IDF: Head of Intel dismisses AMD's triple core threat

It is vital that AMD do not go down the pan. If it wasn't for AMD, P4 Netburst CPUs would still be Intels flagship chips. Core 2 Duos only came about because A64 Kicked Intels ass. Stick with AMD!

Comment by 2pies at 8:51am 23rd September 2007

True Dual Core or not... who cares??? A cobbled together Intel Quad is still faster clock for clock than a "True" AMD Quad. I was an AMD man for years, since the pre K6 days, but currently use all Intel systems. I really hope AMD do bounce back with a killer chip to wipe the smile off Intels face. But they need to do it quick before they do go down the pan, and that would not be good to say the least.

Comment by barron_greenback at 2:03am 23rd September 2007

Anyone who bought a s939 is most likely p*ssed off that they were dumped in favour of AM2 for no good reason. As for true quad cores as opposed to 2x dual core - who cares? AMD should have shoved 2 x dual cores out to SELL Chips not sit back and be pulverized by Intel and essentially sneer at them whilst their bank balance got worse. And this 3-core thing is lame. It means they are having problems with the quad-core manufacturing and this is their way of making some money out of it. K10 benchmarks have already shown they aren't that good.

Comment by chemic_al at 11:27am 22nd September 2007

AMD will be best again just cause intel are the first to do smaller manfactured CPU's doesn't mean they are actually better. Anyway anyone who made the right decision of buying a 939 board when they came out wont be buying a intel board just cause its faster if the difference is speed is so minimal(when i say that i mean in terms of real world difference). Along with the fact that AMD will be the first to make a TRUE Quad core without having to drop the manfacture size so dramatically makes me think that Intel are just trying to get as many ppl to buy now so that dont lose all there money when AMD new core makes mince meat of intels contender. Yea they are releasing the first one a 2gig but what they didnt tell you is how much heat is produce at this lvl and how easy it will be to overclock.

Comment by nick101 at 7:35pm 21st September 2007

I just hope AMD survive long enough to take advantage of their "native quad core"

Comment by DudQuitter at 10:06pm 20th September 2007

I was thinking along the lines that if one core was slower than the others and therefore would fail quality control then it couldn\'t be sold for example as a 3Ghz quad core, instead you would have 3 cores running at 3Ghz and one at 2.5Ghz . I have no idea if this type of QC failure actually happens though.

Comment by amaan at 8:34pm 20th September 2007

So would what would be the point in that amann, thats bad marketing... as intel gets the full 4 cores already!

Comment by Lightning_Pete at 7:25pm 20th September 2007

Maybe they will release a GTO version, where you can unlock the fourth core

Comment by amaan at 7:08pm 20th September 2007

I agree with the fact that AMD are actually doing something. Well I hope that is the case anyway. I think it is important that AMD can keep competing with Intel, as that is the entire reason why prices keep falling and new architecture cpus are being produced. If Intel win the battle now, and put AMD out of business, then Intel will stop racing. Intel can be as cocky as they like but they are forgetting about how much AMD kicked their asses before C2D. I just hope the scales keep turning. AMD cant give up, or we will be charged extreme prices for everything for much longer than we are now. Look at Q6600s for instance, they came out about 9 months ago if I remember rightly and they were launched at something like £575. Now the G0 revision is £170. I think that is something to be happy about, as you can wait for a relatively small amount of time and pick something up for roughly 1/3 of the original price. I just hope that AMD bring something good to the table and that we can still have a reasonably difficult choice when picking out a new cpu.

Comment by RedHotsRule549 at 10:34am 20th September 2007

ya know, intel makes these cracks at amd but even with the 45nm cores on penryn they cant produce a real quad core, the dual pcb's make temps way higher and generally reduce performance because of the extra process needed to connect the top two cores to the mobo. and while intel is prancing about bragging amd is working on phenom, they are already improving their production abilities and getting ready to launch their first line of opterons with L3 cache.

Comment by yougotkicked at 10:24pm 19th September 2007

NickMC07121989 what this does is not make production expensive but actually cheeper...you can have a poor line of quad cores and as long as only one core has a defect sell it as a triple... as long as intel manage true quads with a decent line there is no reason for AMD to survive another few years...

Comment by reashlin at 10:13pm 19th September 2007

http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/601310/idf_556ghz_penryn_breaks_three_benchmark_records_in_two_minutes.html Erm *cough cough* I think Intel do happen to have a product which will counter Phenom, in the form of Penryn... Plus what is AMD thinking selling a quad-core CPU with 1 core disabled (if that is what they are gonna do)?? It's just going to result in higher production costs than need be. If AMD want to make money, be bold, scrap trip/dual/single core CPUs and focus on more cores as apps are undoubtedly going to be multi-threaded. I'm firmly in the Intel camp for now and the forseeable future.

Comment by NickMC07121989 at 7:50pm 19th September 2007

NOT! Intel's got nothing to counter that and they know it!

Comment by Negative_Sun at 6:28pm 19th September 2007

I lol'd.

Comment by D_Cypher at 6:18pm 19th September 2007

As much as I hate to say it, I agree with Intel on this one.

Comment by l3v1ck at 5:47pm 19th September 2007

big business playground battles like the xfx vs evga thing with the front of the box print (in the drool of the dog on an 8600 gt is the word evga) hee hee

Comment by wegreenall at 5:27pm 19th September 2007

intel cant really talk even if the tri core is a quad with a core disabled it still further ahead than what intel has in theory intel still only uses dual cores

Comment by arm4g3don at 5:01pm 19th September 2007

• Custom PC folding team takes number 6 position
• AMD spins off chip fabrication business
• Top 10 PC games chart
• Play Crysis Wars for free
• Over-volted RAM will damage Core i7 CPUs
• Developers hit out at EA after dropping Command & Conquer FPS
• PC gaming ‘in tatters’ says Peter Molyneux
• Asus X58 Rampage II Extreme pictured
• Leadtek demos Cell chip on a PCI-E card
• Rumour control: Windows 7 expected in 2009, says AMD

These are the most popular news articles over the past seven days.

• Leadtek demos Cell chip on a PCI-E card
• Valve: PC graphics have topped out
• Asus X58 Rampage II Extreme pictured
• Rumour control: Windows 7 expected in 2009, says AMD
• PC gaming ‘in tatters’ says Peter Molyneux
• Developers hit out at EA after dropping Command & Conquer FPS
• Over-volted RAM will damage Core i7 CPUs
• Play Crysis Wars for free