Slashdot Mirror
Intel Snags PC Mhz Crown Back From AMD
textral writes "The Adrenaline Vault is running an article about Intel announcing the new jewel in its crown, the 800mhz PC, again foisting the 'fastest processor on the market' belt away from AMD's 750mhz Athlon. " Its fun watching the big boys do battle over silly little things like megahertz. Every time they up the ante, my poor P2 feels slower and slower. Jerks.
And of course any new processor from either Intel or AMD is going to be sucking up more electrical power than the last one. Is it really responsible to keep pushing people toward higher and higher power consumption just to get some trivial extra speed that isn't even apparent (i.e. most applications stopped seeming faster around 133MHz, games and rendering packages excepted). Look at 3dfx's recent announcements. Their next generation graphics card uses so much wattage that it needs to be hooked to a hard drive power connector because the power on the bus isn't enough. And the generation after that needs to plug directly into the wall (no joke; this was mentioned in recent a 3dfx press release). This is beyond stupid.
Whatever you may wish to believe, the Athlon is a better chip at any clock speed than Intel's PIII. I, for one, have made a point to be Intel free as much as I can. All 3 PC's that I own are AMD powered. If I could afford to, I would go with something with more raw horsepower, but for the $69 I spent on my K6-2 400, I don't really care that Intel just released a chip that costs over $850. Similarly, I wouldn't drop $700 on an Athlon. Soon, those prices will fall, and I am content with trailing edge technology. In a few months, I'll be sitting playing with a quad Athlon system that I'll put together for less than the cost of a single PIII system today. No, there is no pissing contest. Intel couldn't piss their way out of a wet paper sack. AMD can, Compaq's alpha could, and any number of other fine chips out there could, but piss on Intel.
Windows is going the way of phlogiston...
http://www.tomshardware.com usually does a good report on the best bang for the buck. Coincidently they LOVE the Athlon and found it more stable than PIII using Win98, but what machine is stable with Win98 :) I have a Pentium Pro 200 and I'm pretty happy.
If you'd bothered to inform yourself about the issue, you'd know that the alleged "off" switch can be cracked. Thus, your statement is as inane as a spammer's "remove" instructions.
/.
/. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
Anything in software can be erased (repeatedly wipe-erased, if you really want to be sure) by the user, after which it is inaccessible to crackers because it simply no longer exists. This is not the case with an embedded chip ID.
This implies a certain lack of worth for said feature, but it also implies complete harmlessness for those with even the vaguest clue.
Someone who is unclear on the concept that software is fundamentally different from hardware is in a remarkably poor position to lecture people about their cluefulness level.
/.
/. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
AMD do have a 1GHz Athlon on the market - it's in the Kryotech SuperG machine, retailing at $2200 I think and available now.
Since Kryotech stuck with AMD through the leaner periods until now, it's nice to see their cooling technology get a worthy processor.
Of course, the general media haven't caught up to this, which is odd given that there was a howling crowd of posters in one of the talkbacks to an article on ZDNet looking at the race to 1GHz all wondering why the Kryotech machines aren't being more widely publicized. No wonder I keep bumping into conspiracy theories about Intel 'warning off' OEMs and PC builders... :-)
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
so far, sharkyextreme.com is the only place i've seen benchmarking the p3 over the athlon Mhz vs. Mhz. Every other is the opposite.
so should we base everything on one website's benchmarks?
They call it SledgeHammer. I think this press release indicates that AMD isn't waiting around to be crushed by IA-64.
A 64-bit architecture with NO speed penalty for IA-32 programs, plus a super-fast (like 20x) I/O bus. Booo-yaaah!
I'm cool like a fool in a swimming p-p-pfft-pool
I have an AMD Athlon 700, 192 MB PC100 RAM, and 13 GB Ultra ATA 7200 RPM drive. These results are from my workstation system running RedHat 6.1.
Apache 1.3.9:
less than 30 seconds (25-30 sec. on three different runs) to compile Apache 1.3.9 from source with DSO support the only configuration option.
Tomcat 3.0
42-47 seconds to build Tomcat 3.0 from source (three different runs for comparison). Compiler used was javac shipped with Blackdown 1.2.2rc3 JDK.
2.2.13 kernel
Just under 2min 30 sec. to compile with a pretty standard config for my system (no sound, no SCSI suport) on two runs.
Here are some enlightening links on AMD Athlon performance and benchmarks:
Note: none of the benchmarks I gave above used any custom compiler optimization settings.
"Sometimes the light's all shinin' on me, other times I can barely see."--R. Hunter
Directory Services
NIS, NIS+, LDAP, NDS...
USB
Has been available for Linux for some time now. Meanwhile, Microsoft has had USB support for NT 4.0, but has been sitting on it to encourage the upgrade to NT 5.0. Right! That's a winner...
High Speed networking
??? AFAIK, Linux supports any networking you have drivers for.
good multi proc support
Linux's SMP works very well on some things, poorer on others. Just like NT. The Mindcraft problem was the single-threaded TCP/IP stack, which has been fixed in 2.3. Next...
standard application base
That old thing? Please. There are thousands of POSIX applications that do everything I want to. (NT cannot run many of them, BTW.) The only thing I lack on native Linux is a lot of games, and Windows 2000 doesn't score too well in the compatability department there...
good web server performance
Which explains why Apache has twice the installed base of IIS, and IIS is dropping...
stability improvements
I'd prefer an OS that was stable to begin with...
You're free to use Windows 2000, but me, I'll stick with Linux any day.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
Uh..Exactly...well...minus the nerd boy thing. The Althlon will run the EXACT same code as the Intels. So you can compare the same App! not just bench a certain task....And unfortunately (or fortunately if you are a hard core gamer) this is what is currently driving the market. You think all us Techno wenies are driving the market? Well...not really. If you only run freeware stuff that comes with source and you want to port all that code to an Alpha that's fine....but for I would guess 70% of the retail customers out there this is not the case....
i'm running a p2-350 at 467mhz(3.5x133mhz) w/ 256mb of pc133 SDRAM. it's doing what i need it to do.. I get about 1.5mil keys/sec in CSC, and about 8hrs per work unit in SETI@Home. All this hype surrounding these 600, 700, and 800mhz processors, and I couldn't care less. My P2 does just fine. :)
That's bullox, SPECwise! (haha, avoiding the flame! :) Eyes on the fp side... And I think the SPECtrometer is not doing any Velocity Engine aka. AltiVec work.
CPU MHz int fp
G3 400 18.8 12.2
Intel Pentium II 400 15.8 12.4
Intel Pentium III 450 18.6 13.6
G4 450 21.4 20.4
K7 600 27.2 21.6
Okay....let's goto sharky's site...the same site that was hashed all over the net when they posted their first Athlon reviews that said the Athlon wasn't faster clock for clock with the PIII when there was half a dozen sites that said that it was...Hrm.....Which would you believe?
Okay....let's goto sharky's site...the same site that was hashed all over the net when they posted their first Athlon reviews that said the Athlon wasn't faster clock for clock with the PIII when there was half a dozen sites that said that it was...Hrm.....Which would you believe? Also, what are you gonna put that brand spanking new PIII in?
Ace's Hardware already has a review posted of the Athlon 800 Mhz. The Athlon design allows amazing speed increases. AMD does not know how fast they can get it up to with their new 0.18 process. PIII, on the other hand, is 'maxed' out. Intel is having tremendous difficulty actually manufacturing higher PIII speeds with reasonable yields due to the PIII's dated design. The other unmentioned virtue of Athlon is its incredible stability, something PIII has never been known for, even if you don't mind the embedded serial number thoughtfully provided in each unit by Intel.
I'm getting sick of this...AMD and Intel are just doing patty-cake over the chip market. "AMD ups Intel by 50MHz", "Intel ups AMD by 33MHz", "AMD ups Intel by 16MHz", "Intel ups AMD by 50MHz"...
The last important thing to happen in the chip market was AMD debuting the Athlon. It was a new chip, not an echo of a past one. New technology, not new numbers, finally allowed AMD to leap over Intel.
When will AMD go dual? When will Intel get RAMBUS and the i820 working right? When will AMD get a full 200MHz bus with 200MHz SDRAM? When will Intel try and streamline a new form factor motherboard?
AMD and Intel aren't innovating right now. They're just focused on a race for the first to break the GHz barrier. Until they pass it, computer users will only be getting "bigger," rather than "better."
Uhh, cryotech already has the Athlon running at 1000. Just because it is cooled, doesn't mean that it is not "officialy" at that speed. If that were the case, may Cray machines were "unoficially" overclocked from the factory =)
Changes from P2 to PIII:
I don't have any pictures of the P2 vs. PIII dies, but I'm certain they are NOT the same. There are enough changes, minute though they may be, to consider P2 and P3 different lines.
marotti.com
Not anymore, apparently...
http://www.ix.de/newsticker/data/ as-16.12.99-000/
The Athlon is now faster than the Alpha.
I just wish they'd have competition like this in the network bandwidth arenas...
My PC's are fast enough for me to work on right now, it's just getting all the damned data I need takes forever.
When I can get OC-3 to my house without having to sell some limbs/organs on E-Bay, then i'll be happy... Who cares how fast I process the data when I can't get it to my processor fast enough?
"Fuzzy Wuzzy was a bear, Fuzzy Wuzzy had no hair... Fuzzy Wuzzy wasn't fuzzy was he?"
The reason P-III's are compatible with P-II motherboards is because there are hardly any differences between the two chips. It's really just a bunch of misleading marketing hype. People see the P-III name and assume that the difference is as radical as the difference between the Pentium and the P-II. In actuality, the technology difference between the P-III and the P-II is more similar to the difference between the Pentium and the Pentium MMX. And the speed difference of similarly clocked chips is even less.
Watch for AMD to beat this by 50MHz or so pretty soon...
:-)
800 Mhz Athlons are already out. I'm not familiar with the exact details but suffice to say that the K7 was designed to scale much more easily in clock speed than Intel's parts. Coupled with the good luck AMD is having with yields it looks like Intel is going to be playing catchup for the foreseeable future.
And don't forget that and the same clockspeed Athlon delivers up to 40% more floating point power, making this the world's finest Quake II engine. Then there are the 3D now instructions.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
I'm willing to bet, however, that their 5-7% performance increase will cost you about 25-30% in cost.
It seems as if processor are getting faster every month. This is really good but how about the rest of the industry, memory manufacturers and especially HD companies. Sure clock speed will make a difference, but just think about the performance gains from say faster storage. These guys have to catch up, because what good is a really fast CPU if it has to wait for slow I/O devices. This is where we'll start to see even bigger performance gains.
Are they really crunching numbers with all those cycles or are they making trades? In my limited experience with investment bankers, they only want the cycles so they are "cutting edge" and really don't have apps that require extremely fast processors (e.g. Biff has a 1GHz PC and so does Chad, where is mine?)
I draw a line between my various computers. Each one serves a purpose. I do most of my writing on an an IBM PS/2 Model 30. That's an 8086 with 640K of RAM and a 20MB hard drive.
God I love that IBM hardware. That PS/2 keyboard is my favorite. I have a whole Microchannel 486 server to set up with Linux one day. IBM sure can build solid stuff! Even though they last longer than they should in the computer industry.
Linux is only free if your time has no value. Windows is only free if you threaten to use Linux.
What's the fastest processor shipping in volume -- AMD or Intel?
-- mikem
Really! Just for my interest what software do you use?
Linux is only free if your time has no value. Windows is only free if you threaten to use Linux.
now this is just bunk, i've already USED a 900MHz kryotech AMD, so what's with all this stuff about 800MHz computers? and i'm not "privy" to any computers that other people AREN'T, the computer was at a local computer store, along with flyers (pertaining to the 800 and 900MHz kryotech systems) for people interested in purchasing.
I am curious to what other people think on getting the fastest processor available at any given moment. The thing is, they (Intel/AMD/etc) seem to be going ahead full speed, but the rest of the industry is quite away behind in terms of actually utilizing the speed. When is it ever the best time to buy the newest and fastest?
If it cant run my bloated software then what is it worth :)
LW
I wonder whether the 800Mhz Intel outperforms a 750 Athlon.
I seem to remember reading some Tom's Hardware benchmarking results awhile back that had the 700mhz Athlon outperforming the 733 Coppermine.
But then again benchmarks can be slanted too.
Over at Ace's Hardware, they've got a news item about AMD's forthcoming announcement of an 800 MHz Athlon, supposedly today as well. And (AFAIK) unlike Intel, AMD's supposed to be able to be shipping them in volume very soon. Intel's still got volume problems, especially with the 800 MHz chip.
I don't trust anyone or anything said from somone with an email from pimp.org especially when they advertise for a company that charges: $1000 a year for a pop account
Most people can not name another chip maker other than Intel. Market share is made by marketing in this case. Intel=Kleenix
Bull... If that where the case then no one would buy AMD at all. Go look on those shopping channels. They cater to non-techies and they usually sell both AMD systems and Intel systems. They just don't tell you it's another companies processor, cause they don't care.
Linux is only free if your time has no value. Windows is only free if you threaten to use Linux.
I thinks they both create good chipsets but this little battle royale has reaped benefits for consumers. If Intel had it their way the P2 would just be introduced. What if M$ had a competitor like AMD to Intel. Oh well, could it be linux... lets hope so.
This isn't competetion. It's an oligolopy that seems to be getting smaller. Oligolopolies often collude with each other to optimize profits by selling at high prices. It's like coke a pepsi, they used to be real expensive til all the unbranded crap started coming on the market.
No, it's not like that at all. Cars that can go 250MPh (show me one) are irrelevant because there is no speed limit that high. Unless I've missed something, there is no speed limit on processors.
What does the speed limit have to do with how fast you drive a car?
n/t
I don't want just one fast AMD or Pentium CPU, I want 2. Slap those puppies in a dual mobo, and let the Q3A begin.
The only thing stopping me is money for the rig. *sigh*
It just doesn't matter to most people, at least practically-speaking. As people pointed out in a recent discussion, even though it doesn't matter, people will still buy the hottest chip around. Very much like how people buy the greatest SUVs, the fastest Porches, etc.
Agreed, but some people do need to crunch serious numbers, and it's good if you're running large servers and suchlike. But if you're just running Office and reading email, 800mhz isn't going to help you much. However, 800mhz CPUs will drive down the price of a 500mhz {insert prefered CPU here} chip, so overall everyone (performance freaks and "normal" people) wins.
But consider that VW does well with their "0-60? Yes." advertisments. How long will it be until a processor company pops up with a similar ad campaign? I give it 12-18 months.
Celerons already have that reputation among geeks, though it's not advertised as such (in fact, I don't remember ever seeing an ad for celerons (or athlons!), just P3s). I know a coupla people running dual overclocked celerons that they got fairly cheap. However, I detest Intel and their bloated architechture, so I would probably get a K6-3 or an Athlon anyway . Yes, same bloated architechure, but at least AMD didn't create it. And from what I've heard the Athlon internals are Alpha-like, which is cool (it would also help explain the performance!).
I fail to understand people like this. First, the Processor ID in PIII's can be turned off. TURN THE GODDAMN THING OFF if you don't like it. Second, this could be a great boon to online stock trading/commerce. However, this person is locking themselves out of a potentially innovative company (which may be realized with this new competition). Too many ignorant people (conspiracy theorists, perhaps?) make dumb statements like the above. And let's face it, folks, Intel has vast resources that AMD lacks. If Intel wants to win, they can. All they have to do is buy victory, whether it's pumping massive amounts of cash into R&D, or licensing technology as AMD has with Athlon (note, however, that I am not condoning Intel's behavior).
Intel(R) Pentium(R) III processor- Advanced Processor Technology for Powerful DesktopPC
The Pentium III processor sets a new baseline for high-performance business desktop computing, and is also available for entry-level workstations and servers. And now, the new mobile Pentium III processor enables greater productivity on the go, at speeds of up to 500 MHz.
Right here, straight from the source. 500MHz is the max that a PIII will do. The rest must be overclocked. I hope that those of you who bought >500MHz chips don't melt 'em.
marotti.com
From the desk of : What's the deal anyhow, the market is pushing bigger faster on a monthly basis. When most of the moronic fools on this planet will never do more than type out a letter on their computer. This is a frikkin' Wintel conspiracy. Those dumbasses are reeling people into a massive scam...what's the system requirements for WinBlows 2000? 128Mb Ram P3-333...give me a break! My P150 (no MMX!) 64 Mb 72pin SD RAM running RH6.1 and Blackbox outperforms their ass....I think I could vomit...but *sigh* 800Mhz...Quake III would run sooooooo smooth ;-) Intel , Microsoft CRAP.... AMD -- I love you guys Cheers
Let's check out the www.thechipmerchant.com ...Hmm, no 750Mhz PIII there, but the Athlon 750Mhz is there. Well it must have been a fluke, let's look at pricewatch.com. Gee, there isn't even a search category for PIII 750, plenty of Athlon 750's though. You're about as likely to find a PIII 750 (or 800) as Boss Hog is likely to turn down a pork chop. Intel can take the crown when they aren't selling vaporware.
Okay....but kinda hard to compare an Alpha to a Intel or AMD dirrectly because they don't use the x86 instruction set! Apples to apples is why it's a big comparison....And the really great thing is that the only that really differs between the two computing platforms is the motherboard and said processor. I guess you can argue RAM now with RAMBUS.....but that's another sad story.
Looks to me like they don't even sell the vapor 733mhz PIII yet. Hmmm... Athlon 750 is still selling. Seems to me Intel doesn't even have anything close yet.
1Ghz Althon (granted its overclocked. but safely and guarunteed for 1 year).
been out for a month. Super G from Kryotech.
TomsHardwareGuide has reported on the easy of overclocking Althons and the problems getting a PIII to just go 50Mhz faster.
-Z
I'm afraid. I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it. My mind is going.
Hey all this whining about the new higher speed processors and how you can't afford them and blah blah - at least we have lots of competition here on the high-end processors pushing the price down on all the older processors. If it weren't for that, my lower-speed processor would not have been as cheap as it was, and Celeron 366's would still be $500 or something...bring it on! (so I can get my next cheap processor upgrade!!!)
An acquaintance and I just did a POV-ray scene test. My PII/333 against his PIII/500. His was 15 minutes shorter than my 11 hours 47 minutes. (He also such off the error message stream regarding degenerate triangles which may account for all the diffrence.) It's De Buss, Boss, De Buss. I can't wait to see what benchmark is created to make 750 and 800MHz CPUs look worth buying when installed on 75-100MHz busses. Will it be how long it takes to ten thousand iterations of the routine that fits entirely in the on-board cache? Is there any other that could make it look worth buying?
EOM
Do you think this would be happening if there wasn't competition from AMD? Homey don't think so... ;-)
They used an i820 mobo and RDRAM for the P3, but just normal 100MHz SDRAM for the K7. I'd like to see a result from a benchmark that didn't need much memory bandwidth. Also, the 133MHz bus of the fastest P3 will help it a lot when all it has to do is stuff bytes into an accelerator card.
It might be that you can't buy RDRAM K7 mobos, in which case AMD needs to get some made.
#define X(x,y) x##y
#define X(x,y) x##y
Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X(peter@cordes ,
Celerons already have that reputation among geeks, though it's not advertised as such (in fact, I don't remember ever seeing an ad for celerons (or athlons!), just P3s).
You know, you're absolutely right, they really are filling that niche. I hadn't thought about Celeron a) because it's Intel, an existing company and b) they don't advertise it as such.
I wonder if, upon advertising it appropriately, Intel could have Celeron capture that market?
We're stuck with old instructions that no one use, which in turns slows down the CPU. We need ludicrous GHz speeds to match CPUs with half and even the third of the MHz speed (PIII/K7 .vs. Alpha anyone? Or even easier to compare, PIII/K7 .vs. G4 Altivec core anyone?). Still, who needs all that number-crunching speed? Well that [TWD] tag suggest some clan game playing, therefore I need all that speed, especially for Q3, and to continue checking keys for d.net and to hope to get that 2k euros prize after CSC finishes. :) Besides that, I wouldn't need anything better than a i386, linux, and an old (read: quick) word processor ! (Oops I forgot XMMS.. ok let's say a P90...)
Like the chipset, right?
Tom's Hardware recently ran benchmarks of Intel's chipsets. What I got from this (which may be wildly inaccurate :) is that the i820 (which is probably what you'll get if you buy a P3) is in many cases no better than the 440BX. In order to get a real performance boost, you'll need the i840, which Intel isn't yet releasing in mass quantities, and they're marketing it as a workstation (not desktop) chipset. hmm.
anyway, I've got a P2-350 and don't plan on upgrading anytime soon (and it'll probably be an AMD when I do. :)
--- this comment is presented in WIDE SCREEN STEREO!!!
The fact is that the high end processors of today will be next week's surplus. Whether this translates into better affordable PC's in the future is another question, but it seems like it can't hurt.
In the end, this has nothing to do with what you or I buy, but it has everything to do with the industry and what seems like the flagging domminance of Intel. People like to buy from the manufacturer that makes the fastest chips. Even if they can't afford top of the line.
Powers&8^]
>This is like cars that do 0-60 in 2.4
>milliseconds and can go up to 250mph.
No, it's not like that at all. Cars that can go 250MPh (show me one) are irrelevant because there is no speed limit that high. Unless I've missed something, there is no speed limit on processors.
>It just doesn't matter to most people, at least
>practically-speaking
To the unwashed masses, it doesn't matter; but that's not who the chipmakers are targetting in their first releases. I work for an investment bank whose traders won't be happy with 1GHz; faster math processing = faster trading = more profit.
Also, as someone else pointed out: how important was the PII to the "average person" when it first came out? Just as important as this speed bump, I'd say. Newer, faster technology at the top pushes prices down at the bottom and all the way up. When an even newer, faster technology comes out your "average joe" won't buy anything less than n-1 tier technology.
-- "In order to have power, I must be taken seriously." -Mojo Jojo
From everything I've heard (two places IIRC) Tom's Hardware and Gamespot a PIII with the 820 mobo and RDRAM actually runs faster than an equivalently clocked Athlon. Now, yes it is running a different memory, but as far as I know, Athlon doesn't support that memory (at least right now.) And the memory is VERY expensive (~$700-$1000 for 128MB), but if you are going for the FASTEST possible at this moment, I think it goes to INTEL. Another slight hit towards Athlon is that it isn't stable in all configurations. (according to gamespot )
Now I have to say that for some odd reason I feel biased towards Intel even though they are the giant. Maybe it's because AMD has underperformed in the past.
However, I will say that I'm happy AMD came out with their Athlon. Competition can only be good, and if they can take the crown, it will mean that I can buy an even faster processor. I don't have any problem with that.
Sorry, it seems that my links didn't work correctly so I'm reposting
From everything I've heard (two places IIRC) Tom's Hardware and Gamespot a PIII with the 820 mobo and RDRAM actually runs faster than an equivalently clocked Athlon. Now, yes it is running a different memory, but as far as I know, Athlon doesn't support that memory (at least right now.) And the memory is VERY expensive (~$700-$1000 for 128MB), but if you are going for the FASTEST possible at this moment, I think it goes to INTEL. Another slight hit towards Athlon is that it isn't stable in all configurations. (according to gamespot)
Now I have to say that for some odd reason I feel biased towards Intel even though they are the giant. Maybe it's because AMD has underperformed in the past.
However, I will say that I'm happy AMD came out with their Athlon. Competition can only be good, and if they can take the crown, it will mean that I can buy an even faster processor. I don't have any problem with that.
Another link that I just found:
Gamespot
If you look about midway down for
The Coppermine/RDRAM/820 combination clearly outpaces other solutions, including the Athlon 700. But the performance crown lies much more uneasily on this system's head. AMD has just announced the 750MHz Athlon, which is built using a 0.18 micron semiconductor process, similar to that used for Coppermine.
This states that Intel is faster, although not by much. I doubt, however, that it can be considered faster because of a mere 33MHz, so my feeling is that the overall package of a PIII system is better than the Athlon. (The CPU may not be any better, but once you plug it into something, it starts getting better.) Note also, the cost of increasing to RDRAM and the 820 chipset isn't very cheap, but it does seem faster.
All Athlons 700 Mhz and below use .5 multiplier for the L2 cache with respect to CPU speed. The 750 Mhz part (and 800) runs with a .4 multiplier. This means that L2 cache of a 750 runs at 300 Mhz, a significant reduction from 350 Mhz L2 cache of the 700 Mhz. Intel is now including 256KB of cache on die with the P3's which means that L2 cache gets that same boost in Mhz as the processor. The performance lead the athlon's held over earlier P3's (500-600 Mhz range) is evaporating. Still though, sometime early next year AMD will add L2 on die, which should give it a decent boost.
for more information look here:
www.anandtech.com
Kryotech's 1GHz Athlon system, "SuperG", is already shipping. Tom's hardware reviewed it more than a month ago, and it was very stable, and very, very fast. To quote Tom's:
Cool edit pro. I've also tried Cakewalk, Digital Orchestrator Pro, and a few other demos. I always come back to Cool Edit, though, because I really like it.
--- "So THAT's what an invisible barrier looks like!" - Time Bandits
As these companies battle for the tittle of speed Like greek goddess fighting over a certain apple, I wonder how much is fundamentally true about who deserves it. The great problem is their are no accredited independent testing faclities to verify these claims. Each company touts the results of what it's lab said were the results. Without independant accredited testing you are at the mercy of the companies PR machine and how they say their product(s) is the best. Not that companies would ever lie to us about their product(s).
I would never do something as stupid as buing the latest and most expensive CPU. I can't afford an Athlon 800, but when faster models come out, the price of slower models comes down - JUST HOW IS THAT A BAD THING?
It's not - check www.sharkyextreme.com for a thorough benchmark comparison of the Athlon 700/750 and the P3 733/750/800. P3 800 is a good bit faster than the Athlon 750
preannounced
Whether your car does 0-60 in 2 seconds or 20, it still accelerates quickly enough to enter the interstate at a reasonable speed. In 10 years, the rate at which your car currently accelerates will still be sufficient. That's because Micro$soft doesn't build the roads. If cars were like computers, then in 5 years, the entrance ramps would be no more than 1/10th of their current length. In other words, your car that blows everything off the road now would be the minimum required to safely get on the interstate.
Furthermore, whether or not you run Linux is immaterial. There will always be new software that pushes the limits of current hardware, and as hardware advances, so will the software. Just because you don't agree with Micro$oft's philosophy that it suddenly takes a P-III 800 with 256 MB RAM for your son to write a book report doesn't mean that there won't be something you want to do that requires faster hardware. Whether it is voice recognition, 3D animation, home automation, or AI, something will come out that will make you need faster hardware. And if you don't believe me, look at your current software and OS and tell me you would just as soon run it on a 4MB 486SX/25Mhz.
www.sharkyextreme.com - the p3/800 runs over the Athlon750.
And a Cray is faster than an Alpha-based PC. But you're still severely limited by lack of software. You may have a rocket-powered Lincoln Continental, but you're not going to get very far without the proper fuel.
I wonder if, upon advertising it appropriately, Intel could have Celeron capture that market?
They probably could, but I doubt they want to. All the geeks I know who drool over celerons do so because, overclocked, they run about as reliably as gravity...so they get some incredible benchmarks on them. The celeron 300 can be easily and safely OC'd to somethng like 550Mhz. But I really don't see Intel advertising chips along these lines, since it would probably detract from higher-end chip sales.
Besides, all the people who are even vaguely qualified to OC their system are pretty much guaranteed to know about celerons...
Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
It's not your Network that's slowing your computers down, it's your IDE bus.
:) I've never waited that long for a level to load, ever... and it takes away from the game.
The latest technology leap in HDD's has been ATA-66, which realistically only pushes 20MB/s which is only marginally faster than a $30 100MB ethernet card.
Now with gigabit ethernet cards, although they are expensive, are fast enough to easily saturate your system bus. Once we finally get away from slow hard drives and buses, we can really see improvements in overall end-user-apparent speed.
Anyone who has attempted to play Wheel of Time knows what I mean
Remove the NOSPAM to spam me...
I'll keep my hand up, thank you very much! The K6 was an excellent processor that had a crappy FPU, that's all. I've been a fan of AMD since the 386 days, and I'll back them until they break Intel's balls!!
GO AMD!
nineteenth of January. And transmeta's webpage is at www.transmeta.com.
SSE - makes 3dNow improvements irrelevant.
Agreed. The FPU is an enormous waste if you ask me. The K6 is an awesome chip. I'm using a K6-166 for my server right now. If only Intel hadn't stopped making the 486SX :(
One word for you: Beowulf. ;)
PS to moderators: This is not a troll!
First, the Processor ID in PIII's can be turned off. TURN THE GODDAMN THING OFF if you don't like it.
Yes, and when they made the announcement that you could turn it off, they said the only way to turn it back on was through rebooting. The next week someone had figured out how to turn it on in software without rebooting. Real secure.
Too many ignorant people (conspiracy theorists, perhaps?) make dumb statements like the above.
And what exactly are YOUR credentials? No offense here, but it doesn't take an idiot to make the connection between UIDs that a browser can identify and send to a company and cookies. Honestly cookies are bad enough, but adding a unique identifier to them such that you personally are easily identifiable without going through your ISP is worse.
Gateway already selling AMD k7 http://gigabuys.us.dell.com/store/catalog.asp?Word _Phrase=amd http://www.theregister.co.uk/991216-000005.html :)
my nick is _EKG_ we all know amd has the 1ghz hidden and is just waiting for intel to catch up!
I find it ironic that you give so much credit to Intel for maintaining backward compatibility. AMD has kept socket 7 alive for over a year since Intel abandoned it in favor of slot one and later socket 370. The also kept performance competitive enough that I find it hard to believe that Intel only left socket 7 for technical reasons. The big buzz about Intel's slot one when it came out was that no other chip company was going to be able to make a cpu that could function in it.
Also, Intel has created socket 370, if you got one of the motherboards supporting socket 370 it looks like you are going to be out of luck when the new P3s come out in socket form, because Intel decided to change a few pins around.
Kudos to Intel.
Make sure your motherboard supports 1.65V, some older ones only support 2.0V or more.
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
The next step up in speed is great since it makes the lower end processors cheaper but why the hell are most of you whning? AMD is better, no Intel is better. Blah blah blah. I'd like to see either company come out with a system architecture that was wholly faster than the previous one. A few frames in Quake or a minute faster on a scene rendering in 3DS isn't going to impress me much. If I saw a doubling of the framerate for Quake I would be much impressed. I read somewhere AMD might be planning a 64bit x86 processor, doing the AltiVec thang and running 32bit code on a 128bit core. Four 32bit instructions get run on a single clock which speeds things up a good deal. AMD just needs to givure out how to speed up the rest of the system, DDRRAM is one step. So is a 133mhz PCI bus. Maybe x86 will stick around a little bit longer...
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
Excuse me, but I just wanted to state that you are a total jackass. The above poster has a legitimate reason to say he doesnt buy Intel processors. It is his opinion, and there are good sides and bad sides to the issue. But saying his opinion is dumb just proves your own intelligence level - as does the statement that Intel could win if they wanted to. Do you know anything about the current state of the chip sector? Intel is having severe problems producing a (in most opinions) inferior processor and are having even more problems making the chipset supposed to go with it. Oh, yes, and just because they dont WANT to win..... Sure, whatever you say, genius.
Vapor chips indeed!
8-P ppphhbbbbbbbbt!
Excuse me, but I just wanted to state that you are a total jackass. The above poster has a legitimate reason to say he doesnt buy Intel processors. It is his opinion, and there are good sides and bad sides to the issue. But saying his opinion is dumb just proves your own intelligence level - as does the statement that Intel could win if they wanted to. Do you know anything about the current state of the chip sector? Intel is having severe problems producing a (in most opinions) inferior processor and are having even more problems making the chipset supposed to go with it. Oh, yes, and just because they dont WANT to win.... Sure, whatever you say, genius.
Sorry, this post was made to the wrong comment....
Actually, Win95 on floppy was _only_ 35 or so floppies and _only_ took 1.5 hours to install. The really fun part is reinstalling it after it crashes :-).
The best way to accelerate a windows box is at 9.8 meters per second square.
I don't see what Intel is doing, they're just beating themselves over the head, AMD can easily keep their chips at Intel's pace, AMD had chips doing 900MHz over a month ago.. They're ready to rock and roll. Intel on the otherhand is struggling to produce mass quantities of chips that go that fast.
How can a chip you cannot buy anywhere be considered the fastest chip available? In fact, has anyone tried to purchase a 733 PIII from their local computer dealer? I've asked around town and no one has them. Not a one. But, all the same dealers I spoke with had 750 Athlon's in stock. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if AMD announces an 800MHz sometime in January. Mark my words.
SYSOP ('sih-sop) n.: the guy laughing at your typing.
I never buy the fastest chip at any given moment. I buy behind the curve and save a fortune.
-- This sig is only a test. If this were a real sig it would say something witty. --
Yep. But the barely computer literate PHB's and AOL users will see it and make analogies with cars 'horsepower etc... It's "got more MHz, Elmer, it must be faster!!!"
The public is, in general, getting more techno-savvy. However, as this proves, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. And by the time your PHB's actually know what a superscalar pipeline is, we'll be getting into some seriously weird new stuff...
Strong data typing is for those with weak minds.
Then why don't they? A 1 Ghz processor would be a quick, swift kick in the patootie of Intel, and would make AMD a "contender" in the eyes of the general public. AMD can't afford to play coy if they want to win - which leads me to believe that they *currently* can't produce a 1Ghz chip in mass-quantities.
The Athlon is not superior to the Intel. They each have their strengths and weaknesses and are not *that* much different in performance (although the anti-Intel geek community would have you believe otherwise). We're talking a few FPS in Quake 3 either way. There's not enough *real world* performance gain to proclaim AMD the winner or Intel the loser. And any price advantage the Athlon has is negated by having to buy a different (and more expensive) motherboard.
a bewoulf cluster of these.
I just saw over at Ace's Hardware site the testing of the 800 MHz Athalon.
"This is like cars that do 0-60 in 2.4 milliseconds and can go up to 250mph"
But it is the cars like Saturn that are surviving 'crashes' and intersection collisions.
Is there a push for chipmakers to meet the side impact compliance standard?
As you have read, AMD have released for review a 800 MHz Athlon to some hardware sites (tech-report.com and Anandtech, for example).
What makes these news even more irrelevant is that the big hardware guys (Dell, Gateway) are not able to get PIII 750 MHz from Intel, let alone this new 800 MHz model! I think Intel is playing the good-ol' FUD card.
Sigged!
I've been running a 500 MHz Athalon overclocked to 806-806 MHz, running at 87 degress F, for a while now. Cheaper, better, faster, cooler, etc.. than any intel:) (add the GeForce card and this mother plays QIII like you wouldn't belive:)
"MOBILE" P3 - big difference.
And if you don't believe me, look at your current software and OS and tell me you would just as soon run it on a 4MB 486SX/25Mhz.
I draw a line between my various computers. Each one serves a purpose. I do most of my writing on an an IBM PS/2 Model 30. That's an 8086 with 640K of RAM and a 20MB hard drive.
Why? Because it works.
But I'm writing this now on a 350mHz G3 with 190MB of RAM and 8MB of VRAM. Why? Because I like to play Quake on this machine.
I use most of my systems as appliances. They do a few things, and that's all that I want them to do. And I strongly believe that this is a trend that more and more people will follow. But they don't want multiple computers as they think of them now, but devices. (With, as discussed today, Be as the OS.)
So, yes, in that sense, I fully believe that there will continue to be a use for less-than-stellar processors, for the VW bug of processors. (Though I maintain that some people will knowingly purchase traditional desktops with less souped-up processors.) Whether Celeron or something else, there will be room for them in a mass-market sense.
"If you want to take it a step further, for the price, Alpha's are great, but for serious number crunching, Cray's are the way to go :)"
Have you looked at whats powering those Cray T3Es? Perhaps you should.
Hardly a fair comparrison, when the Pentium rigs are using RDRAM instead of PC100 SDRAM(Athalons). At $1000/128M simm. Check the specs and comments by the authors at sharkey.. anandtech.com has a different set of comparrison systems that put the two systems neck and neck.
Besides, for $1000 you could get a 1GHz kryo cooled system and put a big gap between the Athalon and Pentium systems.
"I'm nobody suspicious... That makes me sound even more suspicious, doesn't it?" - Spike (Cowboy Bebop)
I don't know why people can't imagine anyone needing fast processors, but when I'm programming I max out my processor all the time. At work and at home I would be so much more productive if I didn't have to wait so long for my program to do some little thing many times, like convert strings to ints or floats. I think the time to buy the newest and fastest is when no other chip is good enough for your needs, and you're willing to pay.
Uhh. Clearly it depends on what you want to do. Good luck getting all those x86 games or the gabs and gabs of Multimedia, Internet, Database, etc.. software for the PC platform working well on your snazzy new Alpha. Oh - but have fun with f77, gcc, and POVRay. I'm sure they'll run real fast on your fancy Alpha, nerdboy :)
Apparently it does take an idiot to make that connection. You do realize any piece of software can generate a completely Unique number in any number of ways and do the same things with it as any hardware number, right? This implies a certain lack of worth for said feature, but it also implies complete harmlessness for those with even the vaguest clue.
you just don't understand the way the game works, it's not about playing coy, it's about amortizing the development costs, intel does the very same thing. if you only have to make your product a little bit better in order to sell it then that's what you do. If they brought out the 1ghz chip out now(which their new fab in the dresden germany was built to produce) they would have to make it so expensive that no one would buy, in addition, that gives them no time to engineer the next technological advance. Believe me, if it wasn't for AMD, we'd be getting pentium II's sometime next year.
AMD Athlon should be still faster than just the 50Mhz speed increase that Intel has put out. Anyone got details?
Okay, okay, so I'm currently looking at an upgrade. Probably a PIII-600 or 550, depending on price differentials.
The increases in MHz seem petty, that's true, but I see them as just more steps along the path charted by the processor-speed corrollary of Moore's Law.
What I'm really waiting for is the next big shift in computing technology. There's something out there analogous to the introduction of the microchip, although I don't know what it will be. What ever it will be, I can hardly wait! =)
Powers&8^]
The best part about the PIII is that it drops right into a 440BX motherboard. Mine (ASUS-P2B-LS) can clock up to 6.5x and currently has a P2-350 in it. I'm waiting for the PIII-650 to drop into the $200 range for my upgrade. Kudos to Intel for maintaining compatibility between the P2 and PIII lines!!
marotti.com
The Dimension B Series will be targeted to the so-called "power user" and high-end gamers.
yeah, and it will give me the power to "supercharge my Office Applications."You are probably going to run custom apps on it anyhow (you obviously have the money to do that if you own a good alpha)... Not games and other "worthless" endeavors, not at the alpha price anyway.
Folks,
Personally, in many cases a Pentium III/Athlon CPU is way overkill for most users. The only people that really need that type of speed are those who run high-end games like Quake III Arena or Flight Simulator 2000 or those who run applications that really use a lot of CPU cycles (Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator).
For most users who is spending most of the time running business apps or surfing the Web, you can get by with an Intel Celeron 300 MHz (A version) CPU. But the big bottlenecks are usually RAM size, hard disk speed and graphics card speed.
Given that most systems built since 1997 using Slot 1 or Socket 370 CPU connectors are of the ATX form factor using the Intel 440LX, 440BX, 440ZX and 440EX chipsets, the best way to get a quick bump-up of performance is as follows:
1. Increase the amount of system RAM to 128 MB. This makes a HUGE difference for most applications because the computer spends much less time swapping to and from virtual memory on the hard drive.
2. Get a faster hard drive. Remember, the current crop of ATA/66 IDE hard drives are downward compatible with the ATA/33 connectors found on the Intel 440 series chipsets, so you might want to get something like an IBM Deskstar or Maxtor DiamondMax hard drive with a 7200 RPM platter speed of around 13 to 24 GB storage capacity.
3. Get a faster graphics card. Since even the "AGP 4X compatible" series of AGP graphics cards will work with the the AGP slot on any motherboard that uses the Intel 440 series chipset; a relatively inexpensive card like the ATI XPert 2000 AGP will provide a speed improvement over the first-generation AGP card in your system, and the ATI XPert 2000 AGP has built-in MPEG-2 decoding so you can add in a DVD-ROM player to play DVD movies.
In short, your system is not as obselete as it seems even if you have an older CPU.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
We're talking a few FPS in Quake 3 either way.
There's not enough *real world* performance gain to proclaim AMD the
winner or Intel the loser. And any price advantage the Athlon has is
negated by having to buy a different (and more expensive) motherboard.
Uhhh, yeah.... That doesn't look like FUD at all, being that Intel is just a "few" fps slower than AMD, and that means there is no "Real World" difference. And of course, you have to mention the motherboard price. May I mention that the processor prices make up for it? Ohhh, and yeah, I'm sure that no little differences will stand in the way of defining winner or loser. I mean, you can't win the 100 m dash with "just" 0.01 s faster than #2...
Go take the Intel FUD back to your Intel FUD factory. We don't want it here.
I mean, well, hell, if you don't care about speed, then why even bother talking in this forum?
The Intel Chip might have a higher MHz rating, but the fastest Athlon Chip will still cream it, especially in Floating Point perfromance. MHz for MHz, the Athlons are about 15%-20% faster than an Intel. I wish that they would hurry up with SMP Athlon boards. I am going to have to build a computing cluster soon, and I would LOVE to make it out of Dual Athlon Boards, but it appears that SMP Athlon Boards won't be out until Q2 or Q3 2000. :-(
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
Sorry for any ugliness of my post, I was posting from lynx and didn't notice the text-only box... :-(
For the near future at least, Alphas are still sitting on top of the performance heap. With API's (www.alpha-processor.com) new UP1000 AMD Irongate based motherboard (uses the same chipset as all Athlon boards), you can get a >40 SpecINT, >60 SpecFP computer for under $5000 (www.dcginc.com) . Nothing on the market is this fast.
For the price, Athlons and PIII's are great, but for serious number crunching, Alphas are the way to go.
MHz has, unfortunately, become marketing crap.
Notice I did not specify which processors I'm using, so that those who know and buy good architectures can gloat without chumming the waters.
that way they release chips faster and cheaper instead of crappier and slower
"This is like cars that do 0-60 in 2.4 milliseconds and can go up to 250mph"
But it is the cars like Saturn that are surviving 'crashes' and intersection collisions.
Is there a push for chipmakers to meet the side impact compliance standard?
I dunno, but I've survived several crashes thanks to my airbags.
More vaporware... let's not be the pot calling the kettle black.
You just give two CPU's the exact same tasks to perform and measure the amount of time it takes... Therefore, the Alpha's faster...
If you still want to say otherwise, i'd venture to say that both the K7 and P6 (especially the K6 though) are not really executing x86 instructions anyhow... They've got microcode that converts x86 instructions to their native instructions, because x86 was just too cumbersome...
Regardless, though... It's not at all hard to compare an Alpha to a Pentium...
I *LOVE* my dual-processor Celeron system, overclocked to 550Mhz (with some REALLY big heat sinks/fans on the processors)...
I've got the distributed.net software & povray crunching away on it, day and night...
Speed is one concern, but the image Intel (hear 4 notes) has built carries more clout that pure speed. Most people can not name another chip maker other than Intel. Market share is made by marketing in this case. Intel=Kleenix
subject is message
You all can rave about the AMD and the Pentium chips... But with a G4 running Virtual PC, one can still run faster than the fastest AMD or Pentium, and neither of them are rated as a munition and banned from export, like the G4 is...
The units the press are reviewing currently are SAMPLES - not production units. Production will not ramp up until Q1 2000 - possibly as late a Febuary. I don't see Intel shipping these chips any sooner than that - they are having problems shipping the 733mhz in volume that they anounced back in October. This is just more classic Intel Marchitecture. Their is good article about this over on The Register - www.theregister.co.uk
You may wonder why there is such a race to crank up the clock rate on processors. The reason is that most consumers do not understand all the intricacies of what processor is faster, but can understand that 800mhz > 700mhz.
People who read Slashdot know that clock rates are only directly comparable between identical processors. We know that different architectures have different performance at the same clock rate. The vast majority of people that purchase processors these days don't know that. Most people don't understand why (if they are even aware) a PowerPC, SPARC, or Athlon has better real-world performance than a Pentium at the same clock rate.
Most people look at the "megahertz" and use that as the sole comparison of the processors performance even when they don't understand what that number actually means.
For this reason, the mantra at processor companies is "Megahertz At All Costs"
I want Quake2/3/Unreal Tournament framerates. I want to see distributed.net and seti@home rates. I want to know how fast it can compile a 2.2.9 linux kernel.
DUH, those are not CPU nechmarks. Games depends on too many things, not just the processor. Same is linux kernel compilation.
If you want to see _CPU_ benchmarks check out Spec95 (www.spec.org) which is the industry standard, I am sure Intel and AMD publish it. Last time I checked, Spec95 numbers P3-733 was slightly faster than Athlon 700 in both, int and fp.
I just found http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/gs-20.12.99-00 1/> saying that AMD demonstrated two version of their CPU running 900 MHz, one who aluminium and one with copper interconnections. Well, the article is in german, so ask some babelfish to translate!
An air-cooled 1GHz Alpha 21264 has already been publically demonstrated (perhaps at Comdex, I forget). If you like the floating-point performance of the Athlon vs. PIII check out the Alpha benchmarks. On fp, Alphas crush* all-comers. At a price. (*)Ok, maybe not some IBMS ;^)
Remind me to avoid whatever roads you drive on. Hasn't someone tried to take your license away yet?
Well, does this one work reliably when it's booted now? Considering that their 733mhz had boot problems. :)
When the Athlon was first released, Toms Hardware did a very detailed write up on the architecture of the Athlon, and how it relates to the PIII.
You can find that article here. To summarize, this advancement from Intel is basically irrelevant, as AMD could (probably) have 1GHz Athlons on the market already, the Athlon is designed to run at those kinds of speeds, and has a (in their opinion) dramatically superior architecture to the PIII.
Tom mentioned somewhere in the article that AMD would probably do to Intel what Intel had been doing to them for years, which was to one-up whatever speed they come out with. Watch for AMD to beat this by 50MHz or so pretty soon...
Anthony
"I think any time you expose vulnerabilities it's a good thing." -Attorney General Janet Reno
When they added the ID 'feature'.
This is like cars that do 0-60 in 2.4 milliseconds and can go up to 250mph.
:)
It just doesn't matter to most people, at least practically-speaking. As people pointed out in a recent discussion, even though it doesn't matter, people will still buy the hottest chip around. Very much like how people buy the greatest SUVs, the fastest Porches, etc.
But consider that VW does well with their "0-60? Yes." advertisments. How long will it be until a processor company pops up with a similar ad campaign? I give it 12-18 months.
And I'll get one, too, because I don't need the latest, greatest hardware. 'Cuz I run Linux.
The real crown will be who busts 1GHZ. It will be interesting because both Intel and AMD are looking at making some serious headway in the design process and 1GHZ will be a landmark for years to come. Look for 1GHZ by early 2nd quarter if we keep up the pace we have been on. Alright show of hands, who 3 years ago with the release of the K6 actually thought AMD would be around this long and this competitive. You in the back with your hand up. Put it down, your lying! Just that much better for the consumer, btw P2 266 gonna upgrade to the Athlon once they release the new motherboards with 133MHZ bus and 4X AGP. =)
Hangtime
Stuff that matters to people with disposable income. All this is to me is another outrageously frivolous component. Hmm... that 500MHz not enough for you? Why not shell out about a grand on a new 800MHz processor. Get less than twice the performance for over three times the price. This is silly, and hardly all that newsworthy. See this for components that people who are not Internet billionaires can afford.- -----------------
----------------------------------------
Perhaps thats what Transmetta is sitting on? We've got to wait until the 19th though.
Yay! Speculation is fun!
--
Donald Roeber
Donald Roeber
Generating 2048 Bits of Randomness...
Why are so many people buying into this? Let's see some BENCHMARKS!
I want to hear about number crunching ability. I want Quake2/3/Unreal Tournament framerates. I want to see distributed.net and seti@home rates. I want to know how fast it can compile a 2.2.9 linux kernel.
MHZ is as meaningful a measure of a processor's ability as bogomips.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Intel cannot afford to announce only the processors they can do volume on. If they did AMD would have a small lead in MHz number. Then manufacturers like Gateway and Dell would think about rolling out AMD based machines. By announcing fast chips, whether there is volume or not, Intel strings these guys along just enough (OK, co-marketing money helps too) to keep them from making any significant investment in Athlon machines. We have already seen Compaq and others introduce Athlon machines, if Intel cannot keep the MHz crown, AMD might get a foot hold with all the big US manufacturers. Intel would not want that.
The flip side is that AMD has probably been holding back a little bit to maximize revenue from each step up in MHz.
Those who can do. Those who can't sue.
Currently, we see AMD and Intel fighting hert after hert for being at the top of the market. To have the best, the fastest computer. But, really, what will that be useful for? And I answer myself: to increase W*ndows requirements. As it has always been in the past: they release something faster, Windows gets slower, user is fooled. But, now, we are reaching a bigger level, where home computers are reaching semi-workstation processing values. Why don't they investigate on new technologies to make microchips cheaper than boosting CPU's to 1 GHz? (I think that may be the 'tryumph' they're looking for). Why not put more money on useful research? Today, we already have fine, *very fast* pc's. Of course we want more. Someday, we'll need more. But the question, to me, is: every 6 months? No, thank you. Maybe next year, I'll buy "today next's generation".
Well, take it from someone who's workes on g4's daily, the native operating system is shitty, and makes the processor run slower than the equivalent wintel system for office work. It may be great at rendering, but its useless for office work. And with the added cost of being entirely proprietary, and the lack of any sort of real games(other than Q3A), if the doctor's here didn't want it because they don't understand computers, they just like pretty pictures to click on, we wouldn't have any mac's, let alone wasting 4k on a G4 and monitor. Twit.
Who really needs a CPU that fast?
I'm doing quite well on my AMD K6-2 350MHz right
now. Not that I'd call that a slow CPU, it's just
adequate.
I bought that CPU after the 450MHz AMD was released just so that i wouldn't cry when they'd release a 500MHz CPU and I'd no longer have the fastest CPU around. It's just stupid. I'd rather buy an extra couple MB's of core, or perhaps a fast harddrive. I have about 50 years of life left in me and I don't mind waiting for a process to finish.
IMHO, it seems that the G4 is about 30% faster at the same mhz than the PIII. However, with the G4 stuck at 450 mhz, it is less powerful than a 600mhz p3. Now, with 750,800,900, etc. P3 and Athlons on the horizon, the G4 is falling way behind.
If you look to the past, PowerPc Mhz had been increasing by 50% each year. Then came the G3's--whereas the G2's of the time had been at 300-350 mhz, the G3's debuted at 233-266 mhz. Ratchet down the Mhz.
You can't argue that the G3 core was better, because it wasn't: it was halfway between the 603e and the 604e. The only great advantage the G3's had was their cache. Less computing power, but faster L2 cache. [can't these guys walk and chew gum at the same time?]
Anyway, after the Mhz was ratcheted down, G3 speed was back to increasing by 50% a year. If you extrapolate that to now, 450-600mhz (500-700 if AIM hadn't lost Mhz when they introduced the G3's) G4's should be debuting in January 2000.
Only time will tell if that will happen, but right now,the G4 kind of sucks. Mhz is only in the 350-450mhz range. To top that off, the errata has not only limited Mhz, but actually has reduced the computing power of the G4. The 450mhz G4 is equivalent to a 400mhz G3 in integer performance. That's a big step backwards. As far as altivec goes, I could care less: none of the programs I use can take advantage of it, and I doubt any will in the forseeable future.
Personally, even though my PowerCenter Pro 210 just died (thank god I have a Powerbook G3 for backup), I will not be buying a G4 anytime soon. I have a G3, and I know how it compares to my 604e machine. When I extrapolate to the G4, the G4 doesn't look too hot. Has AIM really made so little progress in the 2 1/2 years since I bought my 604e machine?
Well, once they fix the errata and IBM's superior fabs start kicking in in early 2000, maybe will see a series of dramatic speed increases in the G4 line. Until then, the G4's looks like a dog.
geezus, talk abnout being a bigoted fuckin retard. "It may be great at rendering, but its useless for office work"?! this is where you show yer total ignorance about computin' - if a goddamn machine can process graphic rendering pretty well, it can certainly crunch a faggoty spreadsheet document or other "office" file. fer chrissakes, what are graphics after all to a computer? that's right, complex mathematical computations. so if it stands to reason that the mac can crunch graphics, it can do the same for just about anything else. games? like how many games are made for the solaris or irix system? how about linux? in comparison it could easily be said that "there are tons more games for the mac than for linux or other OS's". dumbass. "added cost of being proprietary"? wtf? since when is USB, FireWire, ATA, PCI, AGP, PC100, SCSI or VGA proprietary? christ get a clue. the logic board for a PeeCee is just as proprietary as a G4 board moron. RAMBUS, now there's some power. How much can you afford?
An unrelease chip is unavailable. Amazing! Next you'll be telling me that 1Ghz chip we've been hearing about isn't available at CompUSA yet.
If only the rest of the industry had competition running at this scale. I bought my PII 350 a little less than a year ago. I dont think advancements like this have ever been made as quickly. Sure would be nice to see the same thing in the OS market...
The guys who run Intel and AMD were the type of guys who would try to piss farther than their friends when they were growing up.
Thank god for mid-life crises! Now I can read email 0.000004% faster than before !!
Hates people who have stupid little sigs
For the near future at least, Alphas are still sitting on top of the performance heap.
:) "Well, duh!"
:)
This is like popping into a debate between Ford and Toyota to mention that Porche makes much better engines
While you're right, Alphas aren't really consumer-level products (god don't I wish they were), and I believe that's the context they had in mind for this comparison.
If you want to take it a step further, for the price, Alpha's are great, but for serious number crunching, Cray's are the way to go
Anthony
"I think any time you expose vulnerabilities it's a good thing." -Attorney General Janet Reno
Go, go gadget dual celeron 366@550!!