22 replies to this topic

[x2p]

Intel's Paxville: too slow, too hot, too dumb
Opteron killer - back to the drawing board?
By Ashlee Vance
October 20, 2005 17:58 GMT


When we nicknamed Intel's new dual-core Xeon processor "Hot Carl," we didn't know how prophetic this would be. A fresh set of benchmarks comparing the Xeon with AMD's dual-core Opteron chip show Intel's product to be a power hungry demon that doesn't perform.

GamePC got its hands on some of the Xeons - code-named "Paxville" - and put the chips through a battery of tests. Most startling is the dual-core Xeon's voracious power consumption. Intel reckons Paxville will need 135W for average software loads and run up to 150W at peak. When plugged into a two-way server, this pull proves troubling.

"There's no doubt about it, Intel's dual-core Xeons are their most power hungry Xeons to date," GamePC writes. "Even when idling, two dual-core Xeons consume nearly 400W of power at any given time, which is amazingly high, even by Intel's standards.

"AMD's competing dual-core Opteron processors consume far less power, especially using AMD's PowerNow! Technology. When this is enabled, Opteron power consumption drops to roughly 160 to170W when idling. "To be fair, we could not get EIST to function with our new dual-core Xeons, which may help idle power consumption levels. However, their full-load levels are ghastly high."
Source:The Register

[m.oreilly]

yeah, kind of expecting this. don't you just love amd tough one
for intel, 'cause if the performance was closer, intel pricing would
have swayed many customers their way. still might

[stevenaxe]

embarrasing intel, plain embarrasing...wheres the less power (energy consumption) = more power they've been promising to release?

[RedInferno]

LOL, you need that 1kw power supply then...

[Visentinel]

Well Intel can always Licence AMD's Architecture and figure out how to make cool Low Power Chips just like Intel Licensed AMD's x86-64.

[x2p]

hahahahahaha
true have amd got intel by the balls...?

[BlueScreenOfDeath]

ponders getting a Opteron instead of Xeon for his desktop

[Neon]

To be honest downstairs we have a Duron and i have my 64bit one but the rest of them are intels, what happened to the days when Intel PII really made a statement, i prefer AMD anyway but Intel need to get a grip.

With the time they've been doing this, you'd think intel would be able to ACHIEVE SOMETHING AT LEAST, but no they can't get things rolling.

AMD = THE BEST
Intel = Rubbish you buy for grandma

[ShadowFox]

Unfortunately... Karl you are right. I do remember those days when PII was a priveledge to say... now you get shunned at the THOUGHT of Intel -.- They do need to get their act together.

[Visentinel]

Checkout this power consumption and overclocking guide to do with Intels future 65nm Chips.
http://www.anandtech...doc.aspx?i=2578

Edited by Visentinel, 25 October 2005 - 09:29 PM.

[Neon]

Seems nothing but bad for intel, maybe this apple deal will help

[error51]

Ya know I'm thinking that Intel is focussing toooo much on the wireless and not enough on the processor. Intel is one of the leaders in DEVELOPING wireless technology. They are one of the leaders of the WiMax development and other such outgoing projects. Like I said, seams they need to focus on their processors.

[patman174]

Im not knocking AMD for Intel, but if you read into the history of both of these companies, you would see that AMD got there start from Intel. Yes, Intel may licensce some ideas from AMD now, but if not for them in the beginning, there would not be an AMD to get ideas from. When Intel was making processors for personal computers near the start of the craze, they had so many orders, they could not keep up, so they gave there plans to a small no name company Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). This was to help the burden of making all the processors wanted by the consumers. This is how AMD got there start. Yes, they have branched out and came up with there own ideas and they have there own people, but dont knock Intel for there stuff. You got to respect them for who they are.

[error51]

patman174, on Oct 25 2005, 09:21 PM, said:

Im not knocking AMD for Intel, but if you read into the history of both of these companies, you would see that AMD got there start from Intel. Yes, Intel may licensce some ideas from AMD now, but if not for them in the beginning, there would not be an AMD to get ideas from. When Intel was making processors for personal computers near the start of the craze, they had so many orders, they could not keep up, so they gave there plans to a small no name company Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). This was to help the burden of making all the processors wanted by the consumers. This is how AMD got there start. Yes, they have branched out and came up with there own ideas and they have there own people, but dont knock Intel for there stuff. You got to respect them for who they are.

What he said... all ya AMD fanboys need to shove it. No Intel fanboys either. I'm not trying to defend one or the other myself, but patman brings up a valid point that both processor makers have copied each other a lot as have other processor makers. If technology makers didn't try to take each other's ideas and make them bigger, everyone would be stuck with one company to make everything [cough cough Microsoft] they needed and there wouldn't be any competition to rush to beat to the market and advance in front of.

[Visentinel]

patman174, on Oct 26 2005, 02:21 PM, said:

Im not knocking AMD for Intel, but if you read into the history of both of these companies, you would see that AMD got there start from Intel. Yes, Intel may licensce some ideas from AMD now, but if not for them in the beginning, there would not be an AMD to get ideas from. When Intel was making processors for personal computers near the start of the craze, they had so many orders, they could not keep up, so they gave there plans to a small no name company Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). This was to help the burden of making all the processors wanted by the consumers. This is how AMD got there start. Yes, they have branched out and came up with there own ideas and they have there own people, but dont knock Intel for there stuff. You got to respect them for who they are.

That may hold weight but it is clear that AMD had completely outclassed Intel soon after AMD started dening microprocessors and has beaten Intel in chip performance over and over since the early Pentium 3 days, Fanboy or not i can only endorse one company for serious computing and thats AMD.

If Intel really did hand over the bare basics, then it that says even more about AMD's abilities, AMD took what intel did and turned around and beat Intel with their own Technology.