• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

TOP Intel engineers leave INTEL.

Looks like they were all involved in the P4 design... Are you sure they left, rather than being fired? :)
 
yeah maybe they got fired? either way, I have been a AMD user for a few years and don't have nothing persay against intel. but my last upgrade 3000+venice the processor was $150.00 the day it came out and for that money the performance is un-beatable. the flexibility that amd offers I don't think can be beat for along time unless intel does a lot of changes. all in all I hope intel and amd both stay alive... we don't need even less jobs in the usa.
 
I don't see this as cause for worry...and I most definately DO care about Intel's well being. They're AMD's direct competitor and main incentive for continued innovation. ^_^
 
Scali said:
Looks like they were all involved in the P4 design... Are you sure they left, rather than being fired? :)
Click to expand...
I was *kind of* thinking the same thing, but they probably left because netburst was killed by Intel. :p

And the title is misleading: a couple "top" engineers did leave, but they hardly seem critical to intel anymore.
 
I think this title as well as the article is a bit misleading, or I at least am reading it a bit differently.

First of all, they aren't all Intel engineers; they held various positions in the company, however even the Inquirer titles it this way. But this is a minor point.
What's more is that it doesn't appear that these people all of a sudden left Intel, or that it was even recent - at least the article never explicitly states it. The point of the article (and I think a much more intriguing point) is that all of these past Intel executives have recently been found at the same new 'startup' company down the road.
 
advanced101101 said:
cmon its intel, they have the $$ and power to replace those guys
Click to expand...

According to some of the more avid AMD fans here, the engineers at Intel are just foaming morons anyway :p
 
So these people made a mint working for Intel, and are now leaving to start their own company, or something like that? They don't sound like morons. But then again I guess that depends how the new company turns out.
 
Well if they were the pioneers of the P4... I hope they dont go to amd. We might end up with a 72 stage Athlon next :(


Fucking long ass piped netburst peice of :) garbage
 
i dont think amd would take them. theyd hafta pay amd to get accepted. nice way to sum up that long swearing post USMC2Hard4U. i loved it. i like amd for one reason. they make a new core but never leave the socket, now 939 hosts 5 cores, intel switches cores and switches sockets and chipsets all the time.

maybe those *fired* intel guys will make there own cpu company and call it, WFGBRSP, or wicked fast ghz, but really slow processors, and have the first 6 ghz, 156 stage processor. you never know! :D
 
Intel's done a lot of good research...just because my $150 AMD processor can go toe to toe with Intel's top of the line and do quite well for itself, doesn't mean Intel's contributions are meaningless.

Also AMD has three active desktop sockets plus one pending, Intel has two? Maybe I'm counting wrong...
 
i by no means hate intel, thats what im posting with right now. my parents 3.0e does great for firefox and aim, also it can hold its own in video editting. its a decent rig, but i use my a64 for gaming. thats its purpose. maybe once i set up my wcing and get my bonneville heatercore, i will use it for other things, but the noise of my nado made it unusable for anything but gaming before.
 
Haven't done a comparison or anything but I imagine it folds faster too since it's good with all that math stuff. Relatively cheap, fast, readily available folding CPU. ^_^
 
ashmedai said:
Intel's done a lot of good research...just because my $150 AMD processor can go toe to toe with Intel's top of the line and do quite well for itself, doesn't mean Intel's contributions are meaningless.

Also AMD has three active desktop sockets plus one pending, Intel has two? Maybe I'm counting wrong...
Click to expand...

A large portion of the microprocessor design that AMD has come out with has been based off of Intel research and development. Your Athlon 64 3000+ is using Intel's x86 architecture and running Intel's MMX, SSE, SSE2 and SSE3 instruction sets among other things.

Microsoft and the other software developers out there follow Intel's lead not AMD's. You notice how long AMD has had out a 64-bit compatible processor and how all the AMD fans thought Microsoft was going to release them a 64-bit version of XP just a few months after the launch of the A64 but Microsoft waited and they waited on Intel because Intel owns 80% of the desktop CPU market.

AMD is a hell of a competitor and right now they have the best desktop CPU's available for most users like myself but that doesn't mean Intel wont come back with another heavy hitting CPU lineup that takes the crown away from AMD in a few months.

Intel isn't going anywhere and AMD will always have a much greater chance at going under then Intel will because Intel has huge market shares in everything, not just CPU's.
 
yea i have this thing folding 24/7. i just set it up like since februaury for a folding war intel vs amd, but this was an amd bot. i wonder how much folding its done. it loads at a legit 53ºC, and hp was smart enough to put a coolmaster hsf on instead of the crappy intel hsf.
 
The most important part in all this is that AMD has to license x86 from Intel.
Some of the small print in that license is that Intel can always use whatever extensions AMD makes, for free, and Intel can determine the amount of CPUs AMD is allowed to produce with the x86 instructionset.
So AMD can never win this race, they're at Intel's mercy. The only way would be to develop their own architecture, but even Intel cannot pull that off, the market is way too locked-down in x86.
 
Scali said:
The most important part in all this is that AMD has to license x86 from Intel.
Some of the small print in that license is that Intel can always use whatever extensions AMD makes, for free, and Intel can determine the amount of CPUs AMD is allowed to produce with the x86 instructionset.
So AMD can never win this race, they're at Intel's mercy. The only way would be to develop their own architecture, but even Intel cannot pull that off, the market is way too locked-down in x86.
Click to expand...

AMD pays royalties for x86 chips, and pretty much everything else is a freeebie because of cross liscensing (AMD pays nothing for SSE, intel pays nothing for x86-64, and effectively any derivative work for x86). But I've never heard of a hard cap on production.
 
CCUABIDExORxDIE said:
i dont think amd would take them. theyd hafta pay amd to get accepted. nice way to sum up that long swearing post USMC2Hard4U. i loved it. i like amd for one reason. they make a new core but never leave the socket, now 939 hosts 5 cores, intel switches cores and switches sockets and chipsets all the time.
Click to expand...

The A64 will have 5 sockets by the end of next year. S940, S754, S939, M2, S1. Intel has had what, 3 sockets for the Pentium 4? And LGA775 looks to be around for quite a while, like Socket A.

Also, I'm on a socket 754 setup, and AMD will make no more desktop CPU's for it, aside from value semprons. Way to never leave a socket :rolleyes:
 
robberbaron said:
And LGA775 looks to be around for quite a while, like Socket A.
Click to expand...

Well I have two Socket A boards... One with KT133A, and one with KT266A.
Neither can fit a Barton, and even some Thoroughbreds and most Semprons are a problem I believe.
So well, socket is not important. The chipset is.
The fact that a Barton fits in the socket is of no use to me, it won't work properly until I buy a new motherboard with the same socket, but a different chipset. Who cares about the socket then?
 
Scali said:
Well I have two Socket A boards... One with KT133A, and one with KT266A.
Neither can fit a Barton, and even some Thoroughbreds and most Semprons are a problem I believe.
So well, socket is not important. The chipset is.
The fact that a Barton fits in the socket is of no use to me, it won't work properly until I buy a new motherboard with the same socket, but a different chipset. Who cares about the socket then?
Click to expand...


That's a good point. Intel has socket consistancy, but AMD has chipset consistancy. The latter seems a lot more important, when you put it that way, haha. The fact that the roughtly year old or so nForce3 can support dual core whereas Intel is JUST NOW released a dual core compatible chipset says a lot about AMD/nVidia's foresight and Intel's forsight in compatibility.
 
robberbaron said:
That's a good point. Intel has socket consistancy, but AMD has chipset consistancy. The latter seems a lot more important, when you put it that way, haha. The fact that the roughtly year old or so nForce3 can support dual core whereas Intel is JUST NOW released a dual core compatible chipset says a lot about AMD/nVidia's foresight and Intel's forsight in compatibility.
Click to expand...

Imho it's just dumb luck that AMD can fit dualcore on the same chipset. Because the memory controller and everything related is in the CPU, that factor of compatibility is taken out of the equation.
If AMD actually planned it that way, I would have expected the chipsets and motherboards to be marketed as 'dualcore-ready' or something, back in the day.

My example of KT133A/KT266A would indicate exactly the opposite of AMD planning ahead with chipsets etc. If they did, then even my KT133A would have supported the 333 MHz FSB that I need to run the Barton on.
Voltage and power dissipation are other reasons why I can't run all CPUs on these motherboards, despite being Socket A.
Not exactly evidence of AMD planning ahead, is it?
 
Scali said:
Imho it's just dumb luck that AMD can fit dualcore on the same chipset. Because the memory controller and everything related is in the CPU, that factor of compatibility is taken out of the equation.
If AMD actually planned it that way, I would have expected the chipsets and motherboards to be marketed as 'dualcore-ready' or something, back in the day.
Click to expand...

Well, apparently (ie according to AMD) the system request queue for K8 was always designed to handel two cores. And as long as the system (HTT and memory interface) side of the SRQ and socket pinout remains the same, AMD can do pretty much what it wants to the CPU core and remain motherboard compatible.

I can only speculate that there was some question as to whether the dual cores would be compatible with the motherboard voltage regulator (or would fit in the thermal envolope of 103W most boards were designed to fit)) or if it was in fact ever going to be released on S939 (or wait for M2 to hit the desktop).
 
robberbaron said:
The A64 will have 5 sockets by the end of next year. S940, S754, S939, M2, S1. Intel has had what, 3 sockets for the Pentium 4? And LGA775 looks to be around for quite a while, like Socket A.

Also, I'm on a socket 754 setup, and AMD will make no more desktop CPU's for it, aside from value semprons. Way to never leave a socket :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

if amd didnt love us 754 guys, why would they make the newark? each socket on amd has its own use too, 754 : cheap solution, 939 : pricier then 754 with dual channel, 940 : server solution, m2 : pure dual core based, i think, s1 : server solution pure dual core, i think.

every socket has its place, intel from 423 : crap, pure crap. willamette was only on it and it sucked. 478 : intel did alright, dual channel, prescotts new socket. 775 : new technology, pins on mobo. ddr2, dual cores.

intel and amd are on different paths. all of intels p4 sockets have been end user based. amds a64 have been all use, servers all that.
 
FreiDOg said:
I can only speculate that there was some question as to whether the dual cores would be compatible with the motherboard voltage regulator (or would fit in the thermal envolope of 103W most boards were designed to fit)) or if it was in fact ever going to be released on S939 (or wait for M2 to hit the desktop).
Click to expand...

Yes, as I say, it's dumb luck.
 
Regardless of whether or not AMD people might "enjoy" this more, it belongs in the Intel thread. However, in consideration to the thread itself...
So? Intel will do just fine. I almost think they could have been quietly let go, or they knew that Intel was working on some micro economics, taking a long hard look at some of the development. It happens, but I think they're trying to blow this out of proportion.

And "top" Intel engineers wouldn't have to beg to get into AMD, believe me.
 
Why would intel care about a few engineers as long as their bean counters do their job? Innovative, ingenious and ambitious scientists/engineers all over the world are dying to work for intel.
 
cmon its intel, they have the $$ and power to replace those guys
Click to expand...
i dont think amd would take them. theyd hafta pay amd to get accepted.
Click to expand...

This is not directed at any one person in particular, but I can't believe how dramatic people have to make everything in life.

. Just because a few people once left a company at some point does not mean they were dragged out by security with a restraining order pending.
. And just because someone worked at Intel during the release of a (ridiculously successful) processor line called the P4, does not mean they are (A) solely responsible for it's supposed massive conceptual defects and personal malicious impact on your life, and (B) so incredibly incompetent that only an equally stupid (multi-billion dollar) company called Intel would hire them because the all powerful and practically God-like executives at AMD hire janitors smarter than they are.
. And just because a few people that were once released from Intel wound up at the same company, does not mean that this company will now grow with such unimaginable spite and bitterness that Intel will eventually rue the day they ever let go of these executives.

It's amazing how clear things will become when you take human emotion out of it. But I guess that's the hard part.

The fact of the matter is, this 'startup' company is no Mom and Pop's backyard cake factory. It's a company that, for every position worth mentioning on a public employee roster webpage, has hooked a hot shot executive who use to work for the current leading company in the massive microprocessor market. I guess I'm the only one who sees it this way, but I'll be damned if, in 5 years when this company is making a profit, it isn't utilizing Intel products or vice-versa to do so.

It's interesting to note that Intel's brand spanking new CEO has neither a background in science nor engineering, which should help give some perspective on the subject. One must take a step back to realize that the technological business world does not consist of two big computer nerds constantly kicking each other in the shins (Intel and AMD). Sure there's competition, and that's exacerbated by the fact that there are basically only two and the scale is so large. But it's business, not a game.
 
I would have said that, but I try to assume that everyone can see that this is market competition between two corporations. However there are several sides. The most profitable company has the most resources to put into development, to ensure that they have the most up-to-date technology to give them the cutting edge in the market. They want to win, and they can't do that with out-dated technology. But that's why a company isn't simply 1-D.

A successful company doesn't need a scientist who knows everything about the technology. They want people with Harvard degrees in business and economics.

You forgot to mention when saying the company they goto will grow, that the company they goto wont be plagued by "71-stage pipelines". And taking human emotion from the argument? On the contrary, I think infusing an argument with it can be good. These aren't just a bunch of robots with "LONGER PIPELINE MORE STEPS HIGHER FREQUENCY" pumped in their brains, they're living (breathing) thinking human beings. You don't think they know what they're doing? Hah, you go apply at AMD, we'll see who they'll take. The seasoned Intel engineer or the not-so-seasoned "internet nerd" who likes to overclock his computer.

I don't know why it was posted in the AMD section. No doubt some sort of flame bait. You thought the "AMD guys" might enjoy it more? Well I can't speak for the rest of the Intel side of things, but I haven't met many Intel users/fans that wouldn't be interested in looking at something like this in-depth. As opposed to "HAR HAR LOOK AT TEH INTEL LOLOL!!! ... AMD R0X"

In the history of a corporation like Intel, this literally means nothing. This is a huge corporation. Like I said, they're blowing it out of proportion. This happens all the time everywhere around the world, but only when it happens to Intel does it "mean something"?
 
SSE4 said:
You forgot to mention when saying the company they goto will grow, that the company they goto wont be plagued by "71-stage pipelines". And taking human emotion from the argument? On the contrary, I think infusing an argument with it can be good. These aren't just a bunch of robots with "LONGER PIPELINE MORE STEPS HIGHER FREQUENCY" pumped in their brains, they're living (breathing) thinking human beings. You don't think they know what they're doing? Hah, you go apply at AMD, we'll see who they'll take. The seasoned Intel engineer or the not-so-seasoned "internet nerd" who likes to overclock his computer?
Click to expand...

Quite right. Intel chose one strategy, AMD chose another. In the short run, Intel's strategy was better, in the long run, 90 nm had some problems in store that made them unable to continue the strategy, so AMD's strategy is now better.
But obviously both companies have very capable engineers working for them, and now that Intel is revising its strategy, things can get really interesting, because Intel could be putting out a killer architecture. In fact, the Athlon is the first non-Intel CPU in the history of x86 that is actually faster. I really don't think Intel is going to let that happen again. Their Itanium/P4 strategy failed, and the next architecture will put them back on track. It will be interesting to see what they come up with, the first new serious x86 architecture in years.
 
competition is good, so yes, i am anxious to see what intel brings to the table too :p
 
It is interesting to note that the “Itanium” so far has turned out to be a dog and they (Intel) don’t expect anything really big to happen with that project until about 2007, a lifetime in our world. HP has openly admitted to backing away from that project and both Intel and HP have “lost” employees over the research and design of that chip.

In the mean time a bit of research will show that in the 4 processor server business AMD seems to have suddenly taken about a 20% share. That is huge in the eyes of any CPU manufacture.

It has taken AMD a while to build this kind of market share but it’s happening and when you see a paradigm market shift like that people’s heads roll, justified or not. (the stock holders must be answered to, business 101)

We the “enthusiast market” like to think AMD thinks of us as close partners and to a point I’m sure they do, however the same thinking that allows them to sell us fast affordable chips trickles down to the real world market as well.

Intel will respond, AMD will re-respond and the growth will continue. It’s simply called business. At the moment one of the big two seems to be more “aware” of real world needs then the other.

With a bit of luck the game will continue play itself out and we will be the ultimate beneficiaries.
 
CCUABIDExORxDIE said:
if amd didnt love us 754 guys, why would they make the newark? each socket on amd has its own use too, 754 : cheap solution
Click to expand...

Thank god they made Newark (which isn't a desktop chip) which is totally worth upgrading from a top of the line Clawhammer to!
 
Scali said:
Quite right. Intel chose one strategy, AMD chose another. In the short run, Intel's strategy was better, in the long run, 90 nm had some problems in store that made them unable to continue the strategy, so AMD's strategy is now better.
Click to expand...

This is actually very significant. Both companies have massive research budgets, and at some point they have to pick one direction over another. If different guesses had been made things could be completely reversed, and at some point in time they will be again. AMD was down a bit when I made my last rig, now they're up a bit and look to have a good solid lead for the time being.
 
SSE4 said:
And taking human emotion from the argument? On the contrary, I think infusing an argument with it can be good. These aren't just a bunch of robots with "LONGER PIPELINE MORE STEPS HIGHER FREQUENCY" pumped in their brains, they're living (breathing) thinking human beings.
Click to expand...
Your example is consistent with taking the humanity away from the humans pertaining to the argument (we can all agree a pretty silly exercise). Taking emotion out of the argument means analyzing the situation as objectively and honestly as possible, avoiding as much bias and conclusion-jumping as possible. The sarcasm built into the first few lines of my previous post are aimed at this sort of 'emotional' judgement.


You don't think they know what they're doing?
Click to expand...
Of course they do. This was the exact point of my post. Of course they do.

For the record I won't be applying to AMD. Of course neither will Randy Steck or Gary Brown of Stexar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top