Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 10:38:14 07/09/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2003 at 16:53:10, Rajen Gupta wrote: >On July 08, 2003 at 16:43:02, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>On July 08, 2003 at 16:16:00, Rajen Gupta wrote: >> >>>they didn't >> >>Thanks. That's all I needed to know. >> >> >>>and i am talking of the chip's overall performance as most >>>end-users dont buy a chip for its chess performance only: (even on this forum of >>>die-hard computer chess fanatics its quite probable that there are more intel >>>based systems being used) if this so-called pentium killer does not measure up >>>(and i have a horrible feeling it won't), it will be the end of AMD as we know >>>it; for the last 2 yrs they have been telling us: >>> >>>"never mind the athlon; it is only stop gap; wait for the hammer; it is going >>>to smash intel;" and finally after endless delays it does show up it appears to >>>be almost geting a smashing itself! >> >>You do realize that "most end-users who aren't interested in computer chess that >>are going to use the Opteron" aren't interested in 3D games either, right? The >>Opteron is a server chip. >> >>So I guess all of those web server admins who were planning on playing 3D games >>on the companies web server should choose the Pentium 4. Good point. >> >>I also wonder if they recompiled every benchmark they ran for the Opteron with a >>compiler that can take advantage of it's newer features. If so, it would be >>interesting to know where they got the source code for some of that stuff, and >>what compiler they used. They made sure to mention that they tuned everything >>for top performance on the P4 benchmarks. If they didn't do the same for the >>Opteron (which seems unlikely, if it's possible at all), then the benchmark is >>worthless. This wouldn't be the least bit suprising, as you are always quick to >>find all of the benchmarks that show Intel chips as being faster and post them >>here. >> >> >>>if AMD disappears, we will then be subject to intel's monopoly which will be a >>>horrible thing for us all: hence my disappointment with AMD: always too little >>>and too late! >> >>I doubt the sincerity of this statement, as you take every opportunity you can >>to promote Intel and bash AMD. > >i used to take every opportunity to promote AMD and bash intel when AMD >performed; and they did perform well all the way from the thunderbird upto 1800+ >when their chips clobbered intel in most benchmarks, besides having a huge lead >in in running chess software: thereafter they gradually slipped and for the last >year it has been a rout. its not my fault that this has happened; its just that >intel gritted their teeth and got on with what was necessary to get the job done >while AMD preferred to rest on their laurels :-( Bad strategy on AMD's part... they should have made a 64 bit CPU with their existing process before tying the future of the company to SOI... -Tom
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.