EggXpert

And good riddens!

 j/k

But seriously, according to this article from wired.com, it appears that AMD might die soon. They're only just now releasing a quad core server CPU, when Intel's Xeon has been out for ages. That means that their newer, 45nm desktop quads (Deneb) won't be out until next year, where Intel is releasing Bloomfield in a few weeks (which, if you don't know, is Intel's 45nm desktop quad CPU). Plus, Intel already has a 6-core CPU in the works, set to release soon (I think this is for servers). And where's AMD on this? Again, behind the times.

Will I be sad if AMD dies? Only if they take ATI down with them

26 Quad Core Opterons that have been out a LONG while.

http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3456

Don't discount the importance of power savings for server farms... AMD isn't dying in the next little while at least.

Hey, don't kill the messenger. Wired wrote it; I just reposted it and summed it up a bit and threw in a tiny bit of opinion

They were talking about AMD coming out with 45nm chips.....you misinterpreted what was written.

SergeiV:

They were talking about AMD coming out with 45nm chips.....you misinterpreted what was written.

No, I "quad core server CPU" when I should've put "45nm quad core server CPU"

My mistake

Capt. Insane:

And good riddens!

 j/k

But seriously, according to this article from wired.com, it appears that AMD might die soon. They're only just now releasing a quad core server CPU, when Intel's Xeon has been out for ages. That means that their newer, 45nm desktop quads (Deneb) won't be out until next year, where Intel is releasing Bloomfield in a few weeks (which, if you don't know, is Intel's 45nm desktop quad CPU). Plus, Intel already has a 6-core CPU in the works, set to release soon (I think this is for servers). And where's AMD on this? Again, behind the times.

Will I be sad if AMD dies? Only if they take ATI down with them

 

    I don't think that the lack of a 45nm quad core server chip will cause AMD to go out of business. Believe it or not many companies survive quite well without having the fastest performance in their industry. You are only talking about one very narrow aspect of their business. Believe it or not I'm writing this on a PC with an Athlon XP 2800 Barton core chip and it works fine. It can surf the Internet just as good as the fastest chip Intel has. It can run office apps just great. It can record TV, burn DVDs, edit video and audio and does it all in good time. It has 500watt 5.1 surround sound plays movies, outputs to my TV & gets HDTV.If you don't like AMD then don't buy AMD.

    Just remember. The fastest chip there is will only get you bragging rights for a couple of weeks. If you don't use the upper limits of performance, paying for it is a waste of money.

Like I said before, jerry42, I didn't write the article; don't complain to me. I just posted it. That's why the author of that article (who isn't me) has a comments section at the end of it.

AMD may not slice the edge off like Intel does, but they have been surviving just fine.  Intel is only now adding an on-die memory controller with their nehalem cores (i7).  AMD has been doing that for a while.  You can generally buy a PC with an AMD processor for a $100+ less than you can the same system with an "Intel Inside" sticker on it from your big box guys.  Intel has only recently (within the last few years) started geting OC friendly too.  AMD has been allowing all of us "tinkerers" to mess around with the processor settings, timings, and voltages for a long, long time.  They may not have the fastest, but they know what they are doing and aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

OMG  I have just read an analyst which states:

Shanghai puts AMD back in the fight with Intel

It seems that AMD does very well in the coming Shanghai processors.  but after I finish this article, I still know nothing about AMD Shanghai's performance. OMG.

 

The last Intel product that I bought was an AL440LX MB....and I haven't looked back.

AMD is far behind and they haven't made any money in years.

I have never used AMD and don't plan to but it is nice to have competition in the market. Hopefully they will stick around.

 

I have used them because of the price/performance.  I had a bad experience with Intel...support wise...and none with AMD. 

We better all pray that they stick around.  

I would not count out AMD just yet. AMD’s Extreme Makeover: What the new roadmaps  I only posted a couple of paragraphs of it but the rest of the article is showing up to 2011 for AMD roadmap.

Tracer76:

I would not count out AMD just yet. AMD’s Extreme Makeover: What the new roadmaps  I only posted a couple of paragraphs of it but the rest of the article is showing up to 2011 for AMD roadmap.

They're still only on quad core processors through 2011. Intel already has plans laid out for 6+ core processors. And they're not fully integrating DDR3 until 2011 either.

OK, I'll give you that DDR3 has little improvment (right now, and at least for C2D setups) over DDR2 and not much can utilize even quad core processors, but they're still showing a big lag behind Intel. And yes, I realize they're getting quite a bit of money coming in from their graphics cards, but I don't count that in because Intel is CPU/mobo only.

Capt. Insane:

And good riddens!

Will I be sad if AMD dies? Only if they take ATI down with them

What's up with these comments?  You know what happens if 

AMD dies?  Intel will RAPE US on CPU prices.  Get your mind right because Intel having no competition is a HORRIBLE proposition. 

Capt. Insane:

Tracer76:

I would not count out AMD just yet. AMD’s Extreme Makeover: What the new roadmaps  I only posted a couple of paragraphs of it but the rest of the article is showing up to 2011 for AMD roadmap.

They're still only on quad core processors through 2011. Intel already has plans laid out for 6+ core processors. And they're not fully integrating DDR3 until 2011 either.

OK, I'll give you that DDR3 has little improvment (right now, and at least for C2D setups) over DDR2 and not much can utilize even quad core processors, but they're still showing a big lag behind Intel. And yes, I realize they're getting quite a bit of money coming in from their graphics cards, but I don't count that in because Intel is CPU/mobo only.

LOL you are far behind if you think the octocore and the 6 core is the only thing they are working on at Intel. 2 years ago during the CES conference they did show the 80 core in person. But not to be released until 2015. 

And like Mike stated Intel will rape its consumers if AMD goes under that is a fact.

The 6- and 8-cores were the only ones I've heard of until your last post, Tracer.

And Intel already over-charges for their processors so it wouldn't be much different.

Capt. Insane:

And Intel already over-charges for their processors so it wouldn't be much different.

If you think they overcharge now then wait an see what they do when there is no competition.

Capt. Insane:

The 6- and 8-cores were the only ones I've heard of until your last post, Tracer.

And Intel already over-charges for their processors so it wouldn't be much different.

Waite till AMD goes out of business and then you will see prices go up, its something in the real world we call a monopoly.