Newsflash! AMD Appalbred CPU out in two weeks!

[Shade00]

wassnt trying to create an amd vs. intel thread just facts. you buy cheap guess what you get cheap, want a typewriter i got 1 cheap. ALLEN

Lol, ok, that's clearly a statement of fact and not opinion. I'm not going to be drawn into a debate. Let's just drop this.

 

[RangerJoe]

anyone know what kind of core size it is going to have? like the barton?

 

[bulk88]

I highly doubt that these chips will be like 1700+ T-bred-Bs. The applebred is a ghetto processor intended for the cheapest of systems (like those walmart lindows systems). I think these chips will be mixed a bag of failed T-bred-bs and Bartons (more likely). Basically de-clock it and decache it until it works. I just hope the barton 2500's price doesn't increase. These are that processors that were rejected for Thorton work. I think AMD is decreasing the price so people buy these systems out of price and not looking at performance increasing AMD's market share (important for stocks) and user base.

 

[wannaoc]

1400MHz, 1600MHz and 1800MHz costing $32, $39 and $47 respectively in quantities starting from 1000 units.

Those prices are for distributors unless you plan on buying 1000 units at once for yourself. Expect a 20-30 dollar raise from there for them which is still pretty damn good IMO.
*Hopes to see a good o/c from one of them*

 

[Deathknight]

wassnt trying to create an amd vs. intel thread just facts. you buy cheap guess what you get cheap, want a typewriter i got 1 cheap. ALLEN

So you think that you are getting full value for the price you pay on an Intel processor? Don't you think a good hunk of change you pay for that cpu is going to feed their marketing? How much you think they were paying blueman group to do Intel commercials? Paying more for something does not ensure that it is always better, it just ensures you have less money after the purchase.

 

[Shade00]

I highly doubt that these chips will be like 1700+ T-bred-Bs. The applebred is a ghetto processor intended for the cheapest of systems (like those walmart lindows systems). I think these chips will be mixed a bag of failed T-bred-bs and Bartons (more likely). Basically de-clock it and decache it until it works. I just hope the barton 2500's price doesn't increase. These are that processors that were rejected for Thorton work. I think AMD is decreasing the price so people buy these systems out of price and not looking at performance increasing AMD's market share (important for stocks) and user base.

I would speculate that yields are good enough now that we'll see basically the same potential out of these chips. Their core voltage is 1.5v (for all three models), so that's a good start.

 

[allen337]

So you think that you are getting full value for the price you pay on an Intel processor? Don't you think a good hunk of change you pay for that cpu is going to feed their marketing? How much you think they were paying blueman group to do Intel commercials? Paying more for something does not ensure that it is always better, it just ensures you have less money after the purchase.

if i wanted cheap i could do that, but from what i see noone wants cheap they want quality products, if i have to pay more for intel, i will, i wont be the one with a 3200+++++or about the speed of a comadore64 @ 2.2 gigahertz and think im getting something great, you aint. Dont get me wrong i like amd i wish the would blow intel away, but for now my pittiful 2.8 will take me where i need to go, and its not a 4200+++ or about that speed its actually a 2.8 gigahertz. ALLEN

 

[OC Detective]

If you want quality and have cash to burn then get a opteron 246 as it beats the P4 3.2 in most benchmarks even with cas2.5 memory compared to cas2.0 for the Intel.

 

[c627627]

$49 1700+ overclocked to 3000+.
We couldn't care less about anything else allen337, because we can say minimum wage, and you can't.

You can play here:
Intel CPU forum

 

[Sterculus]

I can't wait to see how well these things OC. If they are really cheap, and have decent overclocks, then they would work pretty well for crunching boxes if nothing else. For any sort of gaming/intensive work the cache will probably cripple it a good deal.

 

[The Coolest]

if i wanted cheap i could do that, but from what i see noone wants cheap they want quality products, if i have to pay more for intel, i will, i wont be the one with a 3200+++++or about the speed of a comadore64 @ 2.2 gigahertz and think im getting something great, you aint. Dont get me wrong i like amd i wish the would blow intel away, but for now my pittiful 2.8 will take me where i need to go, and its not a 4200+++ or about that speed its actually a 2.8 gigahertz. ALLEN

I just want to comment on this post. yea its 2.8GHz, and so what? the AMD say 2800+ is 2.09GHz.
The GHz speed doesn't matter at all, what matters is how many calculations can a proc do in a clock cycle, as Intel made that number smaller the CPU needs faster clock speed to do the same amount of calculations as AMD procs, this way, Intel also is able to milk such high speeds from its chips. AMD figured as most Joe sixpacks are ignorarnt and don't know about that they will go and judge a PC by its GHz marking. so the only way AMD could catch up is by making up this PR.
I do admit that it sucks as it would be much better having 2.8GHz AMD chips, but its all we have.
And if the chip has low L2 cache, doesn't mean its quality is bad. Yea its not gonna perform too well, but what do you expect? Its a Duron.

Also paying more for a product, doesn't ensure it being of better quality or even faster than other less pricey products

 

[scoobiedoo]

as a side note to the whole mhz vs pr thing i would like to add that it was amd who had hyped to mhz bit up when it was the first to reach that 1 ghz plateau, now it seems as if intel is running with this and is making a good bit of profit from the 'regular' user.

To me, it just looks like a good marketing plan...a great way to make money off of someone elses hype.

just my .02 cents.

scoobie

 

[The Coolest]

Could be true, but at that point in time both CPUs (the P3 and the Athlon, were doing about the same amount of work per CPU cycle, so AMDs chip was actually noticably faster

 

[allen337]

$49 1700+ overclocked to 3000+.
We couldn't care less about anything else allen337, because we can say minimum wage, and you can't.

You can play here:
Intel CPU forum

Thats just one of the main reasons amd cant keep ahead of the game, instead of actually making a awesome 2.25 or 2.3 gigahertz processor they wanna go backwards. Minimum wage has nothing to do with it, i see xp2800 & 3000 everywhere, if amd would just keep going up on a regular basis i would buy amd, i wouldnt care if it was $600 a chip. I try to upgrade something, video, harddrive, mobo, or processor twice a year for my main puter, i have a amd1gig thunderjet from when they first came out, very pleased with it. But why does amd wanna be the cheap ones, i want amd to survive in the hard times we have i just dont see it by making $50 chips. ALLEN

 

[scoobiedoo]

Could be true, but at that point in time both CPUs (the P3 and the Athlon, were doing about the same amount of work per CPU cycle, so AMDs chip was actually noticably faster

This is true TC....but It is true also that amd hyped the mhz thing up because they wanted to be the first to 1 GHZ....This has now come full circle and has bit them in the bum.

"we" as above end users know that and amd cpu and intel cpu are pretty much equal....'they' the joe six packs of the world do not...this is where intel is marketing too and amd is marketing obviously to the above enduser market.

so in turn i think amd may shy away from the pr rating in a few years as they can't really do anything about it now.

again my .02 cents

scoobie