Strange conclusion.

When you reviewed AMD 90 nm first processor (Winchester) 11/25/2004 you said:

"The new Winchester core used for the new Athlon 64 processors should be considered a success."

"The performance advantages ensured by the new 90nm Winchester core compared with the predecessor, 130nm NewCastle core, are minimal and sometimes the CPUs based on the new core are even slower than the predecessors."

"Since the K8 core design remained the same despite the use of finer 90nm production technology, the major trump of the new Winchester based CPUs is not their performance but their low heat dissipation."

I think strange that some got "strange" conclusions after seeing a deja vu.

Lets see the 130nm to 90nm shrink was a success because the 90nm actually added performance, albeit only a couple of points but still added performance. The power difference was also huge, they went from 80W(L) to 50W(L). So yes that would qualify it as a successful shrink. The shrink from 90nm to 65nm resulted in a loss of performance between 3-7% and power did decrease but not by a significant amount. It's a mix bag, but I think that the enthusiast community and especially the Amd fans are expecting something big from Amd for a while now. I still remember the reverse hyperthreading for the AM2 which was of course false and then came the 4X4 which was a letdown to say the least, and finally the 65nm shrink which many enthusiast believed would be great OCs even though Amd themselves had said that it was not going to perform any better. Times have changed for Amd and their fans got use to being on top. They are having a hard time comprehending that Intel is currently better. 2007 who know but their is alot of hype around something called K8L. We will see....

AMD better smarten up and come up with the new k8L architecture as soon as possible. As it is, it has dropped to second place with the Intel Core 2 duo leaving AMD dual core x2 in the dust. AMD'S newest 65nm fabrication process didn't help any. We are staying loyal to AMD only if the company makes their processors as good as Intel's for the same price, and that is not what we are seeing in tests after tests not only from you guys but also from several other independents, like Amanda tech, etc. Look here in this article, you only used an slower Intel Core 2 6400 and even that one beat the best AMD has to offer in 11 out of a total of 15 different tests. Therefore my previous loyalty to AMD is now gone. If I was in the market to buy a new PC right now I would go with Intel Core 2 Extreme for sure. There is absolutely no doubt about it. That is no doubt the Intel core 2 Extreme is the very best processor in the entire market right now. The same goes for Intel's Core 2 Quad processors as well. I just hope that when the time comes for me to upgrade to a new PC perhaps in 3 or 4 years from now AMD will be on top again, otherwise like I said I will go with Intel.

When I bought my present PC 3 years ago AMD was on top with the best processor in the market with the best price. The equivalent Intel processor at that time was not as good as the AMD Athlon XP. How things have changed in the last three years !! No doubt that since the introduction of the Intel Core 2 duo Extreme which put Intel way ahead in the processor game, AMD has lost a lot of previously loyal fans and customers.

And of course, I forgot to add that AMD's attempt to catch up to Intel's Core 2 duo Extreme and QExtreme, with the AMD's 4x4 quad processor, the 4x4 quad was a complete fiasco and failure as well, with a much higher power consumption and much inferior overall performance, being beat by Intel's Core 2 duo Extreme in 24 out of 25 different tests by several different independent labs, including your X-bit lab here.

before: AMD rules!!!
now: INTEL rules!!!
future: INTEL RULES!!!

AMD Needs to get their act together first. wth is with the ridicolous naming scheme? 4800 being slower than a 4600 and how the hell are the average consumers supposed to know the difference between 4800 @ 2.4 or 4800@ 2.5 or all the EE and Small form factor or which is 65nm and whichis 90nm and which has more cache and whiich has less and what not....

Its an absolute mess.

Intel on the other hand, has it laid out plain and simple.

It seems that AMD is dead in the water. They outdo intel in the low end market segment only, and can not get their act together.

Its interesting to see that for years now AMD has thorougly trumped intel, and suddenly Intel comes up with a new processor and everybody wants to nail AMD's coffin shut!
Give me a break, the leapfrogging will continue and the consumer will benefit either way. I'm sticking to AMD, the last time I bought intel was a celeron 533 and it was a horrible mistake. I've moved up to AM2 and a decent x2 processor and I'm happy. I don't "Mod", I don't overclock, and I don't have a pc full of neon, flashing LED's, and fluorescent IDE cables.
The normal user buys pretty much in the middle of the marketing segment. "Extreme" processors are just for those with lots of cash who want bragging rights.

I imagine people will be wanting to nail intel's coffin shut in a few months too when AMD rolls out its new procs.

If there's one thing I learned from the ATI/Nvidia thing, is that you win either way. You get insanely fast stuff at a good price, so quit whining.

good article!!

although core2d is faster, ax2 are still more than enough for the average consumer or corporate business..and even the performance searcher will not see a valable difference in daily tasks between the two rival offeringsone more thing is that amd s products are perfectly adapted to vista....

My response to JOSEPH MATEUS seams to have been cut off...here is the full response:

"my previous loyalty to AMD is now gone" - Going for whichever brand has the fastest cpu at the time is not "loyal".

"AMD has lost a lot of previously loyal fans and customers." - I wouldn't worry about those "loyal" fans and customers, they'll be right back when AMD has a faster processor.

why do your reviews *still* not have a table of contents on each page? why do readers have to go back to pg 1 to see what's in the review. please provide a dropdown list at the bottom of each page of a review so that they can be navigated more easily. web design 101.... ;-0

Would you please comment on the ability of these various platforms to run scientific applications? In particular, the readiness of these technologies for the 64-bit platform (under both windows and linux).

Is it me? Why didn't AMD make and Brisbane CPU's with 2 X 1 MB L2 cache?

I would think that that would help the perfmance to keep up with Intel.

I'll wait for those CPU's to come out before I'll buy AMD.

I need to clarify that AMD naming scheme is cheating customers. You can’t name your processor a higher clock ratio with lower real clock and lower performance. Yours and most third party test results have proved this truth. For example, I have 2 AMD PC at home. One is rated at Athlon XP 2400+ (2GHZ/256K cache) and the other one is rated at Sempron 3100+ (1.8G/256K cache). At most of time, I feel my 2400+ is faster than 3100+. You can cheat for while. You won’t cheat forever.

The 4x4 from AMD kills anything Intel has.
You morons thinks because the 4x4 was benched with gaming tests that core 2 e is better?
Get an education.
The 4x4 is an all around machine, this means its fast at anything not just doom3.
Intel can not even build a dedicated 2x2, its sad.
even Intel's so called quad core is nothing but a dual core sandwich which all shares the same bus, its pathetic.
The bandwidth on the Intel systems is far inferior to the 4x4.
also what 64 bit programs were benched, I'll tell you none..
Not to mention that AMD will get more of a performance boost from vista than Intel.
Most geektoids say that vista alone will make the old amd chips on par with conroe.
This 4x4 is the most powerful workstation/gaming rig ever to grace the planet.
The intel fanturds are flaming because it smokes intels own so called workstation gaming rig called V8.
Go ahead flame turds bench the Intel quad-core V8 against the amd 4x4 in any game and watch the 4x4 trounce the piece of crap kentfield V8.
The Laugh is on INTEL, ha ha ha ha ha ..............

good article

how is this compared to the fx55 processor?
Would I benefit with the increased l2 cache over the fx55

/server irc.soyle.net