PHENOMenal scores! Not.

[Capper]

I honestly think those days are coming to an end.

First, AMD just doesn't have the marketing capital to compete with INTEL, on any level. Next, places like Best Buy and Fry's now have dedicated staff to point people in a certain direction......

AMD can no longer be considered the "inexpensive option" because they have that ATI albatross hanging around their neck (which may, strangely, in the end be their saving grace)..

Then you have the "Green" aspect....For all the talk about how AMD trumps INTEL in power consumption/efficiency.......well, those days are over as well.....I think people are going to be blown away when they start seeing the Penryn results.

Originally Posted by Athildja-x64

I have a Core 2 Quad (9650) that can OC to 4GHz quiet easily.
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=269576
and that is with no memory tweaks.
Everything set to Auto for memory.
Voltage is a tad high but that seems to be a borad isse.
And yes I know that EC chips OC better than retail but still a 3.6 to 3.8GHz OC on a 9650 would not be out of the expected.
Before ATi was gutted by AMD they were competative. Now, they have fallen under the missmanagment of AMD and thier other internal issues.
So we have two companies that might fall due to the lack of vision of one.

excellent points.....I'd also like to point out, that as much as I like the QX6850....the QX9650 simply stomps what was the best processor on the market.......its like looking at Jessica Simpson and saying "Nice Silicon"....then looking at Scarlett Johansson....both are nice, but Scarlett is much nicer.

what blows me away is the power efficiency....while the QX9650 has the same TDP (130W), my system is drawing 170W as compared to 270W with the QX6850.

[Athildja-x64]

Originally Posted by gvblake22

You've got a great point there Rich, but I would like to add to the list of people that might buy Phenoms. That would be the average consumer who knows absolutely nothing about processor architecture and performance. The people that walk into Best Buy or go on the Dell website to buy a computer and don't care if it says Intel or AMD, as long as it works and they can get away with spending as little as possible.

Again the problem there is that clock for clock the Intel CPUs are less expensive.
As Rich mentioned above AMD has too much debt to cut prices.

As for the "green" thing, Intel was the first to remove all lead from its CPUs.
AMD still uses lead in thier chips.
And power is not going to be as much of a factor now that Intel is making 45nm CPUs.

I have said it before and I will say it again, instead of buying ATi, AMD should have invested that money into production, increasing capacity and making it easier for them to get product to market.

[Jokerswild]

Too bad because we will lose the only competition Intel has when AMD goes down and that is not good for the consumer. Intel will rule the processor and video card market to the extent that MS rules the OS market.

[Capper]

So in closing......AMD

[Athildja-x64]

hahahahaha nice :P

[Dread]

I'd really like AMD to succeed with a C2D killer, if only to keep the competition strong. We all win when they are beating each other to death.

[Tech Geek Deluxe]

I sure hope AMD gets Vision of something ... at least make an effort to corner the HTPC market Video+CPU combination with a powerful integrated low power usage option that can compete with the home project Intel systems.

If they could position for early ownage here and hobnob with some manufacturing suitors ... they could possibly still be in the game and establish trend meeting product lines before the market gets there.

Right now they can't and won't hold marketshare and haven't a hope to do so until they find something they can lead on and establish a new marketshare platform to elbow out a place from Intels lead.

They best re-structure and find a platform they can have some ownage on.

[Capper]

Originally Posted by Dread

I'd really like AMD to succeed with a C2D killer, if only to keep the competition strong. We all win when they are beating each other to death.

You know.....Paul and i were talking about this very thing again this morning....and here is what I have to say.

For all the talk about how INTEL needs to competition, and how this is hurting us, INTEL has released several products, refreshes, steppings, etc in the time between AMD failures.........in that time, INTEL has covered every niche conceivable, and covered it well....

At the same time, processors aren't the current problem in our field, as there is little software that takes advantage of multiple cores, and even fewer that do it well, and until HDD technology makes a huge leap forward, its going to be the bottleneck of any system.

[Athildja-x64]

Right now the HDD makers are working capacity not performance

[Loosecannon]

Yeh no real competition for Intel will be bad for the consumer , come on AMD wake up! And i hope ATI stay in the game