BF2S Forums AMD's Quads to outperform Intel's by over 40%

Can i ask you guys an unbiased question? What do you think of Nvidia getting into the gpu game? I know a person who works with Nvidia(Not in with them) they say that Nvidia's is finalizing the cpu design which will be based off of the g80 core. Now heres the question would you buy an Nvidia cpu? If they we're equal to what amd and intel are offering? And would you buy the whole platform from Nvidia?(It's gonna be like intel's centrino platform but for gamers.)


Example

Off the shelf

Nvidia gpu 500$
Nvidia chipset based motherboard 200$
Nvidia cpu 1000$

total 1700$

As a platform bundle
Cpu  800$
Mobo 150$
Gpu 400$

total 1350$

(Note these prices are just an example i am not claiming anything. I do not know what that the prices will be and these are estimations from an equal amd platform offering on newegg)

Even if the AMD quad-cores do outperform Intel's, will there be any point buying them?

Dual-core processors have been out for a couple of years now but most games that are being released these days still aren't optimized for multi-threading.

^^ so for the average gamer, that's a "no" then.

The processor I am building in my basement will out preform all of them its 22nm 32 core CPU running 2048 bit running at 2.6THz NO processor can compete with mine hahahahaha i will make millions! and u are guaranteed to never need a GFX card agin 2 processing cores will do all the rendering and display which is equal to 22 8800GTX connected In some sort of mega SLI!



PS! it only needs 45 Watts of power to run at opium!!!! so far under load it runs at 30*C and idle its at 20*C thats with no heat sing or fan or any thing, with a fan/ heat sink it idles at 15*C and under load its 25*C In bf2 i get 300000FPS

Last edited by GR34 (2007-03-16 21:30:16)

GR34 wrote:

The processor I am building in my basement will out preform all of them its 22nm 32 core CPU running 2048 bit running at 2.6THz NO processor can compete with mine hahahahaha i will make millions! and u are guaranteed to never need a GFX card agin 2 processing cores will do all the rendering and display which is equal to 22 8800GTX connected In some sort of mega SLI!

What are you high?

GR34 wrote:

PS! it only needs 45 Watts of power to run at opium!!!!

I guess you are.

David.Podedworny wrote:

Now heres the question would you buy an Nvidia cpu? If they we're equal to what amd and intel are offering?

if it would compete in price/performance i would buy it way before i'd give intel another hard earned penny of mine.

David.Podedworny wrote:

Mad Ad wrote:

I didnt know Nvidia had any fabs to compete head on with the others, gpu design and construction typically lags behind a generation or two in process size, if they try making cpus on old technology theyll end up down the same alley as cyrix

Actually no it should be up to par one scalar partition(16 brains or 16 pipeline) from a g80 is about equal to a core 2 e6600 in simple math operations.

plus the design is all wrong, gpus are good at parallel math, hence the assumption that spare gpu power could be easily offloaded to process physics (rather than a discrete pys card), another parallelised flow however until we start to get fully multithreaded kernels then a cpu seems best designed as a single pipeline- plus all the traditional thinking in programming is geared towards set extensions and the traditional model, even if a massivly parallel o/s was to flop out of the ether it would take generations to learn the new approach.

No I firmly belive that an Nvidia cpu would be dead in the water if they try to compete with AMD/INTEL head on without their own fabs to drive the shrink too, theyd be too reliant on the spare capacity of 3rd party manufacturers and always be playing catchup on every front.

yes intels huge, how would they manage?

and even with the case open, core2 is indeed a supercharged P3 but with 5 more years of design innovation on top (learned from the mistakes made during northwood/prescott era) but that still doesnt make nvidia suddenly good at making a cpu...they dont even have anthing ready to manufacture yet so its not going to be any time soon.

ryan_14 wrote:

Yeah, then Intel will pwn AMD by making a 6-core processor that is 80% better.

Intel already made a working 80 core cpu.

David.Podedworny wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Lets look at the C2D Verse P3.

• Smaller Die
• Higher FSB
• Lower clock speeds
• Double the cores

Just a supercharged P3?
Negatory

The architecture is the derived from P6 which P3 came from and you just proved my point. The only difference really is the 4 issue core and 14 step instead of 10 pipeline which is useful for bigger instructions that the P3 would have trouble with.

You do know that Core 2 Duo is 80% new design right?

David.Podedworny wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

You do know that Core 2 Duo is 80% new design right?

Do you mean the unified cache? The Branch prediction? Or the Extra decode step? Then yes it is new but when you boil it down the core 2 is basically a P3 with a new tricks.(I know it sound's stupid but thats how i see it, Like barcelona being K8 with a larger fpu) To tell ya the truth I'm waiting for Nehelam now that will be something completely new.

I mean pretty much EVERYTHING is new... Core 2 Duo isn't really based on P3...

David.Podedworny wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

I mean pretty much EVERYTHING is new... Core 2 Duo isn't really based on P3...

But it's based on P6 architecture. Listen i view things differently then anyone else. I see things as simple as possible in order to understand their complexity's to me Core 2 is just a super charged p3 if you dont see it like that fine we all have our opinions.

I'm sorry to say, but opinions fail for when it comes to facts