RSSCounter-'tock:' AMD fires back at Intel with everything it's got
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published January 8, 2009, 12:09 AM
(continued from previous page)
Betting everything on bettering the bottom line
![A chart showing the relative performance improvement of AMD's Dragon platform over its Spider, with each incremental addition of technology. [Courtesy AMD]](http://images.betanews.com/media/2397.jpg "A chart showing the relative performance improvement of AMD's Dragon platform over its Spider, with each incremental addition of technology. [Courtesy AMD]")
Compared to AMD's Agena design for last year's Phenom, the Phenom II set will enable more instructions processed per clock cycle, will finally ramp speed up to 3.0 GHz for the Black Edition, raises the total on-chip cache from 4 MB to 8 MB, and finally makes the move AMD said not long ago was premature for Intel: support for DDR3 memory. Phenom II X4 can be dropped, however, onto processors that use DDR2, so it's still a candidate for an upgrade from Spider.
During a recent analysts' conference, Intel executives were heard to say that statistics may show there aren't as many enthusiasts in this market today as there were in prior years. "If you define 'enthusiast' as someone willing to spend $1,000 on a Core i7 processor, then I'd have to agree with them," stated Solotko with a swagger. "Phenom's not at that price."
The magic platform price barrier here is $1,000, and it's not fair if AMD stops at $999.99. Its plan is to release the 2.8 GHz Phenom II X4 920 at $235 suggested retail -- which is $16 less than the entry-level processor for Spider. By the time you put all the parts together, including the ATI card, AMD promises customers their final tab should not exceed $900 at the entry level.
By AMD's estimate, the basic Intel Core i7 platform would end up costing customers about $250 more. Upgrade that i7 to something that's performance-compatible with X4, and customers may be spending $900 more.
"With 790GX base platforms, you can buy a motherboard for about $135 that has all of the capabilities of AMD OverDrive performance tuning and multi-GPU support; and with an AMD Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition, you'll have the unlocked control and the massive headroom of a state-of-the-art processor," stated AMD's desktop division director. Plus, he added, "The ATI Radeon HD 4000-series graphics cards are renowned for their energy efficiency. They're manufactured on a state-of-the-art process, they have tremendously low power requirements, such that we were able to offer the 4870X2 -- two GPUs on a single card -- and still with a very reasonable power threshold for an enthusiast card."
The X4 940 Black Edition is the "lights out" CPU AMD's been wanting to build for almost two years: a 3.0 GHz quad-core, at long last. It will sell for a suggested price of $275. Compare that to a Core i7 940 at 2.93 GHz. Granted, it's AMD at 45 nm versus Intel at 32 nm. But it's also Intel at $568.50, according to Pricewatch.
"The savings that you have with the Dragon platform are going to result in users being able to make other investments that enhance the performance of their solution," stated Simon Solotko. "Essentially, they'll be able to upgrade to a 10,000 RPM hard drive, buy a faster GPU, all those things are going to be made possible."
Perhaps the best news of all for AMD is that Dell is announcing for CES its XPS 625 system, which should become available immediately, will support the Dragon platform. Dell's Alienware division is also cooking up something for the first quarter of this year, as is Dell's arch-rival HP. Dragon could be the start of a comeback of epic proportions for AMD. But that's exactly what the company needs, and what it has to pull off.
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. ph***!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
|