AMD sucks, Intel fiddles, the US just bullies little guys

[The exchange of views on the US/UK war topic is now over. No doubt the fanboy one will rage on. Ed.]

Subject: RANT about AMD 65 nm and K8L expectations

So who doesn't know that AMD's performance outright sucks compared to Intel right now at the high end? But some fanboys are running around and keep saying that it will change when AMD intros 65 nm chips that will clock through the roof.

I AM SO TIRED of saying it over and over again. So I am going to say it once more. But here goes the explaination.

AMD's first generation processes have been pretty crappy for a while.

First generation 0.18 K7 Thunderbirds couldn't clock above 950 Mhz until they went with copper interconnects (second generation 0.18), which clocked to 1400 MHz. Third generation 0.18 (Palomino) went to 1.73 GHz.

First 0.13 K7's only went to 1.80 GHz (2200+). With the second 0.13 process we saw 2.2 GHz (3200+) and that was far from the limit as I am sure everyone remembers with Mobile chip overclocking. A shift to the K8 architecture and SOI took 0.13 all the way up to 2.6 GHz (FX-55).

First 0.09 K8's clocked LOWER than the aforementioned Clawhammers (the first actual drop in clockspeed in the above history). They only had a max clock of 2.2 GHz. Second generation 0.09 was marginally better than 0.13 and reached 2.8 GHz. Ok, so we had the shift to dual core. I am sure AMD could have a 3 GHz single core right now on 0.09. Notice how that would be only a 15% clock speed increase over 0.13.

Notice how not a SINGLE ONE of the first generation processes showed a magical clockspeed jump some people are expecting now. The last one actually showed a clock speed drop. Do you believe in miracles?

AMD doesn't. That's why if we look at roadmaps for Quad Father, we see 90 nm FX'es kicking it up at clocks of up to 3.2 GHz well into next year. If AMD could produce 65 nm chips hitting those clocks, why on earth would they keep making these 90 nm chips which are more expensive, and produce more heat?

Here is what we will see again here. 65 nm first generation will clock worse than 90 nm cherry steppings. When second generation 65 nm comes around, we will see them finally clocking better than 90 nm (which will be 3.2 GHz by then for good ol' plain K8). Sounds like that will happen after or around the same time Intel moves to 45 nm.

As an aside, for the same people expecting wonders from K8L. Looks like K8L loses the clock speed race here. By how much? Well, 3.4 GHz Conroe would be a piece of cake for Intel to make if K8L's IPC kicks serious butt. If 2.9 GHz K8L is the high end, to make up the clock speed deficit and MATCH Conroe (or Kentsfield at 4 cores) performance, K8L better have 20% higher IPC than Conroe. Do you see it happening? I don't.

So all you silly fanboys expecting clockspeed wonders from 65 nm AMD please keep it in your dillusioned dreams. Those expecting K8L to totally own Conroe do the same.

Note: I have been an almost exclusively AMD user for the last 6 years, but how I hate fanboys and like my Conroe. Grrrr.

Ivan Andreevich

Subject: Historical revisionism

Your (presumably American) correspondent Randy wrote:

"The folks in Europe should be damn happy that the U.S. is willing to protect your asses from the many rogue nations who can reach your country with missiles. When the time comes to prove our mettle - and it will, the U.S. will stand and fight to protect the world as we have done for centuries, unlike the rest of the western nations who pander to political agendas."

I wonder idly, just which are those "rogue nations" that "can reach your country with missiles"? Most of the "rogue nations" denounced by the US administration are conspicuous by their lack of missiles. The "Axis of Evil" - from memory, Iran, Libya, and North Korea - don't have a single ICBM between them. Nor, AFAIK, a single functioning nuclear "device". On the other hand Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and France have nuclear weapons and missiles. Which of them is a "rogue nation" in the eyes of Americans? Oh, and which is the only nation that has ever used nuclear weapons on another country's civilians?

I wonder, if push came to shove and someone decided to turn these isles of ours into smoking ruins, if the Americans would really lift a finger to stop them? Especially if that involved risking any of their own tender pink skin.

They certainly didn't lift a finger to help us fight Hitler and Mussolini, until those blokes declared war on them... two years, three months, and a few days after the real war got under way. They looked on calmly (and safely) through Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain, the Blitz, the evacuation of Greece and Crete, and the invasion of the USSR.

I wonder how many Americans nowadays know that:

1. The USA remained neutral for the first 27 months of the great war against Fascism.

2. The USA did not enter the war until the Japanese sank its fleet at Pearl Harbor, and Hitler personally declared war on it. After those events, they were at war whether they liked it or not.

3. Britain paid in full for everything the USA sent to support the war effort - even the retired WW1 destroyers that the US Navy didn't think were good enough to send its own sailors to sea in. Actually, we finished paying either last year or this year, depending on which government department you believe.

It was interesting to hear Randy tell us how the USA has protected the world "for centuries". Hmmm, that would be all two and a quarter centuries, since it came into existence. In the 20th century, the USA protected about 25 nations - for instance by killing 3 million people in South-East Asia, and bombing more countries than the Luftwaffe did in 1939-45. It also protected the Philippines, where its forces killed only about a quarter of a million people while liberating them from the Spanish (who had actually left some time before).

How about the 19th century? There was the protection of the Native Americans, which reduced their numbers by over 99 percent and caused them generously to hand over all their land to the USA. There was the protection of Texas, California, and what are now several other states of the USA, which were forcibly stolen from Mexico against the wishes of their Mexican inhabitants. Then there was the invasion of Mexico itself, which led General Grant to say: "The Southern rebellion was largely the outgrowth of the Mexican war. Nations, like individuals, are punished for their transgressions. We got our punishment in the most sanguinary and expensive war of modern times".

All this was admirably summed up by H. L. Mencken (himself an American):

"All [of the Americans'] foreign wars have been fought with foes either too weak to resist them or too heavily engaged elsewhere to make more than a half-hearted attempt. The combats with Mexico and Spain were not wars; they were simply lynchings".

welsht

Subject: IE7 vs Roxio 9, Roxio crashes

Mike I went out a couple of weeks ago and picked up Roxio 9 at Walmart. The install went well, but once I rebooted and tried to start Roxio media creator the smiling face went sour. For the life of my computer it would not start, only the drag and drop icon came up. Everytime I went to start Roxio it would error out asking if I wanted to send in a report to Microsoft.

To make a story short, the Roxio sight was less then helpful and no patches were available. Once I went google searching I found the answer right away. (once I found the right choice of key words that is) IE7, in my case IE7 Beta was the problem. As long as any form of IE7 was installed Roxio 9 would not run. I had earler went onto the Roxio sight and put up a post in the Tech service section. So far no answer from Roxio, but I put my own up. "IE7 is at fault, with IE7 due out this month when will there be a patch Roxio?"

RH

Subject: Letters

For all you Bush and Blair-bashing leftist phonies out there:

What can you say about a country that has TWO communist parties?

Following is from the article "Important Days in DPRK Observed", issues from Pyongyang, DPRK on October 18 this year "... The general secretary of the Central Committee of the New Communist Party of Britain, the general secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist) and other speakers at the meeting said that the WPK successfully built socialism and has defended it, ..."

I guess there are still people in the U.K. who haven't heard that communism is totally dead and buried. It's been completely abandoned by everyone except, I guess for the North Koreans and some Englishmen (and some mad dogs too, I suppose.)

Just another dig at the Euro-peons by an American who is just about ready to launch and see if the cockroaches could do any better.

Rich Wargo

Subject: reply to Randy from "letters"

Randy: "the U.S. will stand and fight to protect the world as we have done for centuries".

I am not sure how you can say US protected the world for centuries, when US barely exists for two centuries. Actualy, i think that it would be safe to say that the USA have been destroying the world since they exist.

sbanjac

Subject: AMD's HairCut after good Q3 earnings report

Hi Cher

just to restore my faith in the Inquirer as an "independant rag" ( especially since being bought-up by big-money ), maybe you could do an article on "Wall Street Game" .. and in particular the manipulation of AMD stock in preference for Intel.

Some analysts made a big fuss about AMD's gross-margins dropping a few % from 55% to 51.4%, whereby Intel's GMs dropped 10% from 59% to 49%.

* Did Intel get a 3$ haircut after their Earnings Report .. No !

* Did the WS press say anything nasty about Intel ( as they should have done ) .. No !

* Did a certain US-TV channel compare AMD'S 2005 revenues against 2006, conveniently including ca. 600 mio.$ of Spansion's revenue in 2005, just to make AMD's 2006 revenue growth look bad ? .. Yes

* Did "most" of the analysts who talked about AMD's 2.6% in GrossMargins
"conveniently" forget to mention that these will improve again due to 65nm. production coming in the 4th. quarter 2006 ... Yes

You just have to look at the performance of Intel compared to AMD over the last year !

AMD beating INTC Earnings Per Share since Q1/06 : as well AMD beating them in Gross Margins Q3 + Q2

BTW..Q2/Q3 was the so-called price-war ! AMD was supposed to suffer .... bit OBVIOUSLY Intel suffered MORE ! Nobody dares to talk about that though !!

When AMD INTC
06Q4 06Q3 0.27 0.22
06Q2 0.17 0.15
06Q1 0.38 0.23

05Q4 0.23 0.40
05Q3 0.19 0.32
05Q2 0.02 0.33
05Q1 -0.04 0.35

On top of that , Intel lost ca. 10% market share in the last year !

Quote: >> AMD has grabbed desktop and workstation business away from Intel, the world's largest chipmaker, whose latest share of the market amounted to 72.9%, down from 82.2% a year ago, according to Mercury Research, a research firm in Cave Creek, Ariz ..http://yahoo.businessweek.com/investor/content/ oct2006/pi20061019_813614.h tm >>

Bottom Line : Why is WS pushing AMD's share price down ? Is it just to make INTC stock look better while they unload it at a higher price ? .or what ?

Cheers
Phil

PS: Maybe you could write an article discussing the above . The speculation, I'll leave up to you !

Subject: not just IE7 vulnerable

I haven't tried the dubious upgrade of IE7 yet, but just for shits and giggles I tested the secunia test link out with Firefox and IE6. Firefox passed with flying colors but IE6 is also vulnerable too. Muddock

Subject: ATI's strike outs. Idea comes to mind.

Companies slashing out people is always a bad thing for people who get cut from a job. Sometimes, it's a business necessity and not the fault of the workers.

To ease some of the stress of workers, why don't companies have "Job Transfers" programs in which eventhough they are being cut, the company's resources itself can assist workers to be transfered to other companies as a safe way to maintain employment, quitting a job on friday and starting work someplace else immediately on monday? Good way to keep workers happy and good way to maintain references. How's that for a small worldly solution?

~The Dude