<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:osnews="http://osnews.com/rss2#">
	<channel>
		<title>OSNews: </title>
		<link>http://www.osnews.com/story/21020/Phenom_II_Competitive_Today_But_What_About_Tomorrow_</link>
		<description>Exploring the Future of Computing</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams</copyright>
		<webMaster>adam+nospam@osnews.com</webMaster>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 16:01:32 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		
		<item>
			<title>why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350261</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350261</guid>
			<description>With AMD you don't need a very expensive new motherboard and memory every time a new CPU series arrives. AMD Socket A CPUs were readily available for at least 5 years and upgrades were cheap and easy. The Phenom II is backwards compatible with most recent AMD MBs and DDR2 RAM. Intel is usually a much more expensive upgrade option.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:01:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (unclefester)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350262</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350262</guid>
			<description>Sorry, new here; see below.<br />
<br />
OT: Could we get some decent comment indentation after posting? I have no visual clue whether I replied or posted a new topic.Edited 2009-02-23 12:11 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:07:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (t-eighty)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350263</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350263</guid>
			<description>Except you can get an older Intel board and get any sort of Core2 and get the same performance for the same price.   Core2s can also reach 4ghz without any crazy cooling and stock coolers.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:09:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (mckill)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350265</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350265</guid>
			<description>To be fair, what enabled AMD to do this is their integrated memory controller. Now that i7 has this feature, you won't need a chipset refresh for every memory clockspeed bump.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:09:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (t-eighty)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350267</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350267</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">To be fair, what enabled AMD to do this is their integrated memory controller. Now that i7 has this feature, you won't need a chipset refresh for every memory clockspeed bump. </div><br />
That is until Intel decides to change something again which requires another new motherboard.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:13:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (liamdawe)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350275</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350275</guid>
			<description>Intel will probably deliberately break socket compatibility within a year.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 13:41:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (unclefester)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>HyperThreading</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350276</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350276</guid>
			<description>What the Phenom (and future AMD CPUs) miss the most to compete against latest Intel chips is HyperThreading.<br />
<br />
It is much important for &quot;Server&quot; loads with massive number of threads, where the i7 shines.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 13:54:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Treza)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Comment by flywheel</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350281</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350281</guid>
			<description>Intel Core i7 Competitive Today, But What About Tomorrow?</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:16:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (flywheel)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: HyperThreading</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350283</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350283</guid>
			<description>Hi,<br />
<br />
<div class="cquote">What the Phenom (and future AMD CPUs) miss the most to compete against latest Intel chips is HyperThreading.<br />
<br />
It is much important for &quot;Server&quot; loads with massive number of threads, where the i7 shines. </div><br />
<br />
I'm still wondering when Intel will release their server CPUs. At the moment you can probably get 8 quad-core Opterons on a motherboard, but you can only get one quad-core Core i7...<br />
<br />
-Brendan</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:28:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Brendan)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[4]: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350293</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350293</guid>
			<description>...and if all they do is change the pin arrangement, then some company will probably come out with a socket adapter. Like Powerleap.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:57:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (helf)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: HyperThreading</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350294</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350294</guid>
			<description>Supposed to be later this year... I'm waiting for the 32nm chips and multi CPU server boards before I upgrade <img src="/images/emo/smile.gif" alt=";)" /></description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:58:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (helf)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350298</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350298</guid>
			<description>That is why I buy almost exclusively AMD, save some celerons.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:50:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (fithisux)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>i7, remove memory controller = charge 3x price for MB?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350299</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350299</guid>
			<description>Tell that to my socket 939 board.  Or my buddy's am2 board that doesn't do 125 watts.  I will say AMD's boards are often cheaper though which is nice.  Especially when we're talking i7.  It's a premium/ripoff for those boards right now.  <br />
<br />
I generally bounce between AMD and Intel depending on who I think has the best price/performance at the moment and can meet the performance (or power) demands I need.  With an eye out for future upgrades of course.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:01:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Bounty)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Socket AM3 will help, but not as much as I had hoped.</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350300</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350300</guid>
			<description>Socket AM3, which supports DDR3-1300, will be out soon-ish, but I don't think it will be competitive soon. either way, I am waiting for that to get back on the amd band wagon. last AMD chip I had was a 4000 (when that was THE proc to have, though that was some time ago), First one I have was a 2600, good times indeed. But now I am on intel and I don't see myself changing back for my main workstations any time soon. I do need a new AMD machine for development purposes though, so hopefully soon.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:09:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (poundsmack)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350302</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350302</guid>
			<description>Check my release dates, but it's all in how you frame it.<br />
<br />
I don't have a single source, but I think LGA 775 came out in Feb 2004 and was replaced by LGA 1366 in Oct of 2008. 4 years, 7 months.<br />
<br />
Socket 939 came out in June 2004 and lived until May of 2006.  1 year, 11 months.<br />
<br />
(I'm putting the death dates of these not when the last new processor was released for them, but when the writing was on the wall due to a new socket out.  The point when you don't really want to invest in a new mobo of that socket.)</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:22:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Bounty)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: HyperThreading</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350304</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350304</guid>
			<description>Hi,<br />
<br />
<div class="cquote">Supposed to be later this year... I'm waiting for the 32nm chips and multi CPU server boards before I upgrade <img src="/images/emo/smile.gif" alt=";)" />  </div><br />
<br />
Me too. I'm want a pair of quad-core Core i7s (minimum), mostly for testing purposes (so I end up with NUMA and hyper-threading in the same system).<br />
<br />
I'm not very good at waiting though - I ordered a quad-core Phenom II yesterday to pass the time :-)<br />
<br />
-Brendan</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:28:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Brendan)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350313</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350313</guid>
			<description>Not really going to argue that AMD is better. I think the only reason they're &quot;behaving&quot; aside from IMC, is because a large chunk of people could land in the hands of Intel if forced to switch sockets. Phenom II's are great, I have a 920, but they're not as irresistible to people who lack AM2+. <br />
<br />
One other point, while 775 has been along for quite a long time, you're not going to be dropping in new C2Q/C2Ds in old 775 motherboards because of FSB issues among other things it may just have well been a socket change -- or several -- because incompatibility is incompatibility.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 20:14:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (JMcCarthy)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Socket AM3 will help, but not as much as I had hoped.</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350315</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350315</guid>
			<description>AMD boy myself. Got a 3200 marginally overclocked, though I suspect I could do far better on this.<br />
<br />
It's a really hard call for which camp to align myself in, but I am really impressed with the &quot;life&quot; of AMD boards. Every time I got a new Intel I got a new mobo, but with AMD it's lasted ... and lasted.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 20:32:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (flanque)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350325</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350325</guid>
			<description>Exactly. I have spent a fortune going after Intel changes. And now a Core i7 CPU, plus a decent mobo, plus enough DDR3 RAM, would cost another small fortune. <br />
I can't afford to build a Core i7 box right now.<br />
I also believe Intel has a long term wrong stategy, especially considering the present economic climate.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:38:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous Penguin)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350335</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350335</guid>
			<description>I partially agree with incompatibility due to FSB and some things. BUT it really hasn't been that bad all things considered. I mean maybe you'd have to buy alot of mobos if you jump for a new CPU every time one comes out, but if we are debating cost here, I doubt anyone does that. And as long as your strategy wasn't to go buy the cheapest mobo in existence that barely met the spec for the first CPU you bought for it, most of them had at least decent upward mobility. I have had 2 different LGA 775 mobos in the past 3 or 4 years. My first was bought back n the P4 days (intel 945) but held on to compatibility up to the early 6000 series C2D's. Those people who went and bought a 533MHz FSB limit mobo 2 years ago because it was on closeout really should have seen the writing on the wall that it was on closeout for a reason.<br />
<br />
That being said X58 chipset boards are way too pricey right now, and it will be some time before i leave my Core2 based platform (X38).</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 22:09:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (daschmidty)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350356</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350356</guid>
			<description>That is all fine and dandy... except for the fact that most socket A motherboards did not support Phenom when it was introduced.<br />
 <br />
 Same for old revisions of socket F motherboards not supporting Barcelona.<br />
<br />
AMD also burned a lot of people when they left people stranded with the socket 939 and 940.Edited 2009-02-24 01:35 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 01:33:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (javiercero1)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350362</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350362</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">With AMD you don't need a very expensive new motherboard and memory every time a new CPU series arrives. </div><br />
 <br />
 Isn't the point of the article about AMD being competitive today with the open question being tomorrow? Tomorrow the i7 boards wont be 300 bucks and DDR3 will be down in price. Right now i7 is for high end machines. Not to mention you can overclock on base air cooling to 4ghz blowing away anything around by nearly double.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 03:14:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Bitterman)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: why I prefer AMD</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350365</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350365</guid>
			<description>But i7 and DDR3 will probably take another 18-24 months  to be as cheap as AM2+ and DDR2 is now. <br />
<br />
Current $100 CPUs are already more than adequate for what 95% of the population requires.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 05:56:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (unclefester)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: HyperThreading</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?350402</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?350402</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">Hi,<br />
 <br />
 "<i>What the Phenom (and future AMD CPUs) miss the most to compete against latest Intel chips is HyperThreading.<br />
 <br />
 It is much important for &quot;Server&quot; loads with massive number of threads, where the i7 shines. </div><br />
 <br />
 I'm still wondering when Intel will release their server CPUs. At the moment you can probably get 8 quad-core Opterons on a motherboard, but you can only get one quad-core Core i7...<br />
 <br />
 -Brendan </i>"<br />
 <br />
 A. Xeon 55xx will be released in a couple of weeks.<br />
 B. ... And trust me, I like AMD, but given a well optimized application, the 55xx will run circles around the 238x.)<br />
 C. Xeon 75xx will be released in ~6 months.<br />
 D. ... and with 8 cores, 16 threads, AMD's Istanbul core (6C/6T) will have a -very- hard time competing.<br />
 <br />
 Having said all that, at least as far as I can see, AMD still has an edge when it comes to virtualization, so it just might be enough to keep it alive until  Magny Cours (12C/12T) comes; plus, if you have a fairly recent Barcelona machine (Say HP DL385/585), upgrading to Istanbul should be fairly easy.<br />
 <br />
 - Gilboa<br />
 <br />
(We're a long time AMD users; up until a couple of months ago our software was optimized to run on Opteron 2xx/x and 8xx/x, but now we're in the process of switch to Xeon 55xx/75xx [when it's out])Edited 2009-02-24 14:28 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:27:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (gilboa)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
