Author: Aaron Gordon
Date: 06:25:17 10/01/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 01, 2002 at 07:54:15, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On September 30, 2002 at 09:09:12, Aaron Gordon wrote: > >>On September 30, 2002 at 04:11:57, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On September 30, 2002 at 01:43:52, Aaron Gordon wrote: >>> >>>>On September 30, 2002 at 00:21:12, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 30, 2002 at 00:05:40, Slater Wold wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I got the annoucement in August that the 2600s would be coming out soon. It is >>>>>>now September and they are barely rolling out. (As in, several vendors who are >>>>>>selling them don't actually have them yet.) AMD is horrible about this. >>>>>>Announce a chip, and 3 months later it hits the streets. >>>>> >>>>>Well, it's a paper launch, and most every company does it at some point or >>>>>another. Does AMD do it more than most? I can't answer, because I don't keep >>>>>track of those things. >>>> >>>>Intel does most of the paper launches. I the 2600+ is the only time I've seen >>>>AMD try that. >>> >>>I remember a lot of other launches. The K7 was announced 2.5 years before >>>it was on the market. specs were posted 1.5 years before it was on the >>>market and then it still wasn't there. Now you can cry about intel delaying >>>the K7 by some 'blackmail' (i do not know how to call it otherwise as >>>my english is not too well; they didn't want to deliver their intel chipsets >>>to mainboard manufacturers who wanted to make K7 motherboards and 90+% of >>>their sales were intel boards at that moment, so they actually needed them >>>bigtime). You can cry about other things too, but both manufacturers are >>>already drumming years ahead about new things. >>> >>>My own drumming about a diep windows version is completely amateuristic >>>compared to their drumming up to 7 years ahead. >> >>Just because they post specs doesn't mean they're going to release it soon >>after. Only when they announce that they're going to release it should you start >>the clock. :) > >Without jokes, i only get serious about a new processor when i receive >the first benchmark of DIEP at it. That's usually 6 months to a year >ahead of market introduction. > >And that's pretty well needed, because if such a processor is going to >be the new standard, then it's not really stupid to take loads of time >to rewrite a part of the engine such that it works better at it :) > >>They posted the specs and THEN announced it. Not the other way >>around. Hammer specs have been around for a LONG time now. Yeah, they did say >>they were going to support up to 8 cpus for the K7's and yes we haven't seen >>those. Most likely because of market demand. > >Most likely because they didn't get it to work. I have a dual k7 and i'm >very happy about it, but i always have the impression it's a very instable >system compared to for example a dual P3. > >You simply don't want to know how many reboots i need, killing of explorer, >reinstalls of windows, etcetera. > >My dual P3 i installed the same software and same OS/servicepack like at >this machine and the dual P3 is completely working without problems. > >Then there is other problems for AMD to get processors stable to run SMP. > >We have already up to 300Mhz higher clocked new XPs, than there is MPs. > >I'm not saying intel is a hair better here with the P4. Not at all. By >keeping L1 caches small at it, they manage of course to clock it that >high. > >But even if you clock a P4 to 3.5Ghz, then still the same 'unstable' AMD >is way faster. > >I wonder how 'stable' that hammer is. > >Producing 1 such a cpu doesn't mean they can produce it cheap for everyone. > >So i wait till i have more reliable results on the hammer for DIEP. >Basically i lack having a cross compiler for it. > >>I have seen dual/quad opterons >>though so at least there is SOME hope. Slate is probably right, we probably >>won't see the 2800+ for another month. Same for Intel's P4-3GHz. Probably will >>see that released in December (but it's being announced today or sometime soon). > >1 month is easy waiting for. but 1 year... I'm not sure what you're doing wrong but I've had/seen NO problems as far as stability goes with ANY of my AMD systems. I have a feeling most people in here will tell you aside from the general Windows bs that dual AMD's are just as stable.
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.