Since they're having problems convincing the average consumer of their strengths, it looks like AMD is getting the US government to do their dirty work for them.

Energy Probe

I'm not saying this is a bad idea, but AMD picks a particularly bad time for them to support looking at energy efficiency. What would be funny is if the government looked at current products today and did a performance/energy comparison. Unfortunately it looks like it would be just servers and not an Intel Conroe or Quad core vs the 4x4.

Maybe Al Gore should try out the 4x4 and link it to at least 50% of future global warming (you know, from just Baron's rig).

Child, please. I will post my power numbers. I will even measure how much time I spend at 100% load and measure how much power it is with the configuration I choose. it should be one proc more than a single socket with the same amount of peripherals.

AMD sucks so badly...

Link?

BTW, your statement means they are bad at sucking.

Yup.... lets jsut ignore the not so recent past, in fact the Netburst CPU's are still being sold in droves (both in desktops and servers).

Seeing as they are very close to 65nm and the power consumption reduction it should bring I doubt they are too worried about singular things like 4x4 which are energy hogs. Look at the auto industry, they just need to meet an AVERAGE energy consumption, which means offsetting SUV's with things like a Prius. Unless youe xpect 4x4 to be a monster hit (which it won't be) its barely a blip in the overall sales.

That's not exactly fair, man. Besides, it's pointless to get into "the brand wars". If anything, you should limit it to something like "The current 4x4 sucks", which I would agree with. Of course, 4x4 could rock in a year or 2 (if you don't care about punching a hole in the ozone layer), but right now it doesn't have enough virtues to outweigh the bad (IMO). Of course, right now this is strictly opinion because I don't feel like providing linkage and getting into the same old battle over and over again.

I don't like a lot of government interference. However, if the bill can save taxpayer dollars in terms of energy costs it should be a good thing. If AMD's processors are more energy efficient then that's a good thing for AMD.

Keep in mind, although 4x4 does suck big time, it's not relevant in this topic because nobody would ever put it in their data center.

If the concern is about the data-centres, AMD still can claim that they have more energy-efficient CPU family.

But for desktops and laptops, surely Intel is great now.

Link?

BTW, your statement means they are bad at sucking.
Very lame. Go to school.

That's not exactly fair, man. Besides, it's pointless to get into "the brand wars". If anything, you should limit it to something like "The current 4x4 sucks", which I would agree with. Of course, 4x4 could rock in a year or 2 (if you don't care about punching a hole in the ozone layer), but right now it doesn't have enough virtues to outweigh the bad (IMO). Of course, right now this is strictly opinion because I don't feel like providing linkage and getting into the same old battle over and over again.

Dual Opteron 2218 uses 119W but someone said I should go with that. Is 6W for two chips really that much more? QFX is 125W. Hell, two or three NetBursts in one home could do all of that. Again, what's the difference?

Sucks big time means it's measured against E6600 and gets slaughtered. Statements like that are why I say you are all biased. No one would put it in a DataCenter because it doesn't have ECC. Hwo much power do you think a 16 socket cluster uses? I guess it's worth it for the extra productivity.

Do you knwo how much power RISC ships use? Alpha was the definition of the space heater yet it was the fastest, most sought after chip for HPC all through the 90s.

Sometimes you have to sacrifice. What would you say if AMD released a new rev that got power down to 89W?

http://www.extremetech.com/article [...] 252,00.asp
"We always have to look at all the options, but that [the Quad FX] roadmap is 125-watts, extended through next year," he said.

So you're going to take the statement of one to judge all Forumzers?.. I concur though, Quad FX does suck big time

Link?

BTW, your statement means they are bad at sucking.

Ah, insulting grammar, a cunning strategy

To be fair, AMD does have a good line of small form factor ready Athlon64's and energy efficiency X2's. Everyones going to make a Netburst one time or another.
Now the only problem is finding these SFF and EE A64's....

dean, just saw your sig, that's pretty hilarious. Must have missed that thread.

It was pretty priceless. Especially for somebody like me that absolutely loves irony .

This is the 3rd thread I've read today that smells like flame bait and just perpetuates the bias and ignorance so prevelant in these forums lately. Out of all the things you could have said about AMD supporting an environmental and datacenter energy usage study, you had to throw out 4x4...such a near sighted view...to my knowledge, there has never been a study on a specific topic like this (if there has been, show the linkage!) and will only server to benefit the industry asa a whole, that means Intel will also gain valuable information from the findings...open your eyes and see the big picture.

Link?

BTW, your statement means they are bad at sucking.
Very lame. Go to school.

Albeit it is lame, BM is right. Why should he go to school for that? Methinks BM schooled Ycon on that statement.

Using a 4x4 is not going to punch a hole in the ozone layer. CPUs don't emit aerosols, nor free radicals, nor do they use much more power than the monster 8800 series video cards - no one's even mentioned anything about power troubles since they came out.

The C2D is not a server class chip. It doesn't support EEC, nor is it certified for 24/7 operation at a constant 100% load. The 4x4 is.

C2D is faster. Big freaking whoop. Everyone knows it. But, 4x4 has the advantage that it is a server-class chip, and therefore can do certain things the C2D may be capable of, but quite possibly isn't. And that's why it's a better server chip - because there's a guarantee that comes with it. The C2D doesn't.