RSSCounter-'tock:' AMD fires back at Intel with everything it's got
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published January 8, 2009, 12:09 AM
This may be it. If AMD has one trump card left in its deck, it could be the ability to deliver a system that balances attractive performance with a measurably lower price. Today at CES, AMD is making its one shot to win back the enthusiast.
In recent months, the general perception among knowledgeable system builders has been that Intel has taken back the performance crown in nearly all market categories, and is threatening to lock in on the two market segments AMD has historically championed: 1) the budget-conscious buyer, and 2) the system builder and enthusiast.
So in a bold step to recapture the hearts and minds of the second group, AMD today is doing something that four years ago it swore it wouldn't do: It's creating a preferred component set for desktop PC components that's much tighter than ever before, that's tied more closely with new ATI graphics components, and which promises stronger performance through stepped-up production and improved support. It's the successor to AMD's generally successful, though not chart-busting, quad-core Spider platform first unveiled in November 2007.
It's called Dragon, and no one at AMD is under any impression that the road ahead for it won't be the toughest yet.
"We have a lot of ground to make up in the enthusiast community with Dragon," admitted Simon Solotko, senior manager of AMD's desktop division, in an interview with Betanews. "I think that simply by really providing a really fantastic platform and correcting some of the challenges we had with Spider, we're going to get a tremendous boost in our overall value, and I think that enthusiasts will come to our solution in greater numbers than they had before."
Early last year, at the worst possible time for the company, an erratum in the production process stalled the rollout of AMD's quad-core Barcelona architecture processors, including its first generation Phenoms. By the time they were finally released, it was obvious that AMD was unwilling to risk testing the 3.0 GHz barrier, either with its quad-core Opterons in the server market or with Phenoms for the consumer desktop market. Last year, AMD had plans to sell the 2.3 GHz Phenom 9600 -- the high-end of its Spider platform -- for $283 in 1,000-unit quantities. Today, its average street price is about $115, according to Pricewatch CPU.
So in the meantime, the company found itself building triple-core processors, in a field that was still saturated with dual-cores on the value side and low-cost quad-cores on the performance side. It still plans to market Phenom X3s, but it finds itself making value propositions that sound ironically similar to Intel's back in 2004 and '05, at the time it tried to stall the onset of the multicore era with a stopgap innovation it called hyperthreading. AMD used to poke fun at hyperthreading, but now it knows how Intel felt.
Enter the Dragon. It's based on three components, at the center of which are AMD's new Phenom II X4 processors, which will not be afraid to test the 3.0 GHz barrier. Those will be coupled with AMD Radeon HD 4800 graphics cards, and AMD 7-series chipsets on the motherboard.
"It's a great breakthrough," Solotko told us, acknowledging the need to break that barrier. "But beyond that, we've got tremendous performance headroom...for extreme tuning."
"Headroom" is the watchword AMD is using very frequently with regard to Dragon. That refers to the speed the processor will run when it runs according to specification, versus the speed it can run when enthusiasts take advantage of Dragon's on-board overclocking tools. The Spider platform received rave reviews from folks who truly did appreciate the ease with which the Phenom 9600 and 9500 could be overclocked and performance-tested. But with spec speeds comparably crippled compared to Intel, that overclocking became necessary in order for Spider to compete.
As AMD's Solotko told us, Dragon has tweaked the tools AMD offered with Spider, including its OverDrive utility. And in essence, it's inviting customers to use OverDrive to throttle up at will. In other words, Dragon is designed to run at speeds it's designed not to run at.
"The way you evaluate a high-performance car or engine, in the enthusiast community, is by how well it performs under extreme conditions," remarked Solotko. "Extreme conditions today come under a number of classifications: First, there's conditions as indicated by overclocking -- an out-of-specification operation. And we're going to blow that out of the water. That's number one. We're running these processors [at speeds] that quad-core processors have never attained, and that is a tremendous story for that community, and it will make this processor fun and exciting for enthusiasts to tweak and to tune.
"Second," he continued, "they run the world's most advanced games at the world's most extreme settings. And in those environments, [Phenom II X4] is providing ample performance to provide the best possible experience, and frame rates that are equivalent to or potentially even better than the best and most expensive processor from our competitor. So I don't know how else you win the trust of the enthusiast community, save by essentially going to the max in the extreme conditions and providing great performance and great headroom, and that's what this platform's going to provide. I think that we will work to earn that trust of that community, and I think we've got the parts to back it up."
Next: Betting everything on bettering the bottom line...
well AMD better build these things so users can over clock them like the i7's or there goes this whole idea.whatever side your on this will be interesting
Score: 0
That depends greatly on the price of the i7's (as alluded to below by Foxy).
If Intel drops the prices on these things, AMD is screwed. If Intel, for whatever reason, keeps the prices artificially higher, AMD might stand a chance with the gamer crowd and the price/performance crowd.
Depends on how easy it will be to build out to this spec as well.
Score: 1
the i7 prices
920 - $284
940 - $562
965 Extreme - $999
The 920 runs almost 30% faster than the previous king of the hill Core2 Extreme QX9770 priced at $999!!!!!
Whichever way you go, with any model by either company, everyone wins!
The very real performance increase coupled with VERY attractive pricing all around on the part of BOTH vendors will make this year a year to build that new machine you have been thinking about!
And in a quarter, the new LOW POWER i7s for laptop use will be released! THAT is when we start looking for a new laptop! ;-))
AMD definitely needs a good launch after the 5 month delay fiasco with Barcelona in the fall of 2007. Let's hope thy have their act together and can benefit along with everyone else and also regain some of their enterprise/commercial customers that were lost.
Whatever your needs, Everyone should benefit at this party!
Score: 1
"If Intel drops the prices on these things, AMD is screwed."
I totally agree.
If Intel really wanted to pull the rug out from under AMD they will do just that.
Since Intel is enjoying the success of Core2 I'm pretty sure they can afford to cut prices and still make a profit.
Although I really hope AMD can get back in the race, I'm still a AMD fan.
But I got say that my Intel Core2 Quad kicks @$$!
Score: 0
Then you will LOVE the new Intels (and AMDs).
As the cheapest $284 i7-920n outperforms the FASTEST $999 Core2 EXTREME QX9770 by from 17-62%!!!!!!!
Score: 0
(Question: The header says 5 comments... Why do they not appear?)
It's great to see AMD finally getting their Shanghai (Phenom) CPUs out of the lab.
Again, we see an classic example of the Value Pricing Model.
Why is this a last shot for AMD? Simple. Intel has had plenty of time over the past two years to sell quad core chips at premium prices sufficient to recoup all of their non-recurring engineering (NRE) R&D costs for both Core2 and the new i7s - AND move to a smaller die technology!
AMD is forced to pull out everything it has and sell their products at cheaper prices before they have recouped their NRE. If this doesn't return huge volumes of sales almost immediately, their R&D cash reserves are exhausted.
Meanwhile, Intel is coasting. Their lowest end i7-920 currently MSRPed at $284 blows away the highest performing Core2 Extremes.
And the irony is that Intel has marketed these CPUs at an artificially high pricepoint, being the first to market with a new lower power consumption and smaller die process.
They can easily drop their prices if they choose. AMD cannot.
Now, regarding AMD's claims of:
"We're running these processors [at speeds] that quad-core processors have never attained"
Hmmm. Speeds at which AMD have never attained. In fact, the new Intel i7-965 Extreme runs STANDARD at 3.2GHz - faster than any AMD rated quad core CPU. So - so much for their claim. And not only that, ALL of the shipping i7s support overclocking - in fact all of the thus far released MoBos have easily fascillitated tools to easily overclock the CPUs. In other words. Intel's CPUs are designed for overclocking. And with the i7-965, Intel uses the even faster Quickpath communications bus coupled with DDR3 RAM for which AMD and its HyperTransport, while good, limited by DDR2 RAM cannot contend.
So apparently AMD has ceded the high end to Intel.
As far as a large cost advantage? Hmmm. At inception, with the classic VPModel pricing advanced by Intel, the Intel price is slightly (not dramatically!) higher. But is this a limitation? Intel is using its market position to sell lots of processors to early adopters at a premium price with LOTS of profit built in (while still at a VERY competitive price relative to the current Core2 prices) and in doing so, shoring up its coffers admirably. They have essentially recouped their NRE R&D costs. Something AMD has most definitely NOT done.
And that is why this is being touted a AMD's 'last' hope.
Intel is sitting pretty with both its R&D and marketing costs having been recouped. And Intel is already poised for the NEXT round even as this round has barely begun.
On the other hand, AMD has put everything into this round, and has NO cash reserves for the next round - and MUST generate significant volume sales in order to simply remain afloat!
And the really scary thing is that Intel is in a position, having already recouped their NRE expenses, to drop prices precipitously on its current line if they so choose. Just another feature of the Value Pricing model.
The only thing that I suspect will prevent this happening in a catastrophic manner for AMD is the resulting anti-trust issues that will emerge, as AMD will not be able to survive this move! Thus, Intel has a vested interst in keeping AMD afloat.
So, it looks like Intel will allow AMD to a share of the low end enthusiat market. In the mean time, Intel will own the high end server market AND a very large share of the enthusiast market.
And in the mean time, Intel is already fast at work on the next generation of CPUs, while AMD is simply trying to get the current line produced - and hoping to generate enough cash to think about designing the next generation of CPUs.
I wish AMD well in this gambit. They need it. And the overall market benefits by the Intel/AMD relationship. And actually, Intel needs this to happen as well. After all, they are in a symbiotic market relationship, where each needs each other in order to prosper. Intel, even more than AMD.
The real problem I foresee, is that while those folks ONLY looking at price may go with the AMD CPU, for a different in real market prices of just about $200 more,(not the inflated prices AMD cites!), you can have the Intel product with significantly more proven overclocking capacity and the integrated tools fascillitating this. And even greater performance advantages if one chooses to step up to the higher end i7s.
The saving grace may be that most of the REAL performance gains seen by most casual users are not determined by the CPU, but by the GPU in terms of games. And if they can save a few bucks on the front end with the CPU, they can reinvest those dollars into a higher end GPU(s).
It will be an interesting market in the next year. But in the end, with the substantial perforemance gains offered by both Intel and AMD, and the very attractive prices for such increases in performance, it will be a good (read "compelling") time to start considering building or buying a new computer - much more so than in any of the previous 5 years. And that will be good for the industry!
And with the same thing happening in a quarter or two with the new low power i7s for laptops, the laptop market should explode.
Score: 1
The best time for buying a new system was with the Core 2 Quad Q6600 :-) with a very low price point. It still rocks. Until prices come down considerably the i7 is not a real option for the masses. So having AMD still alive and trying to do something might be the first step to this direction.
Score: 0
Sorry, but that's just plain incorrect.
The i7-920 has been available en masse to the public since the 2nd week of November,2008.
It is priced LIST at $284 and outperforms the Core2 EXTREME QX9770 by 17-62%!!!!!
There is NO reason to buy a Core2 anything at that price!
The new series chips are effectively a disruptive technology doing far more for far less (or at the same price of entry) than their predecessors
Score: 0
Super can't waite! 3.0 GB 8m Cashe. Come on Produce it. AMD Forever
Score: 0
This sounds like it could fly, while at the same time sounding like they are purposefully selling these chips under-clocked.
The whole reason they used to sell chips at a certain speed was because that was the safest (most stable/reliable) speed for that CPU under most conditions. Now it seems they are changing it to allow for headroom which seems more a marketing gimmick than anything. Wouldn't you think they'd be able to take more of the market by offering the CPU at the same cost and a *much* higher clock-speed, hopefully beating Intel on both?
Looks like they already smoke them on price, but only squeak past in performance. Bump the advertised speed and they'd hit even the non-enthusiast review sites flying.
Score: 1
Overclocking past specified parameters potentially lowers the lifespan of a CPU......
Score: 0
Yawn.
These are DESIGNED to be overclocked.
This is not some user inititiated hot rod attribution!
Read up a bit on the Intel X58 MoBo chipsets!
Score: 0
First off..holy facelift, Batman!! Was this announced? It will take a teensy bit of getting used to, but thank you BN for sticking with essentially the same layout - its functional, fast and easy on the eyes, and I'd miss it. Nice update all around, though! (Whoa..we have ratings now? Oh God, there goes the neighborhood, LOL)
The usual wanks will get in here shortly and start critiquing, but I honestly don't think this article had one bit of hyperbole. The AMD-ATI marriage has not borne the fruit that many of us had hoped for..we knew it was possible, but with Intel essentially closing that price-to-performance gap in record time, things were not looking good. Spider was promising but the price wasn't right and the system builder support just didn't emerge. Dragon, on the other hand..THIS feels like something real. 2009 could be the year the industry finally wakes up and realizes the non-enthusiast desktop market is all but extinct. The vast majority of users are either looking for a cheap general-purpose laptop or building their own full tower rigs from scratch. Everything in between is getting replaced with a game console, a set-top box or an HTPC. Funny thing about recession..it trims the fat and gives everyone new focus.
Score: 0
"It will take a teensy bit of getting used to, but thank you BN for sticking with essentially the same layout - its functional, fast and easy on the eyes, and I'd miss it. Nice update all around, though!"
Are you friggin' blind? The design sucks! It's cluttered, unattractive hard to read and gives me a headache just by looking at it. Whoever came up with this site design should be taken out back and beaten with the server that's hosting this POS site. I'm all for making the site better, but they should go back to the old site and start making small changes to improve the site. Phuck!ing it up in one shot like this is not cool. In fact this site looks just like the one they put up last year but even more cluttered.
As for the article, GO AMD!!! :-)
Score: 1
It is most likely temporary. They did the same thing last year during CES.
This time, it was down for a few hours, came back up almost completely non-functional for a few more, but now seems to be at least semi-functional (Still no way to view down-modded posts so some topics claim 6 posts and show *nothing*)...
One wonders if the devs ever heard of "Betatesting". You'd think they would have, considering the site's focus, but you certainly wouldn't know that from the problems they had yesterday...
Score: 1