Well, it's not the first time that AMD will release a killer chip with such performance advantage over intel's offerings.

Keep the good work AMD.

The 2222 SE is available for a tray price of $873, the 8222 SE is priced at $2149. Intel’s 3.0 GHz Xeon 5160 processor currently sells for $851.

funny how Intel is now MUCH cheaper than AMD - LOL

I so wish AMD will release these things !!. I have a Tyan MB just waiting for 2 AMD Quad Cores.

the 8222 SE is priced at $2149 , huh ? what a strange price ?

They have to release the barcelona processor and then we can tell they 50% or 1% advantage over clevertown. dont goofup in ads only when it is in market we can tell

The new core will be a rendering/image editing monster! Intel needs its 3.73 ghz Penryn to keep up with K10 until Nehalem/Fusion.

Can this be actually true? Im no fanboi, but ya just gotta love the underdog

wowwwwwwwww!

Performance per cycle doesn't mean anything if the competition can clock their chip high enough to negate your efficacy advantage.

Seems to me that AMD wants us to think they jumped a generation or two in development with the "Barcelona"-wonder-core. To me it looks more like AMD also purchased the marketing division from ATI and put them at "work". The IDF 45nm benchmark numbers from Intel sugest "big" improvements over the current models just by adding more cache and ramping up the speed.

AMD desperately tries to compete with Intel, but the blue giant seems to have forgotten all about the small green men, avoiding direct comparison with models from the competition. However both companies pick the right benchmarks, showing off their strongest points.

All AMD fanatics everywhere expect the "Barcelona"-Messiah will come and save them. I fear that Barcelona will just save the Server-Business sector, and leave the rest to slumber. Unlike Intel that had the power to inject the new core-logic to all segments, AMD will bet on servers again. And they will have a hard time covering high level unit demands.

Don't you guys know how hard it was/is to find the exact AMD processor you want? And PRICE? This is another problem. Comparing a 2000 USD processor with an under 1000 USD processor and claiming that it is "only" 25 to 50% faster... And Intel will cut prices really fast and really down. AMD will get in trouble once again because they will need every extra penny they can get, so at the time the new core will begin selling, Intel's couter offerings (except the very high end) will be dirt cheap by comparison.

This is indeed just another "AMD vs. Intel", and I've been with Intel for as long as I remember. I do hope that I am wrong, and I also hope VIA or maybe better IBM will join in soon (Cell anyone?). If Intel is left alone in this one it will get bad for all of us, because if they can make money doing nothing they will take that deal.

I doubt it, AMD is just trying to give itself an ego boost, those numbers are just way to extreme..

....Or ...well, you know the rest. no more talk. . . .but seriously, if it's true, then good job AMD! I'm openly pulling for both manufacturers to have successful years. competition means i get to build more computers.

Of course AMD... It seems that your expectations are always what you dream will happen. An example; your expactations about your Q1 fanancial status. Unfortunately, dreams remain dreams.

to be honest I never thought AMD could defeat Intel but they did with the Athlon64... the thing is, I'm still skeptical about they're chances, but if they do it again I promise not to doubt them again! come on AMD, show us what you're made of!

I'M sitting here on my 2years old s939 system, I would like to upgrade but AMD gave me no chance when abandoning s939, so now the natural choice is to go for an INTEL C2D, if AMD don¨t hurry up and releasing there new product line which can compeate on price/preformance, would really like AMD inside again, as I they are more innovative. Plus I've never forgave INTEL for my firste cpu 486DX that set me back 1000$... Come on AMD suprise us and release it soon and not later...

The 2222 SE is the competitor to the 53xx Xeon series processors, and the Xeon 5355 is currently $1200 on newegg. So Xeons are more expensive in that regard.

The 8222 SE is for the 4 and 8 socket systms, which would be competing with the Xeon 7100 (still netburst) series and the 7300 series (not out yet). I was able to find the 7140 for $2200 online, so price is comparable.

funny how Intel is now MUCH cheaper than AMD - LOL

The 2222 SE is available for $873
The Xeon 5160 sells for $851.

um... the 2222SE is only $22 more than the 5160. The 8222 SE is an entirely different beast and should not be compared to either.

AMD has many times in the past misleading the market. They just could not keep up with the pace of the development and competition. For how long this kind of marketing should go and be ended ? It is pity given the fact of the company in the past 30 year, their net loss is gigantic. Those who are the stock holders should dump all of them.

@PK: They have to release the barcelona processor and then we can tell they 50% or 1% advantage over clevertown. dont goofup in ads only when it is in market we can tell...

This is precisely what Intel used to do back in its P4 days..."paper launch"... but I have no qualms if AMD starts doing the same thing... after all this "technique" helped in increasing public awareness of an upcoming processor line so why note do the same thing?...I say go AMD!

The biggest success since 4x4!!! Oh wait...

This number is from horse mouth. We need number from 3rd party.

Yes, AMD ahd a lot of red numbers in last 5 years, but did you compare how many they lost and how much they grow ?
For example when you get 500mil to red numbers and same time get new factory costing 4 times more (price included) is not as bad.

Let see benchmarking ...

First off, comparing the Xeon 5160 to the 8222 SE is stupid, and heres why. The whole 8xxx series of AMD Opteron CPUs is made for 8 WAY OR GREATER processor configurations while the Xeon 5160 is made for 1 or 2 WAY processor configurations. To get more than 2 WAY configurations with Xeon you have to buy Xeon MP which is different beast altogether.

Secondly, the guy who said that 'efficacy' (I assume that means efficiency...) doesnt mean anything when you can just jump the clock speed up heres why this is a stupid argument. Two words: Net-Burst Architechure. This was the line of thinking Intel had with the P4. This is why AMD killed Intel in server, desktop, and mobile CPU lines. Pushing to 4.0Ghz and higher is very hard to do if you want to do it reliabibly--I dont care if you and your friends can overclock your CPU higher, Intel or AMD dont sell 4.0Ghz CPUs becuase it isnt cost effective. Furthurmore, this is a comparison between CPUs that live in data-centers where efficiency is ALL that matters. You have ot fit the most powerful CPU in the smallest foot print that consumes the least amount of power. If a company has to pay $300 more for a cpu that is 50% more efficient they will do it, becuase in the long run it will save them A LOT of money.

Stop comparing Apples and Oranges while blinded by your fanboy-ism. It makes you look stupid.

I know pretty much everyone had a shot of thrill and excitement after hearing Barcelona is 50% faster than Clovertown. Hold on for a second.

1. No power consumption details are released. Does this 50% increase is performance comes with burning more energy like the Bugatti ??? (yes bugatti needs only 250bhp to reach 150 mph... another 736bhp to reach 250 mph) Surely a bad news for the environmentalists.

2. Be skeptic... nobody even seen whether this Barcelona is round in shape. Until proper benchmarks are performed by TG or any other 3rd prty evaluater, we can't really claim about 50% fact.

(maybe a hoax) I heard AMD usually tune up the processors to get the bench marks and they release a less spec products to market. I don't strongly believe in this fact (just a rumour). So.. if it is the case.. we definitley need to do 3rd party testing.

programmer, you wrote " Those who are the stock holders should dump all of them."
What gave you this idea? actually this is a great time to buy a stock like AMD, not when it is riding high, but when it is in the dumps. If you remember before their Athlon launch almost 10 years ago they were in much the same position and their stock was at about $4 per share. It peaked at $98 not long after.
My point is that unless you think AMD is going to go away, which I do not, then you should not be afraid to recognize a good buy when you see one. AMD will be back and they will adjust to the market. If I see their stock take a beating then I plan to do some dollar cost averaging and dig in for a while.

I cant find the link right now, but there is a link, the first digit is the number of processors per box. I read this last night, its somewhere on digg. But yeah its 8 processors for 2149, or 2222SE is 2 of those opterons. >.< Much Much cheaper per processor

That's great for the server market. Meanwhile, AMD continues to fall further behind in the consumer market. By the time they get quantities of new consumer chips ready for shipment, Intel will have had plenty of time to catch and surpass them - again.

Processors will get faster and faster.

The new AMD Quad Core has a completely different architecture than Intel's Quad Cores... Intel's Quad Cores are only 2 dual cores stuck together... AMD did something different... They made the first native quad core... it integrates all 4 cores evenly, so these performance boosts might actually be realistic.

My guess is that amd's using $70 heatsinks, whith a massive warranty plan for these flammable chips.
Let's hope - pray that they are not so desperate as to overclock this thing massively.

the one advantage of having an intel chip is that the 965 and some 975 north bridge chipsets will support the quad cores on the 775 socket. but we don't know what sockets will amd use[current am2 or something new], which will be a big miss for those trying to save money on the motherboards along with other components.

i believe someone made a good point, that each company is showing off it's good points["huge generation leap" made the point].

another thing to be skeptic about is that they haven't shown anything. all we know is what they say [what amd say]. when intel was going to release core 2 duo, they showed benchmarks [even though it was preset by intel] but at least that shows some sort of evidence to the world.

another good point, how much power will it consume and how expensive [final price decision] will it be for the consumers.

In the past I don't think anyone could think AMD would beat out Intel for 3 years running. I have to say that in the past AMD has been more to set a technical bar that Intel has taken a few years to match. I enjoy my duo core/Nvidia SLI for gaming, but I will not be updating again untill I see what AMD/ATI have to offer. My Gaming system before this was ATI/AMD. I just enjoy being able to choose the best or the best WFT is brand loyalty in this kind of a market there is none. I go when my best option is like most people. Money does not grow on trees

lol

Kill
D

Mike wrote "I cant find the link right now, but there is a link, the first digit is the number of processors per box. I read this last night, its somewhere on digg. But yeah its 8 processors for 2149, or 2222SE is 2 of those opterons. >.< Much Much cheaper per processor" The 8 series processors are still dual-core but they are designed for >2 socket systems. They have multiple Hypertransport links (3 I blieve) that can be used to do processor-to-pprocessor communication to implement NUMA. For example, Sun sells an 8 socket (i.e. 16 core) server. Of course its a very expensive machine - that's roughly $20K just for the CPUs.

The 8 series AMD Opterons are designed for systems with >2 sockets. They contain multiple HyperTransport links for processor-to-processor communication to implement NUMA. Sun, for example sells a 8 socket (i.e. total 16 cores) Opteron server. It is very expensive - that's $20K for the CPUs alone.

someone said this "the one advantage of having an intel chip is that the 965 and some 975 north bridge chipsets will support the quad cores on the 775 socket. but we don't know what sockets will amd use[current am2 or something new], which will be a big miss for those trying to save money on the motherboards along with other components"

K10 cpu's are backwards compatable to socket AM2.

"So far, we the company had claimed" Que?

Of course they want to tell people that they are in that much trouble financially right now they need all the backing they can get from investors... I'll believe it when I see the numbers...however its not a bad idea to say that if they can deliver otherwise it could be all bad.

very few of these posts are accurate in terms of widely available information, including most of the anti-AMD posts, btw.

The funny thing about Wolfgang's articles on AMD is that he first talks his doom and gloom of the company and then finishes with the actual news he's posting about.

In example:
...Sunnyvale (CA) – Following last week’s sobering financial news...

...The announcement arrives less than a week after the company announced the second quarter with heavy losses in a row...

...This phrase especially applies to AMD, which was flying high in 14 consecutive quarters, but was brought down to brutal reality in just two quarters - due in part to challenges the company isn’t used to dealing with and in part to competitors that have been gaining lots of traction...

And the list keeps growing. :-)

Well, you can read something negative into any article, right? It’s virtually impossible for us to write a neutral enough (are there grades of neutrality?) to please both the Intel and the AMD crowd.

You certainly have to read the whole article to get the info – which we hope is useful to you guys to help you make business and purchase decisions.

The Barcelona article especially looks not so negative to me, but we want you to keep in perspective the current and difficult business environment. When we do write news, we do not just consider a press release or a certain statement, but pull in all the information that is directly connected with a certain event.

I do admit, however, that I have not noticed that a certain negative statement is often at the beginning of an AMD article. Thanks for mentioning this – we will have a look into this and make changes, if appropriate.

Wolfgang

I want to see AMD taking crown again.

I may just be nit-picking, but these are the server/workstation chips. They will run on the same platform as current server/workstation chips, socket F (IIRC 1207). There will definitely be a desktop version of the processor that is supposed to run on AM2 with minimal changes, which should just be a new bios.

These benchmark figures are perfectly reasonable:

1) AMD has a much more advanced architecture for running multiple processors than Intel does.
2) AMD is building a chip with a quad core die, not a chip with 2 dual-core dies.
3) There are still some benchmarks that AMD can win (http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/02/142244&mode=thread)
4) Since the release of Athlon, AMD has pushed for floating point performance.
5) Athlon, Athlon-64, and Core 2 architectures all had gains in this ball park.

When you consider that AMD has basically given the opteron the same kind of treatment to create barcelona that Intel gave the Pentium 3 to create Core 2, it will hardly be shocking to see 50-75% more performance per clock than the K8 core, which will translate to 20-50% more per clock than the Core 2.
Intel hasn't really done much with Penryn aside from a speed bump, larger cache and faster bus, and they're beginning to claim 50% performance increases too.

In the end, all of the stuff we'll see until next fall is just a series of stopgaps. Nehalem with its integrated memory controller, and 45nm 8 core AMD chips with mature DDR3, much better Hypertransport-like connections, and the next PCIe iteration will be the real news. Alongside R700, Intel's discrete graphics, and low power integrated cpu/gpu's like fusion, these processors will be the start of a radical shift in pc design. GPU's are taking on much more of the general purpose tasks, CPU's will adopt reasonably high performance 3D capabilities(leading to truly fully functional handheld computers-Crysis in your pocket anyone?).

AMD was in this same position 4 years ago as the Athlon XP was being crushed by netburst. The biggest difference is that AMD is much larger, much better equipped to come back this time. The last time this happened, they came back strong and took a commanding performance lead for more than three years, and all you naysayers really believe this to be their last gasp?

Well Wolfgang, thanks for replying to my post, but I do hope that when it's intel's time, you guys make articles with the same level of criticism and pessimism as is often with AMD. ;-)

The SledgeHammer cometh. Did you think they played that card?
This is the beginning of plummeting ntel. The ego of you ntel lobbyists - as I said - remember what you said 2 years hence. Besides, haha, what are you doing in this area - interested? scared? think maybe you should switch bandwagons? Trying to poo a parade, celebration?
I love the underdog with such limited resources that bombs the big corp w it's dirty money.
I watch and with open eyes, the sickness of the big bully - it will not stand the light.
Stay tuned lobbyists, more coming. AMD is driving ntel - STILL - very still.
AMD innovates to rule - with open honesty, humility, and a simple, original design. The hype is not the thing, get over it. This is excitement!
AMD as a small company, can't be the best can they? O they got bigger, well, my o my, and it just won't stop.
This should be obvious to one who knows truth. Maybe a little too esoteric for some - btw efficacy is efficiency of effort, pure focus, clean intent, right motive. Resultant efficiency is just a natural.
This is Spirit - beyond bizness hype. haha lil green men! right on!
All The Angels Come. YeeHawwww!

They claim it will be faster, but by the time it's released who knows what intel will have in store. I'm sick of waiting for their claims.

(1) The price of the 8xxx CPU is higher because it is ment for 4-way and above boards. Most of the Xeons would be put against the 2xxx chips in a standard comparison. (2) As far as a too-big jump - Intel made a similarly big jump before with the Core2, and AMD did with the Athlon (1st gen), why can't they do it now? Still, as stated, it's only paper and electrons now, we'll see what happens when they are released.

Notice how the Intel fanboys are now doing the same thing that the AMD fanboys were doing when Conroe was announced?

Nice to see AMD's claims. It's quite likely they can back them up, but I won't really believe it until I see the chips released and benchmarked by a 3rd party. I don't trust paper - let's see the silicon.

Exactly. Fanboys.

While having the fastest processor is never a bad thing its gonna be the mid range cpus that really matter.

I love AMD but I'm not dumb enough to buy a processor thats not worth every penny I pay for it.

This is interesting I do beleave I feal a storms a brewing

Whats K-10 TDP? No mention, I bet its 120-150W range

AMD is trying to get in our face. they have nothing. they're going to go bankrupt. haha.

My limited understanding of opteron design would suggest that three ddr2 hypertrtansport memory channels with the 1:1 clock cycle would be tough to beat with xeon 4mb cache in the server product space due to being able upgrade ram speed.

Whats all this "we the company stuff"?

who are those that throw GRAMMAR stones within glass computers

I hope the claims are all true if AMD is to keep being my desktop platform, as my current desktop running a dual core Opteron 165 (socket 939) which is thumped in performance by my Merom 5600 laptop.

Yeah. Ok. More bragging on paper. Lets see Third party testing like Intel allows. I hope AMD does well with this processor, but in all honesty imo AMD will no longer hold the Performance Crown for as long as they did. Also, Where is AMDs answer C2Duo ? That's great that a couple business servers that will benefit, but Barcelona can't afford to be priced aggressively that a desktop requires.

This is the same situation (only reversed) as when Intel was about to release Core 2. Intel made claims, the market was similarly skeptical, Intel delivered. Now AMD is making claims, the market is again skeptical and wants to know if they can deliver. The major difference this time around is that we are reacting to a claim rather than a vendor-controlled benchmark like the one Intel showed off. For me, this cranks up the level of skepticism a little bit - if they can pull it off why aren't they demonstrating it in a benchmark? I'm willing to wait and see (like I have a choice) - bottom line is we won't know for sure until we know for sure.

I have almost solely built amd cpu based systems for my customers for the past 6 years. The Athlon 64/am2 product is superb in real world computing, and I STILL favour them over the Intel core 2 duo.
I was expecting something out 'out of the box' from them to counter the Core 2 duo, this isnt it, yet. But dont ever discount AMD, and write them off at your peril. The next generation AMD workstation cpu is going to stun the industry.

It's just another claim.
Next week's news is that Intel built a faster processor.
And the news after next week's news is that AMD has the faster processor.
Yaaawn! How interesting!

But after their flop with the Radeon X2900 ya wonder...

Okay, I'll concede that AMD has come from behind before, but... let's be serious. R600 *still* isn't out yet, not even benchmarks. AMD's big answer to C2D *still* isn't out yet, not even benchmarks. AMD *still* hasn't brought 65nm to mass market, and Intel is starting up 45nm.

And if Intel, who apparently knows a little bit about making chips, thinks that a native quadcore wastes too many chips and subsequently too much money... why does AMD (who doesn't have and spare money to waste) think that it's a good idea?

Again, I'm not saying it isn't possible, but AMD has *huge* ground to cover, and if they don't have even a response to Conroe before Penryn comes out, well...

AMD always get their upgrades to CPUs a few Months/years after Intel, and the reason Intel won't make their Quad Cores The main thing is because they are in charge of the market at the moment, And they want us to pay a but of extra money for the ones that are out now, either that or they are waiting for K10 to come out, so they can try and Kill AMD.

One of the biggest advantages AMD has with the Athlon64, is the Hypter-Transport link. This (now improved) interconnect allows efficient communication between processor cores as well as the memory subsystem. Intel on the other hand, has to rely on the FSB linking processors and (Northbridge) chipsets in order to talk to memory.

AMD can win on this - and AMD isn't sticking two dual-core CPU's on one bloated package..it's using 4 independent cores on one piece of silicon. I will stick with AMD because historically, Intel has bullied everyone else out the market.

Cheap seems to be in right now. The company I work for still uses P3 processors. If we get new ones soon they will be dirt cheap. Intel is right on schedule to release 45nm processors in Q3. As soon as that happens they will drop prices of their 65nm even more. So cheap is the word and AMD doesnt have the capital to compete.

Ok, I'll start out this little comment with a link to theregister http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...uo_errata/
Basically... Showing that while Intel's core duo is faster, it still has some major security flaws... In the area of buffer overflow, which if I recall correctly, AMD fixed with their Athlon64 line?
Ok... Yes, while I am an AMD fan, benchmarks speak louder than words and claims. So, Im hoping that AMD can deliver with this one... But at the same token, honestly, how many of us will really be affected by this new CPU? How many of us actually run a multi-chip server? How many really need it?
From previous benchmarks, AMD's Opterons use quite a bit less power than the Xeon's... So Im assuming they are going to stick with the trend, but again... Benchmarks will tell the story.
AMD and Intel are playing tag just like Nvidia and ATI... One comes out with a faster chip, the other one makes something faster, ect...
Personally, I would much rather have AMD and Intel both competing against eachother (like they do now) because it forces the other one to make something better and forces them to lower prices.
I read somewhere once that if it wasnt for AMD, Intel would probably still be making P3's, at most...
Long live competition!

AMD IS APARENTLY RELEASING A 3.22GHZ QUAD CORE THATS A SECRET BEING LET OUT OF THE BAG RIGHT NOW. THEY ARE ALREADY BEING SHIPPED AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR WIDE SPREAD RELEASE. AMDs LATE PLANS TO SURPRISE HIT THE ENTHUSIAST MARKET WITH A PUMPED UP 4 CORE 3.2 GHZ AM2 DDR2/DDR3 CPU LATE IN Q4 2007 JUST IN TIME FOR THE HOLIDAY PERIOD.
WHAT THE HOLIDAY PERIOD DOES HAVE TO DO WITH IT I HAVE NO IDEA THEN 8 CORES AM3 DDR3 BY END Q2 2008

This is really new enjoyment beside Intel, i feel really monotonous by using Intel. And by releasing new cheap of Barcelona the competition market will goes upward and we the customer will take the newer and better thing. We are really monotonous in Bangladesh without AMD Cheap_Barcelona.

Why say negative things about things just because you don't like them. Who cares whos processor is faster. Get what you need. Not what you want. I like AMD, my computer is two years behind but does EXACTLY what I need it too, and that's where it will stay.

Recently of the past 2 years all the major develpment in cpu technolagy has come from AMD NOT Intel AMD was and still is the only true 64Bit processor intel is still using 32bit based with EMT64 bit soft ware inbedded how perthetic is this will intel try to pump up the cpu speed and there L2 cache witch doesnt' do as much As the L1 cache which itel is perthetic the 64bit L1 split into for way L1cache hopeing the consumer will buy the chips because of huge cpu speed and huge L2cache iam no fool intels 1333 fsb bus what is that plus there four architeture 4 ways of huge bottole necks.. Amd's Direct Connect architeture is 2way direct to the CPU to the motherboard plus amd's FSB which is greater than intels' oh lordy how is this Advanced Micro Devices have been around along time in this indusrty just because the market is flooded with intel it doesnt mean amd isnt a big lead in chip technolagy it's said to say if intel the big mother is copying there Enemy it's vice to say whos got the better technolagy i just cant belive how intel has sucked in the consumer market with all there lies telling there chips perform better what a load of belloni if the consumers out there in the would wernt all so dumb just to go out and buy and intel intel would have to make a better chip hence to say AMD chips' are better otherwise this stuppedity would not happen it's not AMD fault the world is full of stupped people that they cant see who is the leader in the future in Chip technolagy it's the stupped consumer feeding intel so intel get this rap saying our chips are better because we sell more what a load of bullcrap.. there technolagy is old there performance for the prices of there chips are crap and the loading time because of heating problems plus huge Bottlenecks' is crap intel you have dont it if the market belive you in saying your chip is better i wonder you are the smarter group to fool so many while Amd chips perform better there cheaper and the dont overheat as much plus there better for multitasking ive had intel chips' there so called multitasing is hence to say crap .. only if all read to say if AMD Advertised more the market would buy more thats' were amd problem is in marketing on tv and radio and internet AMD step up and take the hand to be the leader like intel Did when the split from IBM ....thankyou all for your time and dont be fooled bye the leader always watch the underdog .. cheer's adam aka German_warrior