[AMD vs. Intel] Why the Buzz on Hammer Just Won't Quit

VIA Hardware ^ | 7-26-2002 | Joel Hruska

[JameRetief]

ping

[Bommer]

If its still running Windows, it'll still perform like $hit!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Thanks for the ping and posting the article!

I don't know if anyone is up this late but we'll see:

To find all articles tagged or indexed using tech_index

Click here: tech_index

[RightWhale]

The question is whether Intel can match this. Guess: Yes they can and then some.

[JameRetief]

You're welcome.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

You might find this intersting!

[JameRetief]

My guess is that they won't be able to match the hammer line for a long time. Because Intel is going to be segmented (32 bit P4 for home and 64 bit Itanium for servers and other high end applications), it will have a tough time fighting the unified hammer series.

Combined with being iterations of the same hardware (less production diversions), the hammer lines will be able to scale well, thanks to the pipeline changes, and be even more competitive in the raw computer performance, thanks to a variety of innovative technological achievements.

From the roadmaps that I have seen from Intel, nothing is looking promising. And unfortunately for Intel (not for consumers), they let AMD gain a considerable foothold and gain credibility. Intel's FUD machine isn't as able to stigmatize AMD as the low end anymore.

But fortunately, Intel does have the fab (chip fabrication facilities) advantage. They will have to rely on volume of supplies of their chips and hope that AMD will not be able to deliver high quantities of hammer chips from their fabs.

There are other reasons why I think that AMD will be the market leader for the foreseeable future when hammer is released, but the above are good indications.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Isn't competition wonderful.

What are we going to do with all of the processing power that is headed our way?

[Drango]

If this won't help download nudie pictures faster, what good is it?

[reg45]

I'm so happy to see AMD succeed with the Athlon and perhaps the Opteron.

I can't fault Intel's chips either. I'm just glad to see serious competition.

Intel's attitude about microprocessors was similar to the NEA's attitude on government schools.

Intel - You can use any chip you want as long as it is an Intel chip.

NEA - You can go to any school you want as long as it is a government school.

In both cases, competition is good.

[Tailback]

I've built my last 4 computers and the problem with AMD CPU's hasn't been their CPU's, it's been the chipsets and motherboards to go with them. There's always been problems with the chipsets for AMD systems because they rely on Taiwanese companies to make them while Intel comes out with their own chipsets optimized for their CPU's. This means that there's always compatability issues for the AMD systems. Nothing that can't be fixed with driver updates, flashing, etc, but sometimes more trouble than it's worth. That having been said I'm currently running an Athlon 1gig that's rock solid with Win98. I bless AMD often for bringing real competition to the CPU market and bringing Intel back to reality.

[Charles H. (The_r0nin)]

Actually, though I love AMD (my last CPU was a 1.1Ghz T-Bird), I recently bought a 1.6 Ghz P4. The single greatest flaw in the AMD Athlons has been the cooling problems. My new 1.6Ghz P4 has never risen above 34° C, whereas my Athlon was frequently running at 53-57° C with the best cooling fan I could buy. On a hot day, I could see random crashes from overheating.

While the AMD does give a slightly better performance at equal speeds (especially gaming aps), I had to choose the stablilty this time around. But, if AMD can rebound, I wouldn't hesitate to buy another CPU from them...

[JameRetief]

My first motherboard for my Athlon 1.3 Ghz used an AMD designed chipset (AMD 670 Northbridge, if I recall correctly). Never had a problem with it. Now I am upgraded to an AMD 1.6 Ghz CPU using a motherboard with a VIA KT 333 chipset. Still no problems. Choosing an AMD designed chipset when the chipsets are new and then later moving to an established third party chipset when the performance and stability increases is always a safe path.

But the upcoming Hammer lines will have the chipsets integrated with the CPU, so the chipset issue won't be a problem.

[tomkat]

may i open the floor for praise/flames of the Duron ?

my (celery 633) box isn't worth jumping to an athlon, but the amd site has durons for dirt cheap ($64)...

[BJClinton]

What are we going to do with all of the processing power that is headed our way?

Don't worry, the next release of Windows will consume it all.

[JameRetief]

my (celery 633) box isn't worth jumping to an athlon, but the amd site has durons for dirt cheap ($64)...

Depending on where you buy, you can get a much more powerful Athlon for a few dollars more than the Duron. If you do a search on Pricewatch.com, you can find even better deals than the one you have listed. Never go by the official price listing from AMD. The prices you can get them for in the market is alot less. You can get an Athlon 1.33GHz 266 FSB for $62, only $7 more than the $55 Duron 1.3 Ghz. And if you get the Athlon 1500+ (an upgraded version of the 1.33 Ghz listed above), it's only $63.

Obviously, you will want to search through a few sites to find a company you would trust to order from, but you shouldn't have to pay much more. Either way, you will be better off spending $10 or $20 more for an Athlon rather than a Duron. It makes your purchase more future proof.

[ContentiousObjector]

We are looking at a Hammer running Linux for DB2 to free up some expensive Sun big iron, this thing is going to rape Itanium, when not even Intel who is probably closer to Dell than they are to Microsoft is throwing up on the Itanium, that should be red flashing light that it sucks.

I also have very good reason to believe IBM is going to ship eServers with the Hammer,

However I remain frustrated that we are unable to purchase workstation quality Athlon systems from a top tier vendor, such as HP or Dell, however my daughter doesn't seem to have a problem with the situation as we are paying her $50 a box to assemble Athlon systems and upgrade older machines.

[Dat]

Despite AMD's excellent chip designs, they still seem to have to undercut Intel's prices. On the business side they are no where near as profitable as Intel, which seriously curtails their future prospects. Who knows how long they can keep up with Intel's R&D budget.

[JameRetief]

Oh, how I wish I could remember where I read an article covering Intel and AMD prices, R&D, and profits.

Basically, the articles contents described why AMD can undersell Intel, spend less on R&D, and not make as much money in general and still be able to gain marketshare and be able to satisfy their profit needs.

It was a well researched and in depth article. I will see if I might be able to find it.