Please register or login. There are 0 registered and 1266 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 326.30 kbit/s December 13 - 06:03am EST 
Hardware Analysis
      
Forums Product Prices
  Contents 
 
 

  Latest Topics 
 

More >>
 

    
 
 

  You Are Here: 
 
/ Forums / Is AMD finally starting to lose its marbles?
 

  Re: Is AMD finally starting to lose its marbles? 
 
 Author 
 Date Written 
 Tools 
David North Jul 21, 2005, 05:53pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List Replies: 4 - Views: 1577
Ironically regarding AMD, advertising and sports...

I took my son to Mike Vallely's skatebarding tour in Nashville this summer which was sponsored by Sobe and Elements (a drink manufacturer and skateboard supplies maker).

One of his touring staff had an official AMD headquarters shirt on so I stopped him and asked how he got it. He was friends with an executive at AMD and had gone to one of their employee functions as a guest. I asked him if they had thought to approach AMD as a sponsor for tours and he said they had but his friend had explained to him that the owner, "Doesn't believe in advertising" but holds to the concept that if you make a good product word of mouth will build its sales and reputation.

When I sold advertising, my reponse to comments like that was, "If you make a good product and tell MORE people about it with advertising you will get MORE word of mouth." 'nuff said.


Want to enjoy fewer advertisements and more features? Click here to become a Hardware Analysis registered user.
amdfreak22 Jul 21, 2005, 06:04pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Re: Is AMD finally starting to lose its marbles?
I agree! Although I saw a couple more AMD advertisements in some magazines recently, and they weren't even tech magazines! And I'm starting to see more and more systems sold at Fred Meyers, Fry's, CompUSA, etc that are featuring AMD's. I think they are going to start coming around a 'lil. But I do think advertising is a must if you want to compete with a powerhouse such as intel.

"You can't touch me. I'm protected by impenetrable cereal box fort." ~Stewie
Antec 600W
AMD 64 3700+
Gigabyte GA-K8N Pro-SLI
1GB (2x512 Dual Channel) OCZ PC3200
PNY GeForce 6800GS (475/1100)
2x120GB 16mb WD Hard Drives
Memorex
A_Pickle Jul 21, 2005, 07:56pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Re: Is AMD finally starting to lose its marbles?
I'd have to say advertising is important... but... there is a key element we fail to bring forth.

AMD has three fabs, one of which is in the process of activation. Intel has eleven, and is currently constructing three more.

Furthermore, I don't consider the Athlon 64 a "clearly superior product" as so kindly noted in the last TWO articles by HWA. Good processor, yes, but my 3.0 GHz Pentium 4 outperformed Tech Report's 3800+ in their "Preview of Half-Life 2 Performance" benchmark, featuring the Radeon 9600 XT among other video cards crunching the Video Stress Test.

I don't, nor will I ever regard the Athlon 64 a superior product, but rather an equal and a good alternative to Intel processors. It grows ever more irritating how people tend to bash on Intel for not "deserving" it's current exalted position. Benchmarks, work-per-clock estimates, FPU's, and hypertechnologies aside, the Pentium 4 is a great processor. Perhaps it doesn't perform nearly as well as some AMD's, but then, Intel has admittedly stated that that was not it's intent. Intel has publicly announced that the engineering motivation behind the Pentium 4 was not to wipe out AMD's offerings, but to make a buck. It was designed with the consumer purchasing tendencies in mind. CPUs began their competition on a clock for clock basis, very little difference in performance was measureable between a 500 MHz K6-II and a 500 MHz Pentium III. Clockspeed was what sold, so Intel made a processor that was highly scalable in clock speeds. For four years now, the Pentium 4 has a wild "mission accomplished" stamped all over it. Finally, people -- regular, home-owning, people, do not want the most kick-ass server CPU around. Granted it'd be nice, but, um... "Hello, Mr. Opteron, can I buy you for $2,600?!?"

Now it's reaching the end of it's architecture, whilst the Athlon64 seems to have more life, and people are realizing that higher clockspeed doesn't mean higher performance. Now Intel is revving up it's Pentium M/Centrino platform, a processor technology that conforms and in fact capitalizes on the exact lesson AMD has taught consumers. Intel's Pentium M does far more work per clock cycle than the Athlon 64, and will soon be available with all the new CPU stuff -- namely dual-core, hyperthreading, and 64-bit along with some improved SSE2 and MMX instructions. All the words consumers like, and more. Not to mention that as the Pentium 4 is slowly diminished, the new architecture will emerge once again a great processor.

David North Jul 21, 2005, 08:56pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Re: Is AMD finally starting to lose its marbles?
The deal is this...we want AMD to succeed becasue without it Intel and Microsoft own the world. AMD has been a driving force behind Intel's innovation--good case in point, dual core and 64 bit development.

It ain't the overwhelming need of products out there that made these develop when they did--it was chipmaker competition.

If AMD becomes another "Apple Corporation" with only five percent of the market, Intel will become "Microsoft".

The staff person mentioned that the owner had reluctantly increased sponsorships and all but was still opposed to big spending on advertising.

A_Pickle Jul 21, 2005, 11:36pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Re: Is AMD finally starting to lose its marbles?
"...AMD has been a driving force behind Intel's innovation--good case in point, dual core and 64 bit development..."

I've heard that a lot too. Namely from a one Super XP, when folks too easily forget the innovations Intel has come out with. It's easy today to remember that AMD made the first x86 chip that was 64-bit. Who made the jump from 8-bit to 16-bit? Or the jump from 16-bit to 32-bit? Who implemented hyperthreading? Who developed the SSE, SSE2, and SSE3 instruction sets? Who invented the MMX instruction set?

I might add, Intel was the first to introduce dual core on a PC-wide basis, and IBM invented it in the form of the dual core Power4 processor in 2001. 64-bit was Intel's invention, in the form of IA-64, the only hitch of which was that IA-64 was not reverse compatible.

Intel has been a driving force behind AMD's innovation, as much as the opposite. That's what competition does. It's important not to forget that Intel has developed a TON of technologies that have been considered "pivotal" to the computing world.


Write a Reply >>


 

    
 
 

  Topic Tools 
 
RSS UpdatesRSS Updates
 

  Related Articles 
 
 

  Newsletter 
 
A weekly newsletter featuring an editorial and a roundup of the latest articles, news and other interesting topics.

Please enter your email address below and click Subscribe.