AMD Spider platform

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by Netwit, Jun 15, 2008.

  1. Netwit

    Netwit Pass the Kerbango

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    6,029
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm looking to update my computer and I'm pretty intrigued by what AMD is now offering. It looks like it will drop in price in the near future.

    Any thoughts or experience?

    I'm also curious if switching to Vista 64 would be the way to go for gfx performance.

    Coming from a d925xcv 3.6 dual core.
     
  2. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    amd is on death-watch right now. I don't think they're gonna die, but they can't make a competitive processor to save their life, right now.

    You are best served with a core2duo for gaming.

    I would only go 64-bit if you want 4GB of memory or more.
     
  3. Netwit

    Netwit Pass the Kerbango

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    6,029
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm currently running XP I should add.
     
  4. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    a lightened XP install is technically going to handle DX9 games better. If you want DX10, then you want Vista.

    Personally, I think a new build should be vista, anyway.

    What's your budget?
     
  5. MSTRBKR

    MSTRBKR New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    7,584
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Cydonia
    Do not go AMD.
     
  6. Doomsday

    Doomsday XXX

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    14,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Minnesota
    AMD definitely won't die.
    some market experts believe that AMD will never take back the CPU performance crown,... but they still will engage Intel (and Nvidia) via CPU+GPU integrated platforms. It's public knowledge that they've been allocating most of their engineers to Fusion and FireStream.

    one problem for them is Intel is developing Larrabee.
     
  7. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    If you can't product a good cpu, I think you'd have a very hard time producing a compelling combination of gpu/cpu. As it stands, applications tend to use my cpu. Even the most graphic-intensive applications utilize the cpu heavily.

    We cannot reach the limitations of PCI-Ex16v2 yet, so I doubt you'll get too much gains by integrating the gpu with the cpu that couldn't otherwise be offered with an expansion card. Also what do you do about memory? If the gpu (which many use ddr4) has to share ddr2/3 system memory, well, that's one more disadvantage.

    Considering how many times I've had to replace video cards, I like having them seperate from the cpu. Historically, it has been proven that a mid-range cpu will outlive the corresponding gpu, anyway. So it's not unreasonable to buy a mid-range cpu and gpu one year, and a couple years later upgrade the gpu and get another cycle out of the same cpu -- something we lose if the two are integrated.

    That's just a quick synopsis on why I think that a cpu/gpu integration isn't neccessarily the best course of action, and even more so why I think amd is poorly-equiped to bring that change.
     
  8. Doomsday

    Doomsday XXX

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    14,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Minnesota
    srsly, AMD chips are not that bad like it will break or something. Intel is just, better.

    not much details are given out about this, so I don't know.

    not a problem.
    Hybrid GPU solution = integrated + discrete graphics, working together.
    AMD calls it Hybrid Crossfire, Nvidia calls it Hybrid SLI/GeForce Boost.
    Intel doesn't have this (maybe till Larrabee).
    This is one reason why I said on that HTPC thread that on current IGP platforms Nvidia > AMD > Intel.

    the initial batches of Fusion will be aimed for the mobile market.
    i think this is awesome for laptops.
    can AMD bring it? lets wait and see.
     
  9. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    Even when AMD had the better desktop/server chip, they were NEVER able to bring a competitive product to the mobile market. I will be surprised if they can do it, now.
     
  10. SeeVinceRun

    SeeVinceRun Currently In Prison OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,124
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kansas City, MO

    This may be a bit off the original topic, but has anyone heard any concrete facts about the AMD Bulldozer chip? I hear from AMD sackriders its like the second coming of AMD's golden age, but I'm thinking its probably just going to be another high clock, low cache chip. Any news on this?
     
  11. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    amd has been very tight-lipped about it. Thus far I have only heard one good thing about it.... It's supposed to be a multi-core design that can split a single thread amoung multiple cores... Currently the AMD and Intel offerings can only run one core per thread.

    But afaik, intel has that up their sleeve, as well. So I don't see anything special coming out of amd... and sorry to disagree with some other people, but gpu/cpu integration is not the answer.
     
  12. Doc Brown

    Doc Brown Don't make me make you my hobby

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    16,404
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    If that works well enough for the mobile market, that would be freaking huge.
    That could single handedly save AMD's ass.

    I wish them luck.
     
  13. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    amd can't make a chip that is as fast, cool running, or as low-power as intel... now they want to add a gpu to it?

    this can't end well.
     
  14. Netwit

    Netwit Pass the Kerbango

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    6,029
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought it was more along the lines of the on board gpu running with a single card a la crossfire, but cheating.

    Why isn't cpu/gpu integration the answer? From everything I've seen it's very efficient and Intel should have their version coming down the line soon.
     
  15. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    Intel has been able to RELIABLY produce high-performance chips that are both good on battery life, and good on heat/power.

    AMD can't do that.

    Think of it this way:

    Intel is baking a cake. They got the formula right and have an awesome cake, now they're moving on to making the frosting. The frosting may suck, or it may be great.... but because the cake itself is awesome, the finished product has the *potential* to be awesome.

    Amd is also baking a cake. They have a formula that is okay. The cake is NOT great, but it is a cake. Now they're going to move onto the frosting. Their frosting may be better than intels... or it may be the same... or it may even be worse... We don't know yet... but because amd's cake was only okay, there is NO WAY for the total product to be awesome.

    So Intel has potential to be awesome, and AMD does not.
     
  16. Doomsday

    Doomsday XXX

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    14,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Minnesota
    i strongly believe that this is AMD's future. acquiring ATI took them away from just being a 'CPU' manufacturer.
     
  17. Doomsday

    Doomsday XXX

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    14,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Nvidia is laughing at Intel's gpu attempt (Larrabee).
     
  18. Doomsday

    Doomsday XXX

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    14,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Minnesota
    man, I'm an Intel sackrider, you're a true fanboi. :mamoru:
     
  19. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    odd, because according to my research, intel's atom is actually far superior (even at graphics) than nVidia's offering:

    Intel is a processor company. I don't think anyone would argue against Intel as a beyond-capable and innovative cpu firm. So in terms of CPU know-how, Intel wrote the book. What people question is their ability to be competitive in the graphics arena -- something they have not yet been able to do. The opposite is true with nVidia. They have graphics down pat. Now you can argue that their color needs some work as Matrox is more true, and ATi more vivid (and I'd agree with you) but when it comes to building a great video platform, nVidia knows what they're doing. Unfortunatly, they know essentially nothing about processors.

    With Intel's new Atom platform, Intel's GPU stigma is supposed to change. Intel already decodes 1080p at the full 60fps, and nVidia's offering... doesn't. So Intel has the CPU in the bag, and is already building a formidable graphics solution. nVidia can't even match Intel in their own game (graphics) and have little hope in matching the CPUs of Intel :mamoru:
     
  20. Doomsday

    Doomsday XXX

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    14,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Minnesota
    i'm talking about this war
    http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-nvidia-larrabee,5292.html

     
  21. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    It's fucking truth. AMD is even having production and QA problems to add insult to their already major injury. That's why AMD is releasing "tri-core" chips. They were NOT designed to be tri-core... They were designed to be quad-core. But AMD is having their quad-core dies fail in such spectacular numbers that they have to do something to cut the losses. And that's where we get the tri-core. A cool marketing gimick to salvage their "not-quite-good-enough" production.

    Intel was asked if they would start making tri-core dies... Their reply? "No we're sufficiently good at making quad-core... So we'll just keep doing that :mamoru:"
     
  22. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    Yes I know that war. And in some way he has a point (because video is holding the system back.

    But how does that make the CPU dead? If anything, it says that Intel did such a fantastic job, that their product has progressed with such swiftness, that they are not the bottleneck.

    Basically nVidia said that they, themselves were the problem and that they're running behind :mamoru:
     
  23. Doomsday

    Doomsday XXX

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    14,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Minnesota
    They are pushing Tesla for one thing.
    http://www.nvidia.com/object/tesla_computing_solutions.html

    I'm actually confused on what Nvidia's plans are.
    a few months back, i heard they want to buy VIA or AMD if it goes belly up.
    a month ago, they said they only want to focus on visual computing.
     
  24. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    nVidia would never be able to buy AMD.

    nVidia is kinda inbetween a rock and a hard place... On one hand, you have two major cpu firms (intel and amd). For years, each did their own thing. So you had two major gpu firms (ati and nvidia). Well amd bought ati. right now it's not that huge of a deal (although for the first time in several years I'm liking ati's offerings). But nvidia knows that both amd and ati can make formidable products... and when you combine the two, some magical things COULD happen. I'm not neccessarily thinking this is relevant in the desktop arena -- because I think discrete graphics will remain king there. But mobile devices are becoming ever so much more media centric -- partly due to increases in cpu performance while remaining small and efficient, partly due to improved battery tech, and also partly due to increases in bandwidth (especially wireless) to support media-centric applications. And in these portable devices, the desire for high-power processing and graphics performance in a small, power/thermal-efficient package is quite appealing. Well shit. AMD/ATi are positioned well to enter this market. Now at first glance, this puts Intel and nVidia in a bit of a tricky spot. But then you realize that Intel's mobile cpus are lightyears ahead of what AMD currently has. Now AMD has proven in the past that they CAN innovate... So Intel cannot afford to be idle. But they do have a leg up on the cpu. Now one may think this presents an opportunity for a collaborative effort between intel and nvidia.... and maybe it can. But Intel is such a big firm that they could easily enter the gpu market if they so desired. And that's what we see now. Intel has said they are going to accomplish these goals... And with a company like intel, it just happens the way they say it. And certainly they have the engineers and the funds to support it.

    So now you have nVidia as the lone-man-out. You also have VIA -- and they've never really been good at anything.

    nVidia got really scared and they made some press-comments that they shouldn't have. Now it's put-foot-in-mouth time... I mean it's pathetic when Intel's very new gpu is already beating nvidia at 1080p content :mamoru:

    but back on point, nVidia is jumping around with where they want the company to go. They are frightened -- and rightfully so. As it is, they do NOT have the muscle to compete with AMD/ATi or Intel. Via would be a poor partnership, imo. So does nVidia decide to stick to gpus and keep making worthwhile high-end gpu products? Or do they try to branch into the emerging low-cost media-centric device market? unfortunatly that requires serious investment in captial and engineering so it may require them to bet-the-house on something that could very well be the end of the nvidia we know and love. Of course, the converse of that is also true -- it could prove to be a worthwhile and lucrative endeavour.
     
  25. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    AMD is trying to make quad-core chips with all the cores on a single die, and they're trying to beat ATi into shape to make good in-house motherboard chipsets. That's what's biting them in the ass right now; they can't make enough of their really good CPUs to be profitable because the design is so complicated that most of them come out defective, and something close to half their business is still dragging on the ground, trying to come up to speed.
     

Share This Page