If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(via /.)   New Cray supercomputers will use AMD CPUs. Intel surrenders. Well, not really, but we're sure they're pissed off...   ( infoworld.com) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

63 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Oct 2002 at 1:23 AM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

89 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

2002-10-21 11:22:35 PM  
SLAYERWINE, I would tend to agree with with that. And yes, I do have both AMD and Intel machines running (a PIII, older P4, and a two AMD systems.) Can't speak for the newer P4s.
2002-10-22 01:26:04 AM  
533mhz QDR bus sure is tasty though.

Too bad for Intel's premiums.

AMD continues to rise..
2002-10-22 01:26:08 AM  
screw you guys.. i'm taking my PIII and going home..
2002-10-22 01:28:17 AM  
I have a pentium because I like supporting the corprate machine. Also AMD cpu's can catch fire without a fan running. :) Ok, maybe only the older AMD's but still!

Whatever. I bought a P4 because its eaiser to resell to old people who don't know any better.
2002-10-22 01:28:38 AM  
Only 100,000,000,000,000 operations per second?
2002-10-22 01:29:44 AM  
intel does suck. not only because i believe amd's architecture is superior to theirs, but because they overprice their chips.
2002-10-22 01:30:25 AM  
a few days ago, i thought to myself, i should buy some amd stock, because their new line of processors are starting to get press and look like they might kick ass... so i did, i am happy :)
2002-10-22 01:30:43 AM  
Awesome - the more good that comes AMDs way, the better off the cpu market becomes for everyone. Intel loses a little more headway.
2002-10-22 01:30:51 AM  
amd chip > intel chip
2002-10-22 01:31:01 AM  
Great headline.

I seriously wonder what Intel has up their sleaves. AMD is poised to take the consumer 64 bit market when they debut their next gen chips early next year. Intel doesn't have any 64 biatchips that are meant for a wide consumer market.

2002-10-22 01:31:49 AM  
amd is awesome. i'm so glad to hear this news.
2002-10-22 01:32:54 AM  
Cray is still around ?
2002-10-22 01:33:01 AM  
Hmmmm...100 trillion ops a second?

If I gather a shiatload of free 486's....

2002-10-22 01:34:47 AM  
while i am not sure it is worth the technical debate, AMD will sell it's desktop 64-bit porcessors merely on the "64-bit" buzzword for now, the added bits are simply not required at this stage for the average home user... though they should kick ass for 32-bit programs... especially with SSE2...

one of my favourite things about amd is, socket A... i will miss it...
2002-10-22 01:35:11 AM  
I believe a lot of you are talking out your ass. I like asking people why they think AMD's architecture is superior, and they don't have a fvcking clue!
2002-10-22 01:36:40 AM  
Somewhere, a geek is thinking:
*Hmmmmmm. Time to start working on a new Deep Fritz.*

I'm suffering from some serious processor envy.
I just drive two AS/400e's.
2002-10-22 01:36:44 AM  
"The machine, code-named Red Storm, will require over 16,000 microprocessors to achieve that performance level..."

Red Storm, isn't that the name of Tom Clancy's computer game company?
2002-10-22 01:36:49 AM  
Just wait till they install a better cooling system and overclock those 16,000 beauties
2002-10-22 01:37:05 AM  
Also, Intel has a project developing a processor that would be compatible with AMDs 64-bit proc... (Yamhill up their sleeves as backup)

though if Intel starts basing their procs on a AMD generated Instruction Set.... when is their x-license agreement up??
2002-10-22 01:37:57 AM  
Hmm...I wonder if the University of Texas won the rights to do research at the Sandia research facility. Hmm...which university does research at Los Alamos?
2002-10-22 01:38:33 AM  
AMD's architecture is superior because they use shorter pipes.
2002-10-22 01:39:06 AM  
Like Verdant said, 64-bit is all but a buzz because there's nothing out there that can use it right now
2002-10-22 01:39:39 AM  
Imagine how much pr0n that thing could serve....
2002-10-22 01:40:44 AM  
I stroke my T-bird lovingly every night before I go to sleep.
2002-10-22 01:40:47 AM  
Celerons are the tool of the devil!
2002-10-22 01:41:20 AM  
It would be powerful enough to drive pr0n that could actually, physically do you, Mrtwista.
2002-10-22 01:41:28 AM  
do you mean chip architecture or system architecture?
but you are right most people don't know why it is better in terms of technicalities, merely that it runs fast(ie from benchmark comparisons,) is cheaper, easier to overclock, and is the made by a non-huge company
2002-10-22 01:41:42 AM  
I had an old 300Mhz AMD K6-2 (i think) that was great. Then a 800Mhz AMD Athlon which was ok, but had some problems running any OS. Now, a dual P3 800Mhz, love it, and will never go back. :) I still have a 75Mhz laptop here also, which my girlfriend gave to me after windows was not cooperating, and she took a hammer to it! Some chips fell out of it, the hard disk had damage like crazy, but a new hard disk and it is still tickin. :)
2002-10-22 01:42:09 AM  
And here it is:

[image from pethealthcare.co.uk too old to be available]
2002-10-22 01:42:25 AM  
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Silicon Graphics buy out Cray a couple years back?
2002-10-22 01:44:15 AM  
in other news, after reading Nanookanano's comment Mrtwista announced his proposal to Red Storm. Plans include a honeymoon in the server room.
2002-10-22 01:47:33 AM  
See, I knew New Mexico could be #1 at something!!
2002-10-22 01:50:38 AM  
Well, if AMD can manage to get their new 64biatchips out sometime soon then they might survive. I'm begining to wonder though. Eventually, Intel will beat them just on raw speed, which they do for the most part already (would be nice if intel got off its high horse and dropped prices though).
2002-10-22 01:51:14 AM  
Like Verdant said, 64-bit is all but a buzz because there's nothing out there that can use it right now

... nothing (or very little) for the home user... though it will systems to have much, much more than the current ~4GB limit (a couple of orders of a thousand more GB)

just try solving a set of a billion simultaneous equations on your home computer!
2002-10-22 01:51:50 AM  
the AMD architecture (at least the athlon, dunno about earlier chips) is actually a RISC architecture with a translator that parses the x86 ISA--that is, AMD's are running Intel's code through an abstraction layer, if you will. and they are just as fast (if not faster) than the intel chips, so you have to figure something's going on.

hell, if all your windows programs were compiled for the native AMD architecture, that thing would just blaze...

in most benchmarks that i've seen, the high-end athlons have outperformed the high-end Intel chips. in fact, they have outperformed every other consumer desktop chip (including motorola's woeful G4 processor... that's another story though. let's just say they did a good job with vector math).

i believe AMD's translator is software-based, not hardware. this takes off a lot of the overhead of having like a 30-stage pipeline (which the P4 chips have.. or some ridiculous number) where misses cost you a *hell* of a lot of clock cycles.

transmeta's chip is somewhat like this but even moreso. they can manufacture a very cheap RISC chip and simply tack on software-based cache management and branch prediction and save a lot on cache misses or poor predictions.

the AMD is kind of a fusion of the best qualities of RISC and CISC i think they have the best-designed chips out there. i would still like to see some stuff compiled for the native AMD ISA. i don't know if you can even get a ISA manual or anything about it, i haven't looked into it.
2002-10-22 01:56:24 AM  
/me smiles and nods to Chiller and pretends he understands what he's saying
2002-10-22 02:00:48 AM  
boobies link up! (good one too)
2002-10-22 02:01:09 AM  
while the shorter pipeline is the reason that amds CPUs running just over 2Ghz match intel's cpus at almost 3Ghz, it is not really a determinant of speed in itself. My big beef with intel is that i beleive they used a longer "pipeline" to acheive higher frequency rates, but lower efficiency merely to deceive customers looking at only MHz ratings.
2002-10-22 02:01:53 AM  
nevermind, just an ok one
2002-10-22 02:02:16 AM  
Intel doesn't have any 64 biatchips that are meant for a wide consumer market.

well the money is in the server market.

I'm torn on this. I'm a big AMD fan, I think anything that helps the company is good. But I'm an ex Intel employee who has hopes of being hired back in a few months and anything that gains intel money makes my working situation more stable, so therefore anything that keeps intel from making money makes my job situation more precarious.

Oh well
2002-10-22 02:02:24 AM  
I'm sorry Red, I must go now....**leaves server room for christina's hardened nips**
2002-10-22 02:03:02 AM  
Verdant- i've heard that before
2002-10-22 02:07:13 AM  
I believe a lot of you are talking out your ass. I like asking people why they think AMD's architecture is superior, and they don't have a farking clue!"
Tell me why they are better?
An amd chip running far slower than an Intel chip still does the math quicker.
I have no clue what is better about the amd chips, but at lower speeds they still spank the intel chips in most everything.
Find me a recent test... that actuialy pitted an AMD chip against an Intel chip of the same speed.
Now consider the fact that AMD sells their chips for far less than intel does.
AMD has really got their act together as of late.
I'm thinking back a few years, when amd was starting to make a name for themselves... and intel was still spanking everyone when it came to floating point math.
Now it looks like amd is the god of fast floating point math.

Currently it the part of amd chips running hotter than the intell ones... but this is talking 64biatchips.
Have you read the specs on intels 64biatchip? It pulls like the largest amounts of watts of any major chip.
(i forget the exact nunmber, look it up if you want the exact figures,) but intels new chip eats power.
Hell the power that it pulls is ungodly when you think of cpu's.
however the hammer (or what ever its called now) is nothing like the firehazard (or buliding meltdown) hazard that that intels new chip is.
Just on power usage alone, id go with a hammer.

*now regressing some*...
I go amd, since they currently make far 'smarter' chips than intel does. Run some complex shait though an amd chip running at 1ghz... then run the same thing through an intel chip running at 1ghz. The amd chip will do it much faster 90% of the time (i pulled that 90% number out of my arse)
I have also heard many reports of the p4 handeling floating point math worse than the p3.

(spelling is not my game, so excuse spelling before you comment on what I said)
2002-10-22 02:14:17 AM  
Whoa, major flashback! Cray Computer lives?!?!
2002-10-22 02:16:45 AM  

...just in response to HexInverter's comment about how he's never heard *why* AMD's chips are better...
2002-10-22 02:18:07 AM  
I was just answering hexinverters question. Why is AMD architecture superior? they use shorter pipelines and kick ass against an intel cpu speed for speed. Pipeline..better caching, better memory choice until recently, better chipsets etc, etc. etc
2002-10-22 02:29:10 AM  
People like you are dangerous-half informed, half pulling it out of their ass

actually a RISC architecture with a translator that parses the x86
Last time AMD made a RISC based processor was in 1990.. the Am2900
the K5 used an abstraction layer to break down the instructions, into RISC instructions so what you say is perhaps true, though after the k5, they didn't convert them to RISC but something AMD coined as "RISC86", intel's processors do pretty much the same exact thing, but calls these broken down instructions "micro-ops"

hell, if all your windows programs were compiled for the native AMD architecture, that thing would just blaze...
uh-huh "native AMD architecture"? what exactly do you mean? when you compile you break down the written code (presumably from a high level language like c++, perl) to machine code (x86 + extensions (mmx, sse, sse2, 3dnow)) this code has nothing to do with cpu architecture.

like a 30-stage pipeline (which the P4 chips have..
just thought i'd let you know it is 20

if you'd like to learn more about the p4, i suggest reading Here
Athlon XP
Athlon 4 (core AXP technology)
2002-10-22 02:29:47 AM  
the first sentence in the article says it all... "struggling"... AMD blows, and all you pro AMD fark's out there are poor ass kids who cant afford quality, and buy shiatty processors, then have windows crash, becuase of those shiatty processors, blame it on windows, and preach anti Intel and Microsoft, when you truely know who is king.
2002-10-22 02:37:23 AM  
[image from chat.carleton.ca too old to be available]

maybe give reasons why you are a intel zealot?
i mean if you prefer intel, all the power to you, but i have 4 amd procs. a dual proc server, and two worstations, neither of them are turned off, except to reboot after software installations or system configuration. I also don't think Red Storm is being bought by a "poor ass kid"

to the avarage home user, there is essentially no difference between the two lines, save for speed and price.
2002-10-22 02:39:42 AM  
actually, im pro amd, but since I can get an intel mobo and piv 2.53 ghz proc for 175 through work, im going that route
Displayed 50 of 89 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.