RSSAMD Set to Attain 1Ghz Crown
By Justin Jenkins | Published March 5, 2000, 5:47 PM
Advanced Micro Devices, better known as AMD, said Sunday that they plan to announce release of their first 1 Ghz processor, ahead of Intel Corporation, on Monday.
Analysts suspect that both companies will release 1Ghz processors sometime this coming week. Both companies are ahead of their own projections in the race to release the first 1Ghz processor for the personal computer. This may lead to some concerns of the amount testing done and stability of these ‘rushed’ processors. A full story will follow after the respective releases.
Score: 0
|First Article
http://www.gamecenter.co....html?tag=st.cn.sr.gc.1
Second Article
http://news.cnet.com/new....html?tag=st.cn.sr.ne.2
Sorry for word wrap...
Score: 0
|...to have a 1GHz CPU but I'm holding out for teh IA64 Itanium chip. I just plopped a second CPU into my PII Xeon 450/512K system and this baby will hold out just a little while longer. Next year I grab an Itanium system running at 1GHz and put this system to pasture as a file and web server.
Score: 0
|I hope you're also prepared to toss out your existing software investment and start over.
Score: 0
|the 64-bit version of Windows 2000 will support 32-bit apps. Not sure how well or extensive this is going to be but MS has already stated they will provide support so people don't have to toss everything out just to take advantage of the 64-bit systems.
Score: 0
|My comment was more of a reflection on the architecture as proposed by intel: their 64-bit chip would have you sacrifice binary compatibility with previous applications. If Windows will provide 32-bit support my guess is that it would be through an **emulator** and we all know just how wonderful **those** are. The AMD architecture on the other hand does **not** force you to give up binary backwards compatibility, which is one primary reason why I feel intel's offering is doomed before it even hits the market.
Score: 0
|Yes but their plan is to extend the life of the x86 architecture instead of s***ing towards the IA64 architecture. There are ALWAYS trade-offs, you just have to take your pick and decide what is right for YOU. I doubt my dual PII 450 Xeon is the best system for most people but as a motion graphics designer and 3D animator it suffices quite well. I wouldn't trade this puppy in on a Linux box running on dual Athlons anyday.
Score: 0
|I'm betting that the industry does to intel what it did to IBM a decade before: "no we won't play your nice proprietary little game and get trapped into your high margins - we'll investigate other options". That left IBM holding the bag and rightly so. History does repeat itself - however, the would-be emperors never learn. IA-64 will fail as MCA did, as Beta did, as XGA did and for the same reason: in the immortal words of The Who "We Won't Be Fooled Again".
Score: 0
|you don't care about quality, that's why most of you prolly overclock, hehe. And it really doesn't matter who releases them first because the chips are usually completed way ahead of release dates anyways. The reason things are held back is to sell as much of the old stuff out.
In terms of performance increases, you get about 4-8% performance increase per 30-50 Mhz boost depending on the application. So you don't get 4-8 seconds or frames more, but percentage. But any Mhz boost will increase application and system performance. Whether you are willing to pay $500+ per 5% increase is up to you.
Both companies suck in that they keep dishing out these lame Mhz increases. Why on earth is there a need to have such a small range of increase (ie., there should only be 1Ghz, then 2Ghz, and so on). It will probably be the case with these CPU's that you'll see 1Ghz, 1033, 1066, 1200, 1233, etc., or the 50Mhz steps, depending on how they decide. And so long as you guys keep on buying it, they'll keep on doing it.
BUT! Why waste your money on a 1Ghz, 32-bit CPU. Just hold out for the 64-bits. The cpu fabrication industry seems like one of the few that is regulated by the corporations rather than the consumers, sad. Oh well, how about Sony and Nintendo get into making CPU's for the PC's, hehe.
Score: 0
|Why does Intel worry about being first. Quality is what the consumer wants, not some POS that's buggy. You can't rush perfection.
Score: 0
|If quality is what you want, you're definitely barking up the wrong tree given recent chip / chipset history from intel.
They're the ones who are playing catch-up and hence are rushing to market. And it shows. The pace has been set by AMD - lets see how many stumbles intel will have as they try and keep up.
Score: 0
|Why should it matter if AMD or Intel is king of the hill or not. We the consumer have the ability to choose which processor is right for us for whatever purpose we choose to use it for. I am happy that AMD and Intell both have reach the 1 GHz mark. But what applications take advantage of these speeds now? I have a PIII 600 and my wife owns a PIII 500 and There is no noticable difference in App load time at all. Hell I have not noticed any difference in Nvidia GeForce 256 and TNT2 Ultra based cards. Speed in processors is nice but I think for the most part that the majority of the consumer industry is still using PII, with the exception of Celeron Users and the " Keep up with the Jones" crowd. I do however feel that AMD is a better processor once it got past that k6/2 series (even the higher end K6/2's are better now). Besides competition is good and helps to lower the high prices set by current king of the hills. Memory architecture and bus technology needs the focus now. AMD needs one thing to be truely competitive against Intel and that is Dual processor support.
Just my 2 cents and my views and opinions do not reflect the views or opinions of Betanews.efront.com or it's affiliates.:)
Score: 0
|Reaching the 1GHz mark is nice. However, I really don't want a processor with a 10:1 clock multiplier. Perhaps it is time to put some serious work into redesigning the memory and bus subsystems...
Score: 0
|Soon...
AMD will be switching to DDR RAM, which will not only vastly increase performance, but lower the need for higher multipliers and all that crap.
Score: 0
|266 bus speeds coming soon... (in the AMD camp only, of course).
All this being said, the speed difference is 90% hype unless you're a 3D renderer or programmer. I have a K6-III 400 and at work use a PIII 650 (hey, I have to use what they give me). The difference in speed is noticeable but negligible - certainly not "blow yer doors off Maxell commercial time" type differences. Subjectively, I make it about maybe 5%.
I'll be running the K6-III 400 for at least a year and then I'll move to Athlon. Hopefully by then software might be beginning to figure out a way to exploit this performance.
Score: 0
|A 10:1 multiplier, what are you talking about? AMD has a 200Mhz bus speed that would only be 5X not 10X. Do the math.
Score: 0
|hmm .. You are absolutly right ... I'm using my PMMX 166 (overclocked to 210 [83*2.5]) on my 2 years old PC with 96Mb RAM and it can serve W2K with AD, Exchange Server, RRAS and Oracle 8i EE with a few problems. The same results i've got with on my work with Dual PII400 with 256 RAM. My CPU usage @home is a 60% on work is a
Score: 0
|I still cannot believe some Intel freaks who defend that huge company. If Intel is in fact so superior to AMD then I'm sure they'd be able to realease the BIG chip ahead of AMD. And why shouldn't these chips be reliable; so long as there is adequete cooling. The 0.18 core can easily make it to a Gig. k whateveA until Intel gets its act together it will continue to BLOW
Score: 0
|If and when intel ships the 1ghz to the public it will be far faster than that of the equilevent AMD athlon. They still have not integrated the cache on chip. So even at 500 mhz or 1/2 bus speed it will be no match for a true 1ghz cache. It has been showing less and less of performance increase as each comes to market. Even for a 7th generation design, the 800's of both are neck and neck in performance. So even if the athlon comes to market first, it will be the slower of the two.
Score: 0
|I think they'll have a version of the Athlon with that sometime. I'm not sure when, but I think it's planned.
Score: 0
|and wouldnt it also be nice if their cache didnt max at 350?
Score: 0
|It starting to get way out of hand with these processor war that have been happening. Predictions have been blowen out of the water when and who will release the first 1Ghz processor. I agree they probally haven't spent enought time on testing these's "rushed" processors, but i guess the public wants the need for speed.
what next week the 2Ghz ????
Score: 0
|I have one thing to say....
25*2.0=49.999999768
Intel rushed that first batch of pentiums and there was a floating point error. I wonder what the error will be on this one?
Score: 0
|bool s*** ... AMD don't have sales of 1Ghz proc now.
They have only 0.931322574615478515625 Ghz ...
As for PC world 1Ghz = 1024 Mhz = 1048576 Khz = 1073741824 Hz
Intel ? How about 1073741824 Hz PC ?
Just my .02 UAH = .1104 USD
Score: 0
|no one really cares. In the past 3 months, the speed of processors has increased sharply from 700 mhz to 1 ghz, as of monday. That's way too fast, and it's doubtful these GHZ processors will be reliable
Score: 0
|This is funny but it seems no one here understands why AMD is better than Intel at the moment. There will be NO errors in this 1Ghz chip because its just an overclocked version of previous chips. They do it in the expense of yields. for example Intel has trouble producing 800Mhz+ because their yields are way down... Athlon can handle up to about 1.333 without any problems (read amd white papers) but yields will definitly suffer. 800Mhz is a sweet spot for Athlon as yields are around 70%. thats ALOT. Its good if Intel gets 25% on their 800 Mhz PIIIs. Now back to why Athlon will be faster. 1Ghz chip most likely will feature on board cash (code name Thunderbird). We might see something like Athlon 1GHz A and Athlon 1Ghz B where B is with onboard cash but I doubt it. The only reason why 800Mhz Athlon loses just a little to similar PIII800 is $12 bucks per megabyte RAMBUS ram not a better PIII core.
The real fight is not now. check this 1.3333 Ghz Athlon Mustang ( code name for K75) against 1.5 Ghz Willamete ( did i spell it right?)
now this is some sweet stuff. right now there is no question Athlon wins hands down. After all it is 7th generation chip...
Score: 0
|The pentium 3 does have a more advanced core in some respects. It has a lower latency l2 cache which is on die. That permits the p3 1ghz equivelent to have a cache running at 1ghz. The athlon 1ghz cache speed is running only at 1/3 speed. Thats at 333mhz down from the 350 with which the 850 was running. Once benchmark numbers are released between th k7 and the p3. The p3 will likely come out on top. Not because of a 100% better core, but because it scales cache speed to a 1-1 ratio with bus speed.
Score: 0
|K7 Rocks!
Score: 0
|AMD Sucks.
Intel Lives on!
Wait and see. Intel will win out!
Score: 0
|you remind me of the linux advocates who feel they must post to NT news posts or releases. Their replys are just as inteligent.
Score: 0
|Last I had heard, AMD and Intel made computer chips, not play on some league... I still have to fathom the idea of how somebody could say Intel rules and AMD sucks or vice-versa... I mean, come on! These are simply chip makers! Its ok if you prefer one chip to the other, but that doesnt mean the company sucks! If you guys argue that maybe just intel rules because it has so and so or amd rules because so and so... ok... thats different... but saying Pentium IX kicks a** over K12 and thus Intel rules is just plain childish... Myself, I prefer the Pentium III because of the market experience and stability Intel has, but the Athlon is still an excellent chip and I would not mind switching over if the outlook changed... and besides, who cares who reaches 1 Gig? It will still be too expensive for many people, frankly it is WAY too fast for the average user, and it will not change anything in the browser wars. Please, until Intel or AMD get their own stadium and sport teams, lets stop cheering them on like that...
Score: 0
|exactly .. i agree with ya.
Score: 0
|me too - thank god for ADULTS.
Score: 0
|