• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 19:29
CEST 01:29
KST 08:29
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack1Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation StarCraft 1 & 2 Added to Xbox Game Pass
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S:Season 2 - RO8 - Group A Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 $3,500 WardiTV European League 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
RECOVER LOST BTC USDT FUNDS RECLAIMER COMPANY [ASL19] Grand Finals [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET NA Team League 6/8/2025
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes? Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 27565 users

AMD vs Intel

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
1 2 3 4 5 Next All
zeroimagination
Profile Joined August 2009
18 Posts
October 09 2009 03:42 GMT
#1
A Joust to the finish.

The CPU market these days is an interesting place, we have three price segments and three markets. Low, Mid, High (duals and quads) and Budget, Mainstream, Professional. The tactics that AMD and Intel have been using have proven to be quite interesting.

Not too long ago AMD introduced the Phenom II line of quad core processors which undercut Intel’s Core2Quad line in price and brought similar performance. However, Intel at that point still remained the performance king with its high clocking E8000 dual core line, the formidable Q9550 quad, and untouchable Core i7. The Phenom II line quickly sprouted off in multi-core directions, bringing the Phenom II X2 and X3 into the fray as well as the X4 955 and X4 965. It seemed like, for the first time in a long time, AMD was back on top, at least in the mid-range.

The Core2 line still technically provides better overall performance but fails in two important areas for its mid-range segment: price and gaming. The Phenom II architecture is a heavy hitter when it comes to gaming, giving nearly on par clock-for-clock performance against the Intel flagship; the i7. So when AMD branched its Phenom II line into dual and triple core forms they had effectively stolen the segment from Intel. This, in addition to backwards compatibility and promise of long term socket support, gave AMD a large edge and command of the mid-range. Good times for AMD.

The good times, however, would not last. A few months later Intel introduced socket 1156 which would power their 32nm Clarkdales in the future, as well as the newly introduced Core i5 line. The Core i5 line was a crippling blow to AMD’s domination. The cheapest i5-750 was essentially an i7 without Hyper-Threading and triple channel memory. These losses are nearly nonexistent and with Intel pricing the i5-750 at around $200 it chopped off AMDs mid range quad domination.

AMD struck back at the low-end with the Athlon II X2 and X4 line. The Athlon II X2 250 brought a 3GHz dual core to the low end segment which performed around 8% worse than the Phenom II X2 550 at more than 20% less cost. The Athlon II X4 620 marked the first time a brand new quad core would sell for under $100 while keeping up, and in some cases, besting Intels $160+ quads. With the Athlon II X2 250 dominating the low-end, the Phenom II X2 550 BE dominating the high-end duals, the Athlon II X4 620 dominating the low-end quads, and the Phenom II X3 720 BE being the best bang for buck processor, AMD seemed to still be in good shape. In addition to this, 2010 would see the introduction of AMD 45nm hexa cores and 32nm octo cores.

As good a year 2010 seems to be for AMD, it will be even better for Intel. Early next year, Intel will be introducing its answer to AMD’s remaining mid-range domination: the 32nm Clarkdale. Early reports of Clarkdale told only half the story. Intel would release a 32nm dual core to combat AMD’s Phenom II quads? Surely, a losing proposition.

As the release of Clarkdale grew nearer, revelating rumors began to surface. Clarkdale will have Hyper-Threading. Clarkdale will have Turbo.

Currently, Clarkdale will be separated into two lines: the i5 which will be high end ($170-$280), the i3 which will be mid range ($120-$140), and the Pentium which will be low end ($90). The i5 and i3 lines will include HT and Turbo. To make things interesting (and quite frankly, practical) let's assume the Clarkdale architecture will match the Phenom II clock-for-clock and core-for-core in gaming performance and surpass it in everything else. With the slowest mid range Clarkdale clocking in at 2.93GHz, what this would mean is that AMD would lose the dual core market which is, in essence, a majority of the gaming market. That’s not even taking into account Turbo mode.

But what about those gamers who also multitask heavily? Intel answers that in the form of Hyper-Threading which turns Clarkdale into a virtual quad core. This practically destroys most of the incentive for the average gamer to go with Phenom II. A higher clocking dual core is going to perform better than a lower clocking quad core while consuming less power and producing less heat, and unless you are doing something that requires 100% of one core, Hyper-Threading will provide adequate real world multitasking.

This really only leaves AMD with consumers looking for incremental upgrades for their AMD motherboards and the low-mid range quad core market for people who actually need 4 physical cores; a very small segment (practically nonexistent) as most people who require 4 physical cores will move up market.

What's AMD's next move?
home of vaporware
Manifesto7
Profile Blog Joined November 2002
Osaka27139 Posts
October 09 2009 03:50 GMT
#2
As someone who does not follow the trends of hardware much, this was a really interesting read. I'm interested in any debate that develops in this thread.
ModeratorGodfather
randombum
Profile Blog Joined April 2007
United States2378 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-10-09 03:55:23
October 09 2009 03:55 GMT
#3
I never knew there was such competition between AMD and Intel. If this thread develops into a real debate, I'm sure to learn lots.

Edit: So manifesto basically said it better.
FragKrag
Profile Blog Joined September 2007
United States11549 Posts
October 09 2009 03:57 GMT
#4
I have to say that I agree with the i5 cutting deeply into AMD territory. I was actually going to build a Phenom II x4 machine until I saw the i5 :|
*TL CJ Entusman #40* "like scissors does anything to paper except MAKE IT MORE NUMEROUS" -paper
Smorrie
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Netherlands2922 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-10-09 04:05:20
October 09 2009 03:57 GMT
#5
Welcome to TL! Had you included some links in there I'd say you were a spam bot or marketer lol.

While there are enough techies around here, you might be on the wrong forum for this kind of stuff (seeing how we also have people deleting their rundll files ).

I guess we'll just have to wait and see? :p Nothing touches the i7 series at the moment, but I'm sure AMD is brewing up their own new line of CPU's.

For people wanting to do more research.. check these benchmarks! In some areas the i7 series are more than twice (!) as fast compared to the best AMD competitor.
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2009-desktop-cpu-charts/benchmarks,60.html

Personally I prefer AMD for desktops & Intel for notebooks. However, if I were to buy a new desktop right now and had a budget to buy a monster comp, I'd definitely go for an i7 tho.
It has a strong technique, but it lacks oo.
motbob
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States12546 Posts
October 09 2009 03:58 GMT
#6
I love AMD... they forced Intel to get their act together near the end of the Pentium 4's lifecycle. Now Intel is generally blowing them out of the water but that's a good thing for the consumer.
ModeratorGood content always wins.
chongu
Profile Blog Joined February 2009
Malaysia2585 Posts
October 09 2009 04:00 GMT
#7
Nice write-up... its really hard keeping track of new processors.... i feel that the product cycle is really speeding up recently
SC2 is to BW, what coke is to wine.
Newbistic
Profile Blog Joined August 2006
China2912 Posts
October 09 2009 04:04 GMT
#8
I'm actually thinking about buying some AMD stock, though my main worry is because they've been operating at a deficit the past year. It would be interesting to see what people's thoughts are on the company and its products.
Logic is Overrated
FragKrag
Profile Blog Joined September 2007
United States11549 Posts
October 09 2009 04:06 GMT
#9
I believe AMD has a 6 core proc coming out in 2010
*TL CJ Entusman #40* "like scissors does anything to paper except MAKE IT MORE NUMEROUS" -paper
Lemonwalrus
Profile Blog Joined August 2006
United States5465 Posts
October 09 2009 04:10 GMT
#10
It's like a weapons race.
da_head
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
Canada3350 Posts
October 09 2009 04:11 GMT
#11
thx for the writeup
When they see MC Probe, all the ladies disrobe.
xmShake
Profile Blog Joined February 2007
United States1100 Posts
October 09 2009 04:11 GMT
#12
This is AMD's desktop roadmap. Highly relevant.
[image loading]
FragKrag
Profile Blog Joined September 2007
United States11549 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-10-09 04:12:46
October 09 2009 04:12 GMT
#13
rofl I bet they are all going to use AM3 socket

Except the 2011 cores
*TL CJ Entusman #40* "like scissors does anything to paper except MAKE IT MORE NUMEROUS" -paper
cz
Profile Blog Joined August 2007
United States3249 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-10-09 04:17:27
October 09 2009 04:16 GMT
#14
Somewhat on topic rant:

Anybody who buys AMD/Intel based on the company is retarded. There's a very simple way to buy hardware:

1. Decide on your price range
2. Go to sites like anandtech, techreport, etc and look at reviews of whatever hardware you want (ie CPU). Look for charts/graphics which give a bar graph of the products' performance in that range. There will probably be 10+ cpus in whatever your price range is, and their performance all nicely graphed out.
3. Buy the best performing part in your price range. Alternatively you might find that you can cut off 25% of what you pay for only 5% less performance with a certain part. Etc. The bottom line is you have the performance, you have the price, and you make the call.

This is so obvious but it frustrates me to no end when I see people who post here in hardware / build a computer thread with advice like "Buy intel, they're better" or "Don't get ATI, nvidia is a lot better." Just understand the performance, then look at prices, and go from there.

edit: This wasn't a criticism or response to the OP really but rather to unaware people who might conclude from the OP that you should buy a certain company rather than buying based on facts of the hardware you are paying for
FragKrag
Profile Blog Joined September 2007
United States11549 Posts
October 09 2009 04:19 GMT
#15
yeah, but sometimes there is reasoning behind it. As much as I hate to say it, AMD/ATi drivers sucked whereas nVidia drivers are generally much better. Intel has been dominating the market with it's C2 and i7 lines whereas the Phenom II came out at a horrible time
*TL CJ Entusman #40* "like scissors does anything to paper except MAKE IT MORE NUMEROUS" -paper
Whiplash
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
United States2928 Posts
October 09 2009 04:21 GMT
#16
<3 my corei 7, I run crysis full settings/screen and I have never seen CPU usage go above 33%.
Cinematographer / Steadicam Operator. Former Starcraft commentator/player
Myrmidon
Profile Blog Joined December 2004
United States9452 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-10-09 04:28:48
October 09 2009 04:23 GMT
#17
To me it's amazing how transistor feature size keeps shrinking so fast these days. Since chip size is no longer increasing, the decreasing feature size is the only thing keeping Moore's Law going. Practically every silicon chip on the market, including processors (and except maybe flash memory), can contain more transistors than people really know how to use. Right now everybody's cheating with processors, saying, "Oh, let's just put 2 4 8? cores on there. Since we don't know how to make a better processor with all our available transistors, let's just put the same old crap in duplicate all right next to each other to use up the space and hope people will be happy...oh, and all the huge excess space even after all that, let's make into cache." I mean, sure, extra cache helps for some stuff. And extra cores help for some things.

But I feel while Intel and AMD keep pushing hardware innovation, software to actually fully utilize the hardware is lagging way behind. It's not every task that can be parallelized so easily. People don't really know how to write programs to run in parallel (yes, lots of stuff does it, but it's far from mature).

What I want to know is what happens when transistors of reasonable cost can no longer be made smaller. There are physical limits--you can't make layers less than an atom thick. This really isn't too far on the horizon, so it's something to consider soon.
xmShake
Profile Blog Joined February 2007
United States1100 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-10-09 04:33:18
October 09 2009 04:31 GMT
#18
On October 09 2009 13:23 Myrmidon wrote:
To me it's amazing how transistor feature size keeps shrinking so fast these days. Since chip size is no longer increasing, the decreasing feature size is the only thing keeping Moore's Law going. Practically every silicon chip on the market, including processors (and except maybe flash memory), can contain more transistors than people really know how to use. Right now everybody's cheating with processors, saying, "Oh, let's just put 2 4 8? cores on there. Since we don't know how to make a better processor with all our available transistors, let's just put the same old crap in duplicate all right next to each other to use up the space and hope people will be happy...oh, and all the huge excess space even after all that, let's make into cache." I mean, sure, extra cache helps for some stuff. And extra cores help for some things.

But I feel while Intel and AMD keep pushing hardware innovation, software to actually fully utilize the hardware is lagging way behind. It's not every task that can be parallelized so easily. People don't really know how to write programs to run in parallel (yes, lots of stuff does it, but it's far from mature).

What I want to know is what happens when transistors of reasonable cost can no longer be made smaller. There are physical limits--you can't make layers less than an atom thick. This really isn't too far on the horizon, so it's something to consider soon.

There's a couple proposed routes, the one that I can remember the best is quantum computing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing
I also believe there's another proposed processor that uses lasers somehow.. I'm fuzzy on this one.
Edit: This is probably it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_computer

There are tech articles that come up on this subject every couple of months.
thunk
Profile Blog Joined March 2008
United States6233 Posts
October 09 2009 04:44 GMT
#19
I used to keep up with this stuff, but I don't anymore. It was an interesting read.

The AMD/Intel rivalry is a very interesting rivalry. They're both incredibly well managed and well run companies, a perfect example of how competition is good for the consumer.
Every time Jung Myung Hoon builds a vulture, two probes die. || My post count was a palindrome and I was never posting again.
LittleBallOfHate
Profile Joined September 2009
29 Posts
Last Edited: 2009-10-09 04:49:29
October 09 2009 04:48 GMT
#20
On October 09 2009 13:16 cz wrote:
Somewhat on topic rant:

Anybody who buys AMD/Intel based on the company is retarded. There's a very simple way to buy hardware:

1. Decide on your price range
2. Go to sites like anandtech, techreport, etc and look at reviews of whatever hardware you want (ie CPU). Look for charts/graphics which give a bar graph of the products' performance in that range. There will probably be 10+ cpus in whatever your price range is, and their performance all nicely graphed out.
3. Buy the best performing part in your price range. Alternatively you might find that you can cut off 25% of what you pay for only 5% less performance with a certain part. Etc. The bottom line is you have the performance, you have the price, and you make the call.

This is so obvious but it frustrates me to no end when I see people who post here in hardware / build a computer thread with advice like "Buy intel, they're better" or "Don't get ATI, nvidia is a lot better." Just understand the performance, then look at prices, and go from there.

edit: This wasn't a criticism or response to the OP really but rather to unaware people who might conclude from the OP that you should buy a certain company rather than buying based on facts of the hardware you are paying for

Not necessarily true, I would be willing to pay a bit extra to a company I trust and that I know the shit works.
For example, I have had a terrible experience with amd in the past(Support issues/driver), so I am less likely to purchase their products even if one of their products is a bit cheaper/better.
HATE
1 2 3 4 5 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL: GosuLeague
19:15
Quarter Finals
Hejek vs Herbmon
Semih vs Kyrie
cavapoo vs TousaN
ZZZero.O91
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft281
UpATreeSC 142
JuggernautJason69
CosmosSc2 64
EnDerr 26
RuFF_SC2 9
ROOTCatZ 8
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 19057
Sea 1233
Artosis 748
ZZZero.O 91
Dota 2
LuMiX0
League of Legends
tarik_tv10071
Counter-Strike
fl0m4355
taco 256
PGG 145
Super Smash Bros
ChuDatz10
Heroes of the Storm
Grubby3093
Khaldor93
Other Games
summit1g8347
shahzam1195
ViBE158
Maynarde91
Sick54
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Main Stream5207
Other Games
gamesdonequick614
BasetradeTV178
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 18 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH116
• RyuSc2 43
• davetesta36
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Migwel
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
StarCraft: Brood War
• HerbMon 10
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota22135
League of Legends
• Shiphtur718
Other Games
• Scarra1034
• imaqtpie935
Upcoming Events
PiGosaur Monday
32m
PiGStarcraft281
GSL Code S
10h 2m
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
Online Event
1d
Replay Cast
1d 2h
GSL Code S
1d 10h
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
1d 10h
Replay Cast
2 days
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
OSC
2 days
Korean StarCraft League
3 days
[ Show More ]
SOOP
3 days
CranKy Ducklings
3 days
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
Cheesadelphia
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
GSL Code S
4 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Wardi Open
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Replay Cast
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.