AMD had itself a busy day today: not only did the European Commission file
antitrust charges against Intel for interfering with AMD's business in Europe, the Sunnyvale company released an updated product roadmap at its annual analyst conference. With the quad-core
Barcelona processor on track for an August
launch, the company announced its next-gen mobile platform, "Puma," which will feature hybrid graphics support. Looking even farther ahead, AMD also announced some chips we won't see for a while yet: the all-new workstation- and server-oriented "Bulldozer" chip and mobile device "Bobcat" chip are scheduled to arrive sometime in 2010, and represent entirely new chip designs for the company. The hits didn't stop there, however: AMD's also announced its first
Fusion integrated CPU / GPU chip, the "Falcon," which will use the Bulldozer core -- no word on what happened to
Hawk or when we'll see this ship. Finally, the company answered speculation that it's looking to get out of the manufacturing game by saying that it's aiming for the "right balance" between in-house and outside fabrication, but that it's committed to its current existing mix through 2009. All in all, it looks like AMD has got some pretty ambitious plans for the future -- but will it be enough to hold off scrappy upstart
Hynix? Tons more info, including all the slides, at the read link.
[Thanks, Ryan]
posted Jul 26th 2007 9:57PM
Yeah...Bulldozer. AMD, the sleeping cow.
Right now, AMD feels like a kid you were once proud of who now inexplicably sucks, yet you still see some promise in. Here's hoping they pull it together...
never met this kid in my life.
I wasn't knowledgeable about processors until after I had my first PC...it was a P4 laptop. From there, I started researching for my next PC once I had had enough of the heat and the constant fan usage. The Athlon 64 was new and a year or two after that, AMD was doing nicely with Socket 939 and the X2s... I hope you can understand where I am coming from with this. Undoubtedly, the C2D is far superior to anything AMD is packing now.
Intel is just a tough competitor. They were full force into the P4, and AMD was playing to beat it. But when they finally and narrowly did beat the P4 and the failed NetBurst architecture it turns out Intel had had a whole second line of processor research which came up with the P-M and ultimately the C2D.
AMD couldn't compete with the P-M or its successors. It seems like the whole development with notebooks making up more than 50% of new PCs sold and low power chips much more interesting took AMD completely by surprise. No back-up plan like the P-M there.
With the acquisition of ATI AMD ATI is once again competing. They have a lot of tech now which can make for some very interesting products. My only fear is that AMD simply doesn't have enough imagination to pull it off. And Intel meanwhile is frantically researching its own 3D chips...
>> Undoubtedly, the C2D is far superior
>> to anything AMD is packing now.
But when it comes down to performance-per-dollar, I feel that AMD is still leading the way. Looking at various CPU benchmark tests, it's almost impossible to build a comparable Intel machine for less money (at least, I couldn't do it trying to build a comparable C2D version of an X2 5600+ build).
@nikster
Well actually I got the idea that the second processor line even got a lot of folks at Intel by suprise..., it took quite some internal effort in that company to stop favoring the P4 line.
I just built a X2 5600+. The processor cost £103. The Intel comparable I think it was the E6300, which runs much hotter and slower 2.13 compared to 2.8 was closer to £170. I could buy another 2GB of RAM with the saving.
I have had 3 AMD and 1 Intel and 1 Centrino. I would always go Centrino, but AMD for any desktop.
Did *no one* notice the new colour scheme for the OLPC there? I know most people's complaints were that it was green. This seems to be a more pleasing shade of orange.
Anyone notice that "AMD's also announced its first Fusion integrated CPU / GPU chip, the "Falcon".
Is there even the slightest possibility that this is the new 360 CPU? Think about it, i guess it would make sense (unless Microsoft signed a long contract for PowerPC chips)
IBM has been producing cpu in all consoles for a while now so I dont see that happening.
Here comes the AMD slandering, don't forget, Fanboys, we'd still be stuck on the overheating, overpriced, and under-performing Pentium D line if AMD hadn't challenged Intel to it's current level of excellence.
just another bunch of concepts which they can hardly bring into the market...
"Here comes the AMD slandering, don't forget, Fanboys, we'd still be stuck on the overheating, overpriced, and under-performing Pentium D line if AMD hadn't challenged Intel to it's current level of excellence."
Sounds like AMD fanboyism to me.
Intel was moving toward the core duo for a more energy efficient laptop processor, they then realized that they could pump more juice into it and make a processor that performed better than their current desktop chip, and that is how we ended up with core duo and core 2 duo for the desktop.
NOT because Intel was "threatened" by AMD's desktop offerings, and certainly not because they felt threatened by AMD's laptop offerings.
You can't even put an AMD laptop on your lap they get so ridiculously hot.
Well I think Revrant2394 got a point here... it's the same with OS-es, webbrowsers, etc... You can wonder why after all those years Linux still hasn't been able to make a small dent into windows, however a lot of improvement windows can be subscribed to this mainstream system being challenged. The same for webbrowsers, anyone remember how long IE6 was around and that MS even stopped developing newer versions? Until Firefox was improved enough and started nibling at IE's market share.
I happen to live in England where Intel Chips have a huge mark-up and AMDs are sold at a much better price. When you go to buy a pre-fab a majority of the sub £500 ones use AMD as the C2D are just too expensive.
Unfortunately over the last 2 weeks, built my system 5 weeks ago about £30 has come of the price of alot of Intels, so they have roughly levelled out, but I would still buy an AMD and so do all my system builder friends.
Also I'd like you to get a C2D on a stock Heatsink idling at 35C and working around 45C. Even with you 65nm process.
AMD X2 5600 +
NewEgge Price: 149$,
Manufacturing Tech 90 nm
E6300
NewEgg Price: 164.
Manufacturing Tech 65 nm.
When AMD first relased their X2 platform, which are undoubtedly better than Intel Dual core, their cheapest X2 offering was 3800+ for around 300$. And they didn't reduce their price until Core2 came out.
Look at Q6600, you can buy it for less than 300$.
Ofcourse Intel is reducing it to fight before AMD releases it's new Quad, but right now AMD has no processor to fight Intel.
Draw your own conclusions.
Im just glad to see AMD getting back in the game....or hoping to anyway.
Is that actually a slide produced by AMD? If so, it's not too brilliant to illustrate your companies' future with an GIANT RED ARROW POINTING DOWN.