.

So I don't think this as big of a disappointment as people paint it to be, nor will it have a large effect on the business side of amd in the desktop space. It will matter in the server space, and guess what, it's actually competitive there.

you poor thing. you actually think modern consumerist culture cares about what's needed. Most Americans don't need a full size SUV with a 5.8liter v8, but that doesn't stop people from buying it.
ever read a car review where they recommended an otherwise comparable car with less power?
Seriously, the whole reason to even buy a new pc is to have more than enough power so it won't be obsolete for a while. So overkill is the name of the game.
And if overkilling it with a quad core intel is only an extra 80 bucks...

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: TekDemon
you poor thing. you actually think modern consumerist culture cares about what's needed. Most Americans don't need a full size SUV with a 5.8liter v8, but that doesn't stop people from buying it.
ever read a car review where they recommended an otherwise comparable car with less power?
Seriously, the whole reason to even buy a new pc is to have more than enough power so it won't be obsolete for a while. So overkill is the name of the game.
And if overkilling it with a quad core intel is only an extra 80 bucks...

What you seem to fail to understand is that the average joe knows very little about the performance difference between the different cpu's available on the market. I have had to talk a number of my family/friends out of buying a cheap pc they saw at Bestbuy or Wal-Mart because it would not do what they actually planned to purchase the computer for.

How many average people do you know that can tell you the difference between a Sempron, Celeron, P4, Athlon64, Atlhon64 X2 and the C2D? The general public just does not keep up with this stuff. Trying to compare it to something like a SUV is really not a good comaprison since the general public does have a good understanding that a V8 is much more powerful than a 4 cylinder engine.

Edit:

One more thought. The general public is still under the impression that clock speed is the most important factor in determining how fast a computer is. They have not got the memo yet that clock speed is no longer an accurate measure of how fast a CPU actually is.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: TekDemon

Originally posted by: fishmonger12
Someone may have already said this, but on the desktop side, few people really NEED the power of a core 2 duo cpu. I would say gamers and other enthusiasts are the only ones that actually take advantage of a chip like that, and they make up what, like 10% of the market? I just bought my girlfriend a laptop with a 1.9 ghz turion x2 and 1 gig of ram, and it plows right through vista, multitasking, movies, etc. Which is what most of the market uses a pc for.

So I don't think this as big of a disappointment as people paint it to be, nor will it have a large effect on the business side of amd in the desktop space. It will matter in the server space, and guess what, it's actually competitive there.

you poor thing. you actually think modern consumerist culture cares about what's needed. Most Americans don't need a full size SUV with a 5.8liter v8, but that doesn't stop people from buying it.

Most Americans DONT buy a full size SUV with a 5.8 liter v8. Best sellers are toyota's, Honda's, economical on fuel and well built.

ever read a car review where they recommended an otherwise comparable car with less power?

Guess what, a toyota camry can't climb up the side of a mountain when a SUV with a 5.8 liter v8 just might.
However, a "lowly" CeleronD could accomplish anything the most powerful CPU available can do, only a lot slower. But it still gets it done.
Cars and CPU's are never good analogies.

Seriously, the whole reason to even buy a new pc is to have more than enough power so it won't be obsolete for a while. So overkill is the name of the game.

Or a computer breaks down, or your computer gets inherited by your son or daughter, or for a gift, or for your business. Broaden your thinking a little bud.

And if overkilling it with a quad core intel is only an extra 80 bucks...

Do you have children that depend on you? Anybody you need to support? Do you make a ton of money? Or do you just make ends meet? Why some people think that what applies to them, must also apply to every other sentient being on the face of the earth is pretty much beyond me.

[/quote]

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Pederv
I'll probably get a Phenom, sometime next year or so.
Am I a fanboi? I don't consider myself one.
I do have name brands that I usually purchase, whether it's my Darigold milk, my Ford car or my AMD CPU. Do I stop buying Darigold because I get a bad gallon? No I just buy another gallon of milk.

I don't think I've ever bought a CPU that was past it's expiration date.

Good one Keys.

My wife didn't look at the expiration date on products until she saw me making a point to do so. As a result, the bad gallons are few and far between.

Just as my auto maker of choice went from AMC to Ford, when AMC went out of buisiness. My CPU manufacturer of choice will change if AMD goes out of buisiness, no biggie. Until that happens the CPU I'll purchase is what AMD has that I can afford, when I can afford it. It's not like AMD is going to charge me twice the price for the same performance as Intel would. I just won't have the fastest system on the planet, again no biggie.

That goes beyond idiotic, to purchase based on brand in the computer world. It would have meant that you were using the crap K5 when the Pentium was kicking it's butt. Or using a PMMX when K6-2 was walking all over it. Or a K6-3 when The Celeron 300a@450 made it look like a 386, or perhaps worse.

The *only* logical choice is to pick the best deal at the time that you buy. Buying by brand just makes you a brainless lemming, no offense intended.

Arkaign:

Purchasing by brand isn't any different in the computer world than it is in the clothing world or the automotive world or the food world. Sometimes you get the quality that you're looking for, sometimes all you get is a pretty package.
Yes I did have a K5-166, yes I did have a K6-3-450 because at the time I bought them they were the best bang for the buck, without overclocking. My old systems are spread throughout my family, so they have to last. The K6-3-450 came back to me after I upgraded my mom to a 2000XP system. The K6-3-450 runs Win2K and I use it for software that has a 30 trial period. I just reimage the system when the trial period expires.
Overclocking to me is something to play with, not a way of life. So I don't base my CPU purchases on how far it will overclock, just as I don't choose my car by how fast it will go when floored.

Okay, I'll try again. I'll break this into separate sections for clarity.

(1)- Purchasing by brand is vastly different in the cpu world, because if the product isn't abused it will work 100% just like the other brands.

(2)- K5-166 was outperformed by P-120/133 most of the time, it wasn't until K6 came along that AMD kicked butt like in their 386/486 heyday. I never noticed a significant price delta between Pentium and K5/K6.

(3)- Basing cpus on how they overclock is irrelevant to this discussion, but the fact remains that a Celeron 300a @ 450 was rock stable, and many are probably still in perfect working order today. The .25mu process technology that mendocino was made on was designed to start @ 450mhz in the first place.

(4)- The final error in your logic is that you choose on brand ONLY, without considering what is available for your money/usage. Intel and AMD both make excellent cpus. But if cpu A and cpu B cost the same, yet cpu A is 15% faster, what logic is there to buying cpu B? The best choices change weekly, and on needs/whether or not you're overclocking, etc. Sometimes AMD or Intel will run price cuts that drastically change things, and it's never good to pay more for less. Ironically this usually favors AMD, so I am not Anti-AMD by any means. It just seems ludicrous to me to buy only one brand with no regard to anything else.

 

[covert24]

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Pederv
I'll probably get a Phenom, sometime next year or so.
Am I a fanboi? I don't consider myself one.
I do have name brands that I usually purchase, whether it's my Darigold milk, my Ford car or my AMD CPU. Do I stop buying Darigold because I get a bad gallon? No I just buy another gallon of milk.

I don't think I've ever bought a CPU that was past it's expiration date.

Good one Keys.

My wife didn't look at the expiration date on products until she saw me making a point to do so. As a result, the bad gallons are few and far between.

Just as my auto maker of choice went from AMC to Ford, when AMC went out of buisiness. My CPU manufacturer of choice will change if AMD goes out of buisiness, no biggie. Until that happens the CPU I'll purchase is what AMD has that I can afford, when I can afford it. It's not like AMD is going to charge me twice the price for the same performance as Intel would. I just won't have the fastest system on the planet, again no biggie.

That goes beyond idiotic, to purchase based on brand in the computer world. It would have meant that you were using the crap K5 when the Pentium was kicking it's butt. Or using a PMMX when K6-2 was walking all over it. Or a K6-3 when The Celeron 300a@450 made it look like a 386, or perhaps worse.

The *only* logical choice is to pick the best deal at the time that you buy. Buying by brand just makes you a brainless lemming, no offense intended.

Arkaign:

Purchasing by brand isn't any different in the computer world than it is in the clothing world or the automotive world or the food world. Sometimes you get the quality that you're looking for, sometimes all you get is a pretty package.

if we are talking in regards to processors than it is extremely different than in life. In life you have all different brands making different things in different ways. in the processor world you have two main companies that both produce great processors. and like arkain said if both of the 2 are equal in price but one is better performance wise than the other, whats the sense in buying the other one?

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Well, I suppose what is really important is that AMD is showing signs of actual activity. A product was released. They are doing something. And the product is not half bad. 15% better than K8 clock for clock isn't bad at all. Consider how good the K8 was/is. Don't look at Intel for the moment. A 15+/- improvement over a previous gen is quite good.

And you can't really go by P4 to C2D because P4 was in big trouble compared to K8's. For all the hardships AMD is going through right now, I have to give them props for even getting that 15%. I was anticipating a flop to be honest. But this wasn't a flop, even though it's not spectacular either.

The P4 is the *only* CPU I remember that had a lower IPC than anything that came before it.

I say that 15% is a huge disappointment simply because it took an enormous team of engineers several years to reach that goal. I'll bet they would have made more gains by having those people research manufacturing and chipset design.

I suppose one could make the argument that the fastest P3s were faster than some of the P4s at launch, but really, I don't see the P4 as much of an engineering success...

The one saving grace for AMD may be higher memory clocks. I'm pretty sure Gary Key stated that the chips like high bandwidth memory. Maybe some of you with C2Ds can let us know what kind of hit you take by running at DDR667 speeds. :light:

 

[kknd1967]

I remeber Anandtech did a review on different DDR2 speed and shows very marginal performance difference for C2D

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Well, I suppose what is really important is that AMD is showing signs of actual activity. A product was released. They are doing something. And the product is not half bad. 15% better than K8 clock for clock isn't bad at all. Consider how good the K8 was/is. Don't look at Intel for the moment. A 15+/- improvement over a previous gen is quite good.

And you can't really go by P4 to C2D because P4 was in big trouble compared to K8's. For all the hardships AMD is going through right now, I have to give them props for even getting that 15%. I was anticipating a flop to be honest. But this wasn't a flop, even though it's not spectacular either.

The P4 is the *only* CPU I remember that had a lower IPC than anything that came before it.

I say that 15% is a huge disappointment simply because it took an enormous team of engineers several years to reach that goal. I'll bet they would have made more gains by having those people research manufacturing and chipset design.

I suppose one could make the argument that the fastest P3s were faster than some of the P4s at launch, but really, I don't see the P4 as much of an engineering success...

The one saving grace for AMD may be higher memory clocks. I'm pretty sure Gary Key stated that the chips like high bandwidth memory. Maybe some of you with C2Ds can let us know what kind of hit you take by running at DDR667 speeds. :light:

 

[IntelUser2000]

I say that 15% is a huge disappointment simply because it took an enormous team of engineers several years to reach that goal. I'll bet they would have made more gains by having those people research manufacturing and chipset design.

Though you can say part of A64's success is Intel's fault with Prescott, and part of the reason Barcelona looks bad is because Intel exceeded everyone's expectations with Conroe. Nobody expected Conroe's performance before the numbers started trickling out. Everyone expected that with same FSB, it would be just like a Yonah. However, we have seen its much more than that. People also doubted Intel's ability to clock Conroe cores to more than 2.5GHz, thinking of Yonah. They came out with 2.93GHz EE.

You can say this is like a Geforce 5800 vs Radeon 9700 comparison. Geforce 5800 would have been impressive if ATI didn't manage to pull out an even more impressive R9700.

Someone may have already said this, but on the desktop side, few people really NEED the power of a core 2 duo cpu. I would say gamers and other enthusiasts are the only ones that actually take advantage of a chip like that, and they make up what, like 10% of the market? I just bought my girlfriend a laptop with a 1.9 ghz turion x2 and 1 gig of ram, and it plows right through vista, multitasking, movies, etc. Which is what most of the market uses a pc for.

Yes, of course, so why are you posting here at all?? It's about people that actually cares about the difference that's posting here. After all, if people buy what they only need, Intel wouldn't have been doing suddenly better by introducing Core 2, and AMD wouldn't have been in trouble.

It's not unlikely to think that Phenom scores will improve by at least 10%. Memory gains from using higher speed non server DDR2 667 RAM should be somewhere around 5%. Mature chipset drivers catered specifically for desktop apps should yield another 5% as well. These preliminary scores are very promising in the server arena, but if AMD wants to regain lost share in the desktop arena they better pray they can get those clockspeeds up.

That sir, won't happen. Some people seem to have forgot Anand's early Conroe review at IDF, and how people complained of BIOS not recognizing K8 CPU and its a crappy chipset etc etc. We found out later how much the latest BIOS brought to the table. An average of 1-2%.

About chipset and memory:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3042&p=6

Look above, look how irrevalent chipsets are to performance. Unless we are comparing totally ignored chipsets like Via's and SiS's, chipset, performance difference between the slowest and the fastest chipset don't exceed 3%, and majority of the time its under 2.5%. And one of major changes to Barcelona/Phenom is greatly enhanced memory controllers. If anything, it will benefit less than Opteron does from faster memory.

People like to dream .

 

[Pederv]

Originally posted by: covert24

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Pederv
I'll probably get a Phenom, sometime next year or so.
Am I a fanboi? I don't consider myself one.
I do have name brands that I usually purchase, whether it's my Darigold milk, my Ford car or my AMD CPU. Do I stop buying Darigold because I get a bad gallon? No I just buy another gallon of milk.

I don't think I've ever bought a CPU that was past it's expiration date.

Good one Keys.

My wife didn't look at the expiration date on products until she saw me making a point to do so. As a result, the bad gallons are few and far between.

Just as my auto maker of choice went from AMC to Ford, when AMC went out of buisiness. My CPU manufacturer of choice will change if AMD goes out of buisiness, no biggie. Until that happens the CPU I'll purchase is what AMD has that I can afford, when I can afford it. It's not like AMD is going to charge me twice the price for the same performance as Intel would. I just won't have the fastest system on the planet, again no biggie.

That goes beyond idiotic, to purchase based on brand in the computer world. It would have meant that you were using the crap K5 when the Pentium was kicking it's butt. Or using a PMMX when K6-2 was walking all over it. Or a K6-3 when The Celeron 300a@450 made it look like a 386, or perhaps worse.

The *only* logical choice is to pick the best deal at the time that you buy. Buying by brand just makes you a brainless lemming, no offense intended.

Arkaign:

Purchasing by brand isn't any different in the computer world than it is in the clothing world or the automotive world or the food world. Sometimes you get the quality that you're looking for, sometimes all you get is a pretty package.

if we are talking in regards to processors than it is extremely different than in life. In life you have all different brands making different things in different ways. in the processor world you have two main companies that both produce great processors. and like arkain said if both of the 2 are equal in price but one is better performance wise than the other, whats the sense in buying the other one?

Isn't there one major national or international company that sells espresso? I will hunt for a mom-and-pop espresso stand before I buy from Starbucks. Ever since Starbucks started using those automated espresso machines their coffee tastes like something you would find on the floor in a barn. On top of that they are over priced, a mom-and-pop stand can cost you buck or two less for a better cup of coffee.
The real world isn't different than the computer world. One just needs to know what their priorities are.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: covert24

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Pederv
I'll probably get a Phenom, sometime next year or so.
Am I a fanboi? I don't consider myself one.
I do have name brands that I usually purchase, whether it's my Darigold milk, my Ford car or my AMD CPU. Do I stop buying Darigold because I get a bad gallon? No I just buy another gallon of milk.

I don't think I've ever bought a CPU that was past it's expiration date.

Good one Keys.

My wife didn't look at the expiration date on products until she saw me making a point to do so. As a result, the bad gallons are few and far between.

Just as my auto maker of choice went from AMC to Ford, when AMC went out of buisiness. My CPU manufacturer of choice will change if AMD goes out of buisiness, no biggie. Until that happens the CPU I'll purchase is what AMD has that I can afford, when I can afford it. It's not like AMD is going to charge me twice the price for the same performance as Intel would. I just won't have the fastest system on the planet, again no biggie.

That goes beyond idiotic, to purchase based on brand in the computer world. It would have meant that you were using the crap K5 when the Pentium was kicking it's butt. Or using a PMMX when K6-2 was walking all over it. Or a K6-3 when The Celeron 300a@450 made it look like a 386, or perhaps worse.

The *only* logical choice is to pick the best deal at the time that you buy. Buying by brand just makes you a brainless lemming, no offense intended.

Arkaign:

Purchasing by brand isn't any different in the computer world than it is in the clothing world or the automotive world or the food world. Sometimes you get the quality that you're looking for, sometimes all you get is a pretty package.

if we are talking in regards to processors than it is extremely different than in life. In life you have all different brands making different things in different ways. in the processor world you have two main companies that both produce great processors. and like arkain said if both of the 2 are equal in price but one is better performance wise than the other, whats the sense in buying the other one?

Isn't there one major national or international company that sells espresso? I will hunt for a mom-and-pop espresso stand before I buy from Starbucks. Ever since Starbucks started using those automated espresso machines their coffee tastes like something you would find on the floor in a barn. On top of that they are over priced, a mom-and-pop stand can cost you buck or two less for a better cup of coffee.
The real world isn't different than the computer world. One just needs to know what their priorities are.

Agreed on Starbucks vs. Mom & Pop coffee houses. Honestly, that analogy contradicts your logic in buying Cpus. With your coffee, you're willing to analyze cost/taste/etc to make a qualified decision. With your cpus, you buy because of the name on the box. Big difference.

 

[Pederv]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: covert24

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Pederv

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Pederv
I'll probably get a Phenom, sometime next year or so.
Am I a fanboi? I don't consider myself one.
I do have name brands that I usually purchase, whether it's my Darigold milk, my Ford car or my AMD CPU. Do I stop buying Darigold because I get a bad gallon? No I just buy another gallon of milk.

I don't think I've ever bought a CPU that was past it's expiration date.

Good one Keys.

My wife didn't look at the expiration date on products until she saw me making a point to do so. As a result, the bad gallons are few and far between.

Just as my auto maker of choice went from AMC to Ford, when AMC went out of buisiness. My CPU manufacturer of choice will change if AMD goes out of buisiness, no biggie. Until that happens the CPU I'll purchase is what AMD has that I can afford, when I can afford it. It's not like AMD is going to charge me twice the price for the same performance as Intel would. I just won't have the fastest system on the planet, again no biggie.

That goes beyond idiotic, to purchase based on brand in the computer world. It would have meant that you were using the crap K5 when the Pentium was kicking it's butt. Or using a PMMX when K6-2 was walking all over it. Or a K6-3 when The Celeron 300a@450 made it look like a 386, or perhaps worse.

The *only* logical choice is to pick the best deal at the time that you buy. Buying by brand just makes you a brainless lemming, no offense intended.

Arkaign:

Purchasing by brand isn't any different in the computer world than it is in the clothing world or the automotive world or the food world. Sometimes you get the quality that you're looking for, sometimes all you get is a pretty package.

if we are talking in regards to processors than it is extremely different than in life. In life you have all different brands making different things in different ways. in the processor world you have two main companies that both produce great processors. and like arkain said if both of the 2 are equal in price but one is better performance wise than the other, whats the sense in buying the other one?

Isn't there one major national or international company that sells espresso? I will hunt for a mom-and-pop espresso stand before I buy from Starbucks. Ever since Starbucks started using those automated espresso machines their coffee tastes like something you would find on the floor in a barn. On top of that they are over priced, a mom-and-pop stand can cost you buck or two less for a better cup of coffee.
The real world isn't different than the computer world. One just needs to know what their priorities are.

Agreed on Starbucks vs. Mom & Pop coffee houses. Honestly, that analogy contradicts your logic in buying Cpus. With your coffee, you're willing to analyze cost/taste/etc to make a qualified decision. With your cpus, you buy because of the name on the box. Big difference.

I buy for price and performance, or did you miss this -
"...the CPU I'll purchase is what AMD has that I can afford, when I can afford it. It's not like AMD is going to charge me twice the price for the same performance as Intel would. I just won't have the fastest system on the planet..."
AMD usually sells their CPUs to be competitive with the same performing Intel chip, so I'm not throwing my money away or getting less than what I paid for. I may end up with a chip that doesn't overclock much, but I just play with overclocking I don't run my system overclocked.

 

[Arkaign]

Your original statement was "I'll probably get a Phenom, sometime next year or so.
Am I a fanboi? I don't consider myself one.
I do have name brands that I usually purchase, whether it's my Darigold milk, my Ford car or my AMD CPU. Do I stop buying Darigold because I get a bad gallon? No I just buy another gallon of milk."

combined with :

"..the CPU I'll purchase is what AMD has that I can afford"

Now, that means that you aren't taking performance into consideration. Notice I didn't say anything about overclocking related to your cpu decision.

If AMD has a Phenom 2.4ghz that costs $299, but is outperformed by a C2Q 6700 @ $280 at STOCK speeds, then yes, you're making a poor decision.

Buying one brand is ignorant at best. Get the best educated value for your purchase. AMD usually has a good price/performance ratio, but several times (without overclocking), they've been the loser in this area. Before the X2 price cuts following C2D's price cuts, a higher-performing C2D chip was LESS expensive than the AMD X2 choice in most cases.

 

[SolMiester]

Hi all, I'm just wondering, I mean I could be wrong, but everyone appears to be comparing Barca with a C2D, now I thought the Phemon was supposed to be 4 cores (native), wont the comparative Intel be the Q6600?

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: SolMiester
Hi all, I'm just wondering, I mean I could be wrong, but everyone appears to be comparing Barca with a C2D, now I thought the Phemon was supposed to be 4 cores (native), wont the comparative Intel be the Q6600?

A Q6600 is a C2D processor. The 2 in the C2D does not represent the number of cores. It means it is the second architecture in the core family line up.

Edit: A Q6600 is a C2Q processor.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: SolMiester
Hi all, I'm just wondering, I mean I could be wrong, but everyone appears to be comparing Barca with a C2D, now I thought the Phemon was supposed to be 4 cores (native), wont the comparative Intel be the Q6600?

A Q6600 is a C2D processor. The 2 in the C2D does not represent the number of cores. It means it is the second architecture in the core family line up.

Core2 you mean. There's Core2Duo and Core2Quad

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: SolMiester
Hi all, I'm just wondering, I mean I could be wrong, but everyone appears to be comparing Barca with a C2D, now I thought the Phemon was supposed to be 4 cores (native), wont the comparative Intel be the Q6600?

A Q6600 is a C2D processor. The 2 in the C2D does not represent the number of cores. It means it is the second architecture in the core family line up.

Core2 you mean. There's Core2Duo and Core2Quad

I thought about that when I went outside to smoke.