Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AMD Roadmap for Coming Year and Beyond

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the never-a-good-time-to-buy dept.

nexex writes: "With a new year comes new products, and AMD certainly has some new toys for us to drool over. The first of 2002 will see the release of "Thoroughbred," a version of the Athlon XP chip made on the more advanced 130-nanometer manufacturing process. The chip will cover 80 square millimeters in area, or 65 percent of the space of the "Northwood" Pentium 4 coming from Intel in early January. That chip measures 116 square millimeters, according to AMD estimates. For more, including info on Clawhammer, Sledgehammer, and all the Intel bashing you can handle, see here." I hope they don't really mean that "these new chips will also consume less heat than current AMD notebooks chips."

4 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. Hrm... by autopr0n · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hrm, the third paragraph is an intresting one. "Instead of a (Microsoft-Intel) duopoly, we are going to have a holy trinity," he said.

    I guess we know where AMD stands with regards to Linux :P

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  2. Re:Superior technology means nothing in the market by IntlHarvester · · Score: 4, Insightful

    (Nice karma whore post with the links! See you at 5:Insightful.)

    AMD is leading the market and producing technology that is faster, more reliable, and cheaper.

    Everything I've heard about AMD mobos is that they are *less* reliable than the Intel ones. For corporate customers (cf Dell), that's far more important than the 10-20% speedboost that AMD or better-than-SDRAM memory technology gives you.

    You have to get out of the gameboy thinking that performance matters uber alles. Any ol' 2001 CPU, even Celerons, are fast enough for the vast majority of users, even those using client-side Java. That puts the "value" somewhere other than the Quake FPS benchmarks over at Biff's Hardware.

    Furthermore, AMD might be cheaper on "Pricewatch", but that's not where Dell buys their CPUs. I would suspect that with the whole package (CPU/Mobo/RAM/Discounts/Kickbacks), Intel isn't a whole lot more expensive than AMD for a big OEM. You see those chips cheap on PriceWatch because the vendor has excess stock.

    --
    Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
  3. these names are getting awful by AA0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Appaloosa, a discount version of Thoroughbred."

    they must have been smoking something really heavy when they named that.

  4. They need way better motherboard support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've said it once, I'll say it again... No one ever wants to flat out say that the motherboards for AMD chips are a lot less well supported than the motherboards for Intel chips because they're so busy cheering for the underdog.

    But if you dig deep into, say, Tom's Hardware Guide: Another factor is the stability and product quality of a system: while all Athlon processors suffered from occasional instability in our tests, the Pentium 4 platform ran without a glitch. (http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011031/xpvs p4-15.html [tomshardware.com])

    Now, for me and I'm guessing a lot of people, system stability is far more important than a few percent performance increase. Since these machines are so closely matched and overpowered anyway, I'd like to see more emphasis on other factors like stability. More than a single sentence buried in one review, anyway. If these things are crashing during the tests, I want to know about it with a big red X on the graph...

    Or just the chance to stop having to download freakin' 4-in-1 drivers for my KT7A... if I had known about the KT7A Faq (http://www.viahardware.com/faq/kt7/kt7faq.htm) before buying one, I probably would've passed... but all the "review" sites just a good things to say about it...