# AMD Unveils Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Black Edition



## zekrahminator (Aug 14, 2007)

While every hardcore AMD fan awaits the Barcelona and Phenom series of CPUs, AMD is busy making the best out of what it has already. In a Japanese presentation, AMD showed off the Athlon 64 6400+ "Black Edition". This CPU should hit retail markets on August 20th, and should cost anywhere between $220 and $240 USD. The CPU runs on a 90nm process, and is clocked at 3.2GHz. 

At the same presentation, AMD demoed a Phenom X4 system at 3GHz in an AMD RD790 motherboard. AMD somehow managed to present this without anyone getting good performance numbers. 





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## kwchang007 (Aug 14, 2007)

Why is AMD keeping K10 so under wraps, I remember before Conroe they were releasing benchmarks.


----------



## InfDamarvel (Aug 14, 2007)

Swarm AMD FANBOYS AND BUY ANOTHER PROCESSOR THATS ONLY A SLIGHT IMPROVEMENT.


----------



## hat (Aug 14, 2007)

O........k....? ^^


----------



## DRDNA (Aug 14, 2007)

InfDamarvel said:


> Swarm AMD FANBOYS AND BUY ANOTHER PROCESSOR THATS ONLY A SLIGHT IMPROVEMENT.



Per forum rules please fill out your hardware config in system specs in your controle panel or put them in a signaturethnx!
EDIT>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^my  mistake there  is  no  such  rule..srry.


----------



## mandelore (Aug 14, 2007)

InfDamarvel said:


> Swarm AMD FANBOYS AND BUY ANOTHER PROCESSOR THATS ONLY A SLIGHT IMPROVEMENT.



lol dont be a muppit

if there would be only a slight improvement if upgrading from ur current cpu to this, then wed go for a phenom


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Aug 14, 2007)

Reguardless. Im holding out to see the colour of the Phenoms before I decide weather or not to  clip my AMD ties & head for Intel C2d's skies.

I dont think my O/c'd X2 3800+ will be able to put up much of a fight when that time arrives. even now its kinda feeling its age. but I dont have the funds right now to carry out a full on overhaul & this system is less the a year old anyhoo


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

Well the difference is the 6400+ is going to oc better than a 6000+ because it's a better quality bined chip and uses 89w to the 6000+ current 125w, which means less heat. I bet it will do 3.6ghz on air and if you have a 3800x2 to 4800x2 Windsor and need a upgrade that would be a giant one. A 6400+ will be very competative to the the current core 2 duos excluding the e6850. It should match up with a e6700 e6750. Don't get me wrong it will be slower just not that much real world difference.


----------



## a111087 (Aug 14, 2007)

trt740 said:


> Well the difference is the 6400+ is going to oc better than a 6000+ because it's a better quality bined chip and uses 89w to the 6000+ current 125w, which means less heat. I bet it will do 3.6ghz on air and if you have a 3800x2 to 4800x2 Windsor and need a upgrade that would be a giant one. A 6400+ will be very competative to the the current core 2 duos excluding the e6850. It should match up with a e6700 e6750. Don't get me wrong it will be slower just not that much real world difference.



you are actually right, i just read a review of this cpu vs e6850 
just a little ocing and you got yourself AMD e6850


----------



## erocker (Aug 14, 2007)

And AMD chips in your hand feel like gold while Intel's feel like um... cheap aluminum.


----------



## newbielives (Aug 14, 2007)

If they had benchmarks to brag about they would be bragging already.

Thats my guess



kwchang007 said:


> Why is AMD keeping K10 so under wraps, I remember before Conroe they were releasing benchmarks.


----------



## kwchang007 (Aug 14, 2007)

newbielives said:


> If they had benchmarks to brag about they would be bragging already.
> 
> Thats my guess



That's what I'd think, but if they didn't have a good product, they'd also be hitting hard on the adverts about things like htt where Intel can't touch them, like in the 2+ server board segment. Idk....it was the same with the 2900xt, there weren't benchmarks before it was very close to being released.  Maybe it's AMD's new stance.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 14, 2007)

newbielives said:


> If they had benchmarks to brag about they would be bragging already.
> 
> Thats my guess



Apple brags about ipod improvements too.

left, right, up down.

and they dominate the market right?

Companys aren't 5 year olds trying to hide info 100% of the time.


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 14, 2007)

I still wait for the day anxiously when an AMD chip is in the No1 spot in both the Sceincemark and SuperPi threads   I fear however that at least for the SuperPI....that may be a while off yet.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 14, 2007)

DRDNA said:


> Per forum rules please fill out your hardware config in system specs in your controle panel or put them in a signaturethnx!



There is no rule that you HAVE to have your system specs listed, in fact there is even an option to not show it even if it is filled out.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 15, 2007)

a111087 said:


> you are actually right, i just read a review of this cpu vs e6850
> just a little ocing and you got yourself AMD e6850



Where was this review?


----------



## cdawall (Aug 15, 2007)

you forgot to add this chip has 2X2mb cache and not 2x1MB like the 6000+ hence jumping up to 6400 and not 6200  

this should oc well i wanna see a new AMD WR on these chips


oh and the slight improvment comment what improvement did you see from 1066mhz FSB to 1333MHZ FSB? intel :shadedshu AMD is keeping up even with old chips 6400+ e6850 hmmmm well if you already have a sAM2 board the cost to upgrade is minimal. now the intel side you have a s775mobo oh wait it wont work cause intel locked the chips out of working on it  never heard of AMD making a BS stunt like that and intels been doing it since before s370 remember i810? or s423 anyone have one of the 3 chips released on that b4 the change to s478 like 10mins later


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 15, 2007)

cdawall said:
			
		

> ... oh wait it wont work cause intel locked the chips out...



Yeah...  I was trying to see if my friend could have a E4300 or even a Q6600 in his i925X motherboard, but NOOOOOOO! Stooopid Intel. He doesn't need a new mobo.  Don't think the Core 2 line supports DDR anyroad.*

* - DDR1 folks.


----------



## a111087 (Aug 15, 2007)

InnocentCriminal said:


> Where was this review?



http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/hwdb.php?tid=842214&tp=AMD-A64X2-6400&rid=842214
enjoy


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 15, 2007)

Excellent! Cheers dude.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 15, 2007)

InnocentCriminal said:


> Yeah...  I was trying to see if my friend could have a E4300 or even a Q6600 in his i925X motherboard, but NOOOOOOO! Stooopid Intel. He doesn't need a new mobo.  Don't think the Core 2 line supports DDR anyroad.*
> 
> * - DDR1 folks.



no they do you can have them on the VIA chipped P4M800 stuff


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 15, 2007)

Oh right... shame he doesn't have a P4M800 chipset.


----------



## WarEagleAU (Aug 15, 2007)

thats a big jum and amds highest clock chip yet. I want one


----------



## trt740 (Aug 15, 2007)

a111087 said:


> you are actually right, i just read a review of this cpu vs e6850
> just a little ocing and you got yourself AMD e6850



What do you mean I'm actually right that a left handed complement If I ever heard one.

Here is the english short translation Posted by: Chris_Tom on Tuesday, August 14, 2007 - 04:41 PM

 HKEPC Hardware has reviewed the Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Black Edition. It comes boxed, through the channel only, but without a heatsink. That saves on shipping costs I'm sure. Anyway, it appears to be about 2% to 12% faster than the 6000+, and it may just best the E6750, but not the E6850.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 15, 2007)

I would have thought he (Chris Tom) would be referring to the 6400+ at stock, with a OC such as a111087 has suggest might bring it on par with one. That's how I've read it anyroad.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 15, 2007)

InnocentCriminal said:


> I would have thought he (Chris Tom) would be referring to the 6400+ at stock, with a OC such as a111087 has suggest might bring it on par with one. That's how I've read it anyroad.



He is talking about a 6400+ at stock.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 15, 2007)

Thought as much. ^^


----------



## a111087 (Aug 15, 2007)

InnocentCriminal is correct


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 15, 2007)

a111087 said:


> InnocentCriminal is correct



I am? Excellent! Do I win anything?


----------



## a111087 (Aug 15, 2007)

You win my invisible 8800Ultra, I will ship it to you tomorrow in an invisible package through Invisible Postage Service (IPS)


----------



## DrunkenMafia (Aug 15, 2007)

I really don't know why amd has this little sales strategy of theirs...  tryin to keep everything top secret and then BANG they release it and everyone goes YAY...  its going to be sooooo fast.  And then its not...  its only just as fast or a bit slower than the competions offerings which have been out for a couple months already....

I don't get it.  They need to try a different strategy...


----------



## KennyT772 (Aug 15, 2007)

dont you guys realize AMD is using intel's prescott marketing. AMD's chips were superior and intel had to keep revising and die shrinking to speed bin higher while they were working on a new architecture. AMD is going the same route until k10 comes out.


----------



## hat (Aug 15, 2007)

Maybe but they aren't using nutburst 

Bah at this 6400+, if someone would ship me a good cooler I could just OC my 5200+ to its speeds and be satusfied


----------



## trt740 (Aug 15, 2007)

KennyT772 said:


> dont you guys realize AMD is using intel's prescott marketing. AMD's chips were superior and intel had to keep revising and die shrinking to speed bin higher while they were working on a new architecture. AMD is going the same route until k10 comes out.


Um no the 64 killed the Intel Pent 4 chips overclocked and at stock it wasn't close . Then they charged giant amounts for their chips remember the extreme Intel chips .The Am2 6400+ if you read will beat a e6600 e6700 e6750 and will catch a stock e6850 when oced so I don't see your point. Intel was just overclocking chips and acting like it was making a difference and they weren't even close, these however are. We are talking in some cases a 5 percent difference. Lets face it the 6400+ is a 12 percent increase over the 6000+ that not a tiny amount. Intel just release the 1333fsb chips and they only increased performance by 5 percent and I didn't hear anyone say a thing. The AM2 64 x2 chips are very capable cpus they can match up with Core 2 Duo chips very well. Which just goes to show you how well they were designed 3 years ago to be able to even compete with in some cases 1 year to 6 month old chips. If AMD can keep pumping up the mghz keep it up. Look at the difference in gpu speeds in say a  8800 Ultra gtx and a 2900xt you wouldn't apply your theory here would you? Those gpu's don't run at or near the same mghz. Should AMD drop there speeds on the 6000+ to say 2.66 ghz to match up right. Why when the chip will run at 3.0ghz and beyond. Thats a really dumb arguement. If Intel was smart they would put AMD down by producing a e7000 running at 4.0ghz, which their chips can do, when bined right but what they are doing is streching their chips out trying to make them last as long as possible just like AMD is doing now. Atleast AMD doesn't give up on it's customers like Intel used to and without AMD Intel would still be making you change your motherboard everytime a new chip revision came out. Way to go AMD I bet we get a e6900 because of this. To make my point look how AMD/ATI is tweaking the hell out of the 2900 xt the newest driver release upped it's performance in some games by 17 percent. Now that my friends is customer support and hard work. Why do you think they haven't released the AM2+ chips yet ? It's because they promised their customers the new chips would be AM2 compatable and are trying to keep their word. If this were an Intel issue instead of AMD, get ready motherboard makers to start pumping out a new socket because Intel would just move on and screw the consumer. I can only go by the past and thats their track record thoe I will give them credit they are learning from AMD


----------



## russianboy (Aug 15, 2007)

good stuff, thanks zek.


----------



## russianboy (Aug 15, 2007)

oh and trt740 is my best friend now.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 15, 2007)

russianboy said:


> oh and trt740 is my best friend now.


Why thanks but like Julian Lenon better he was from my era.


----------



## russianboy (Aug 15, 2007)

I don't care from whos era im in/from, if there was something good, I like it.

no matter where/when its from.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 15, 2007)

russianboy said:


> I don't care from whos era im in/from, if there was something good, I like it.
> 
> no matter where/when its from.





I am perhaps the stupidest man on TPU...NEVER put hot sauce on your penis. Unless you want an hour of running around screaming. I would tend to agree.


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 15, 2007)

I'll still be very surprised if an overclocked AMD 6400 will get anywhere near an overclocked 6600....across the board, maybe in the odd test, maybe even almost in Sceincemark 2 but then thats as much the memory and HDD access time as it is the speed of the chip.  I know Trt's old 6000 beat a number of C2D's in sceincemark but as I said, because there are so many variables in that test the ones he beat probably were running their memory at 800-900Mhz, Trt's was running around 1160Mhz and in that test thats a HUGE difference, you only need to look at the SuperPi times, the 6000 @ 3.5Gig was hitting just over 23 secs, the C2D @ 3.5Gig were hitting near to 14 secs!

Bottom line tho, for those AM2 owners who are waiting for Phenom, it is at least an upgrade path, whether it's worth it or not is another matter, IMO unless the 6400 can give you 200Mhz overclocked on the 6000 then it's clearly not worth it and TBH I cannot see a 90nm chip doing 3.7Gig, today, tomorrow or even when the pigs fly!


----------



## MacboY (Aug 15, 2007)

I really dont know why these so called AMD Fanboys wont just give over and accept that the evil dark side is far superior at the moment and that phenom will be as disapointing as all current "new" developments from said company -= I betrayed them and now have 2 core2duos - they overclock more than any of my old amds did and after maz\king the change i wont look back- Dont get me wrong - a loss of AMD would be the worst possible thing that could happen to the IT industry i xan think of as Then intels prices rocket and the dev process slows down to a total halt - we wouldnt have conroe and so forth if it wert for athlon64 - Get ur arse into gear and make sumit revolutionary again - bad things recently - ATI head geeza steps dwn - Oh dear !!!, 45nm fabs cancelld - oh dear oh dear - Am i right in thinking that intels 32nm process is inc atm and they have a 80core cpu ffs - Bring it amd we need u


----------



## Grings (Aug 15, 2007)

it amazes me how people make out amd is so inferior because their chips are slightly slower than intels, yet when intel were making nutbursts everyone was making excuses for intel, clearly intel have a superbly efficient, well oiled propaganda machine


----------



## MacboY (Aug 15, 2007)

I couldnt agree with you more - Apple being the Gods of turning every consumer into a unpaid computer vidgulati hell bent on telling every1 how much greater macs are than anything they have and yet receiving no gain from said free marketing - Is very odd indeed.
Im not quite sure what to make of current price war though - a core2quad drops 120quids in a month - u can get retail boxed goodness for 160quids with VAT - WTF! how on earth are amd sposed to compete with that - is not faair but sadly thats business.

All hail Mac - You know u wanit --- lawl


----------



## Wile E (Aug 15, 2007)

Wow, that makes 3 of us Mac fans on this forum. lol


----------



## Grings (Aug 15, 2007)

i abide macs, just cant afford one (my pc's only up to date because i can do it bit by bit) i'd love to see them release the os alone (to run on any x86 hardware, without hacking it) as i'd prefer it to linux (what i use for anything other than movies/games)


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 15, 2007)

Grings said:


> it amazes me how people make out amd is so inferior because their chips are slightly slower than intels, yet when intel were making nutbursts everyone was making excuses for intel, clearly intel have a superbly efficient, well oiled propaganda machine



I dont think AMD chips are inferior......on the contrary, I am an AMD fanboi at heart....no doubt about it, all I am saying (If your comments in part were addressed towards me) is that currently (and I constantly remind people AMD held the performance crown in most things for over 3 years), the C2D is clock for clock supposidly 15-20% faster across the board, but raw speed does not always actually = better.  My other point being that unless the 6400 will give at least 200Mhz exra overclock then IMO the 6000 remains the better option.


----------



## mak3nshi (Aug 15, 2007)

Overclock athlon are still pretty competitive. Got this picture from another forum.


----------



## tkpenalty (Aug 15, 2007)

Guys stop arguing. The real bottom line is that we are getting controlled by market stratergies/propaganda. One SAD fact AMD needs to address is their advertising segment. I did a survey and most of my schools students didn't have a clue about what AMD was. EVERYONE knew what intel was, and everyone knew what a Pentium 4 was. See? AMD Should advertise when they are KICKING ass, i.e. the Prescott era. They would have generated a large revenue, but no. 

Now going onto the performance of the 6400. Guys stop talking about OVERCLOCKING. The general consumer will not whatsoever overclock. If its cheaper and has better performance, then by ALL means go for it. Dont think about overclocking so much, the unknown MAY happen (example slightly oc'ed Prescott with good cooling literally frying for no apparent reason). I am no way a fanboy, and at this day and age, calling people FANBOYS is a insult, especially you MacBOY; you cannot deny the fact that AMD gives better performance for their money, do not try to counter this with overclocking as an excuse.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 15, 2007)

Don't forget tk - AMD don't have anywhere near the capital that Intel does, so I can only guess that their PR budget would be much smaller. They'd most likely be using that money on refining their processes and Fabs.


----------



## mak3nshi (Aug 15, 2007)

Which school and what area in Sydney are you talking about TK? My work colleague, friend's
all know what AMD is. In fact most of the guys i knew when i used to go to school all had AMD processors on their machine. No offense by any means man. But AMD is not as unpopular as you think in Australia. Especially with it being in Sydney.


----------



## tkpenalty (Aug 15, 2007)

Mak3nshi, barely anyone in my school knows what AMD is, mate I've even worked at a shop and when customers came in to buy a system, they asked stuff like "Will it break faster?" or "I want intel". Yes I have friends which are tech savvy, but the MAJORITY im talking about. The MAJORITY dont know what AMD is. Some guys do have AMD indeed, but think about this; how many OEMs use AMD anyway? Not many. Moreover if you talk about stuff like Excel Computers, they dont even make up a percentage of Systems sold.

Finally, wherever you work Mak3nshi, it must be something with IT in it.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Aug 15, 2007)

cdawall said:


> you forgot to add this chip has 2X2mb cache and not 2x1MB like the 6000+ hence jumping up to 6400 and not 6200
> 
> this should oc well i wanna see a new AMD WR on these chips
> 
> ...



Don't turn AMD news into Intel bashing.


----------



## russianboy (Aug 15, 2007)

everybody STFU!

Who gives a shit about your opinions, honestly.

I mean, AMD guys go buy AMD, Intel guys go buy Intel, stop turning this forum into a CPU propaganda exchange database!


----------



## cdawall (Aug 15, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Don't turn AMD news into Intel bashing.



are you kidding seven other ppl have posted worse than that and several have backed up the fact that intel constantly changes socket/chipset locking out newer chips on older mobos 


if you want to make an example of something PM it you have been around long enough to know that  

there is nothing wrong with AMD sending out its 90nm chips with a bang we have all seen that this constant die shrink makes no difference in performance. look at the p4s 130nm down to 65nm the just oc'd different what makes you think the new C2Ds w/ 45nm and 3Xnm is going to make them any different. AMD has been pumping out higher end chips since K6-2 look at those next to a P3 . the fact that AMD is keeping up at all with chips that have been around since sept 23,2003 yet the keep up with intels C2Ds released july 27,2006 hmmm i see an issue 3 year old tech getting beat by 1 year old tech its one of those gee you think moments. i have no issue with intel for chips i own 3 running intels and only 1 runnning AMD, but as far as new tech goes they kinda suck it took 3 years to address having there asses handed to them by A64 tech but AMD is expected to have faster tech in less than a year.......thats BS in my book.


i hope Phenom blows C2Ds pants off cause all this crap about AMD not being able to keep up is stupid. Intel has had Penitum M chips since march of 2003 the things kept up with the AMD A64s yet intel completly ignored this and kept pushing out nutburst based crap that didnt have a chance in hell of keeping up with the A64 lineup. not one person questioned intel motives with this but everyone and there grandma thinks AMD is dead because one line of intel chips outperforms them by marginal amounts and then AMD just oc's the current chips a little more and everyon says oh no you cant do that? WTF? 

if your to stupid to relize that all of this is crap then you dont need to post here. AMD has made more advances than intel ever will. AMD already replaced the ANCIENT tech of FSB and managed to get less onboard cache to behave in a way that you couldnt tell (compare a 512k and 1m a64 you'll see diff is marginal) yet intel is pushing out chips with 12mb cache that hardly beats an AMD? again WTF? we are talking about 5-10% margins WOW there was a 20-50% margin between A64 and P4 yet no one comments about that the 4ghz p4s got beat out by the cheaper more efficient 4000+ yet intel stays on top of the market with more expensive but slower chips,at least now you can buy an intel and not get SCREWED, thats all intel changed it gave the customer a LITTLE bit of aknowledgement.... this arguement is pointless the e6850 barely beats the 3yr older base of the 6400+ and thats that. 





STOP BASHING AMD FOR RELEASING CHIPS. ppl got banned for shit like that if it had to do with intel but not AMD thats CRAP!


oh and dan no were did i bash intel in the post you quoted i posted true information on how intel seemed to simply forget the customer and change shit because it could :shadedshu if you want bashing look towards some of the other posts


----------



## russianboy (Aug 15, 2007)

you spelled bashing wrong


----------



## cdawall (Aug 15, 2007)

happy now?


----------



## Grings (Aug 15, 2007)

Tatty_One said:


> I dont think AMD chips are inferior......on the contrary, I am an AMD fanboi at heart....no doubt about it, all I am saying (If your comments in part were addressed towards me) is that currently (and I constantly remind people AMD held the performance crown in most things for over 3 years), the C2D is clock for clock supposidly 15-20% faster across the board, but raw speed does not always actually = better.  My other point being that unless the 6400 will give at least 200Mhz exra overclock then IMO the 6000 remains the better option.



no, not aimed at you (or anyone on this forum in particular), just the general idea people have that core2 is 'SO MUCH FASTERRR!!!' or statements like 'you NEED a core 2 for an 8800, ANY amd chip is a bottleneck'
My actual point was that while core2 is quicker than A64, its on a much smaller scale than the difference betweem A64 and P4, yet people make so much more noise about it than they did when the boot was on the other foot


Cdawall, i had a 754 rig, i wanted a newer chip and had to buy a new motherboard as they changed the socket (939), then i was going to upgrade again, and they changed the socket AGAIN (am2)
Then i got an intel, since which they bought out 1333fsb and quad core, both which work in my current board, AMD 1:1 INTEL?
__________________


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 15, 2007)

russianboy said:


> you spelled bashing wrong



You mis-spelt... spelt as spelled.


----------



## HAL7000 (Aug 15, 2007)

cdawall said:


> are you kidding seven other ppl have posted worse than that and several have backed up the fact that intel constantly changes socket/chipset locking out newer chips on older mobos
> 
> 
> if you want to make an example of something PM it you have been around long enough to know that
> ...



Sounds intelligent to me.... 
But I really wish that AMD would release something already and stop talking about it. I will replace my current 6000+ with the 6400+ if they were out. But where the hell are they.
I must be loosing my patience......dam where is the wife when I need her


----------



## InfDamarvel (Aug 15, 2007)

AMD is so disappointing now....not just because they have a sligtly slower processor, but because they have the slightly slower gfx cards XD. W/e though, 6400+ x2 is a good marketing strategy to keep people buying.


----------



## MacboY (Aug 15, 2007)

*Amd*

AMD really need to look at the marketing stratergies - they keep saying oooo look consumers hold on to ur cash for 6months then get this - then ooo look whats cuming - people dnt invest and there left totaly buggerd - We neeeed them!
Look at apples marketing
2Weeks ago - oh btw were having a press meeting at apple hall in 1 week - Internet goes WILD --- tuesday comes - wow look new imac and iwork - omfg people go out and buy then and there. - Releasing too long roadmap or info leads to consumers not digging in top there pockets early and then doing the same not to long later - used to be great - amd64 - few came out then BAM - new1s hit market out of nowhere - we all go out and reinvest to get 300Mhz faster speed and a lil mre clocking headroom 

We reaallly cant let them die else we will feel the rath of intel


----------



## trt740 (Aug 15, 2007)

russianboy said:


> everybody STFU!
> 
> Who gives a shit about your opinions, honestly.
> 
> I mean, AMD guys go buy AMD, Intel guys go buy Intel, stop turning this forum into a CPU propaganda exchange database!



Your too young to talk like that young man!!! go to your room.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 15, 2007)

InfDamarvel said:


> AMD is so disappointing now....not just because they have a sligtly slower processor, but because they have the slightly slower gfx cards XD. W/e though, 6400+ x2 is a good marketing strategy to keep people buying.



not for long the 2900xt just got a 17 percent increase in some games on the last driver release. If they keeps this up the 2900xt is going to beat a 8800gtx.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Aug 16, 2007)

InnocentCriminal said:


> Don't forget tk - AMD don't have anywhere near the capital that Intel does, so I can only guess that their PR budget would be much smaller. They'd most likely be using that money on refining their processes and Fabs.



yeah but it wasn't always that way, amd has plenty of time to develop a good advertising sector long ago while intel was just making it's first comercials, it didn't and now the company pasy for it, as any small ad they put out is shadowed by a longer and better intel one. it's the same with nvidia vs ati, nvdia's advertising team puts the products into the public eye, ati rely's on their fans to spread the word. and wow look ati the older company with more leading flagship cards (over the years) is less than half the worth of nvidia. hmmm.

I think it's about time to throw some money into ads. lol


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 16, 2007)

I don't think they an awful lot of money to put into advertising now, let alone back then.


----------



## russianboy (Aug 16, 2007)

trt740 said:


> Your too young to talk like that young man!!! go to your room.



im not your bitch.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Aug 16, 2007)

russianboy said:


> im not your bitch.



MAKE ME A SAMMICH, SAMMICH BOY!


and no hot sauce!


----------



## russianboy (Aug 16, 2007)

all right then.

I'll make you a fucking sandwich with your own broken bits of your mac book.


----------



## hat (Aug 16, 2007)

Save the CPU


----------



## russianboy (Aug 16, 2007)

yeah I'll save the CPU. and ship it to you, along with a free package of anthrax in the envelope.


----------



## hat (Aug 16, 2007)

What did I do?!


----------



## russianboy (Aug 16, 2007)

you were born, thats what.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Aug 16, 2007)

InnocentCriminal said:


> I don't think they an awful lot of money to put into advertising now, let alone back then.



lets see a 30 second slot for an ad is 50000$, it  cost anywhere from 300,000$-1 million to shoot a good comercial, so what you don't think amd has 350k? wow you really need to stay in school.

and yeah back then amd had as much as intel had for ads, intel wasn't always the supermonopoly.

anda 100K commecial is always an option too.


----------



## a111087 (Aug 16, 2007)

300,000$-1 million to shoot a good commercial?! wow, for that commercial they will sell tickets in movies


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 16, 2007)

yogurt_21 said:


> lets see a 30 second slot for an ad is 50000$, it  cost anywhere from 300,000$-1 million to shoot a good comercial, so what you don't think amd has 350k? wow you really need to stay in school.



I think you need to know exactly what you're talking about before you let your ass do the talking. D'you even have any proof to your claims on how much these adverts would have cost AMD? Are you even familiar with the History x86 Prcoessors? 

From the way you're wording your posts you have no idea that AMD have been in financial issues for a long time. 

Get y'facts straight before blowing out hot air.


----------



## Wile E (Aug 16, 2007)

tkpenalty said:


> ...you cannot deny the fact that AMD gives better performance for their money...


Only on the low end. They match pretty well price/performance wise, until the High end. (Which is all Intel, thus the stiff penalties, no competition)


----------



## laszlo (Aug 16, 2007)

Let's hope they'll have the money for the new products;seems they sell notes for $1.5 billion i just read it.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543~118792,00.html


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 16, 2007)

Wile E said:


> Only on the low end. They match pretty well price/performance wise, until the High end. (Which is all Intel, thus the stiff penalties, no competition)



Agreed, and when you try to get things into perspective, TK is right in so much as clock for clock, compare the 6000+ against the 6850, both clocking stock at 3 Gig, now across the board clock for clock the 6850 might be 15-20% faster but in the UK it's not too far off twice as expensive as the 6000+ but at nowhere near twice the stock performance, yes it will overclock higher making that price/performance gap shorter but when only about 5% of home PC users overclock then there is something to be said for AMD still even with it's current and ageing stock.

I got the 6850 cause I do overclock


----------



## trt740 (Aug 17, 2007)

Tatty_One said:


> Agreed, and when you try to get things into perspective, TK is right in so much as clock for clock, compare the 6000+ against the 6850, both clocking stock at 3 Gig, now across the board clock for clock the 6850 might be 15-20% faster but in the UK it's not too far off twice as expensive as the 6000+ but at nowhere near twice the stock performance, yes it will overclock higher making that price/performance gap shorter but when only about 5% of home PC users overclock then there is something to be said for AMD still even with it's current and ageing stock.
> 
> I got the 6850 cause I do overclock





Well you rock Tatty you rock!!!!! Please get rid of that God forasken Avatar LOL. That big tumor is killing me on your head. I can believe Tatty is a black hearted Intel fan, God help us. Man hes ugley too just a reflection of his intel blackhearted soul . I for one am fed up with EVGA and Intel, second motherboard works but won't Id my SATA DVD/CD burner . The other board a Tr wouldn't oc a quad (got mislead on that ) new board is crap ola, and the new replacement is headed to my ebay account as is my e6700. I'm getting a AMD system and gonna pocket the difference since I have seen zero real world improvement, except for (maybe a little when burning a dvd). AMD here I come. I'm leaning towards a Brisbane 4000+ to oc to 3.0 and a 2900xt. God love ya AMD, or a AMD 6000+/6400+ and pocketing maybe 50.00 to 100.00 dollars depending on the motherboard I buy, and no video card. Intel makes great stuff as does Nvidia but I have turned back from the darkside ( I am a Jedi as my father was before me)I have freed myself from the dark vale of the Sith.!!!!! 






Okay well maybe I'm just kidding lol!!! hey Tatty I'm just kidding about the intel stuff but not that God aweful avatar put on your glasses to read this you old fart; anyone want to bet he misses this part due to Eye strain lol!!! P.S all statements are subject to change as prices drop and my mind changes randomly. Which means I might not do this at all I might buy a Intel quad core shhhh!!!  I feel like Two face Ahhhhhhhh!!!!!!


----------



## Wile E (Aug 17, 2007)

trt740 said:


> Well you rock Tatty you rock!!!!! Please get rid of that God forasken Avatar LOL. That big tumor is killing me on your head. I can believe Tatty is a black hearted Intel fan, God help us. Man hes ugley too just a reflection of his intel blackhearted soul . I for one am fed up with EVGA and Intel, second motherboard works but won't Id my SATA DVD/CD burner . The other board a Tr wouldn't oc a quad (got mislead on that ) new board is crap ola, and the new replacement is headed to my ebay account as is my e6700. I'm getting a AMD system and gonna pocket the difference since I have seen zero real world improvement, except for (maybe a little when burning a dvd). AMD here I come. I'm leaning towards a Brisbane 4000+ to oc to 3.0 and a 2900xt. God love ya AMD, or a AMD 6000+/6400+ and pocketing maybe 50.00 to 100.00 dollars depending on the motherboard I buy, and no video card. Intel makes great stuff as does Nvidia but I have turned back from the darkside ( I am a Jedi as my father was before me)I have freed myself from the dark vale of the Sith.!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...





If you do go AMD and a 2900XT, don't get a 4000+ and OC to 3GHz. That's exactly what I did just before this, and my card was still bottlenecked. It's much happier with the OCed 6000+.


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 17, 2007)

Shit you worry me at times Trt.......and you say I need to change my avitar   I gotta say, yours is much uglier than mine and at least a zombie has a heart!


----------



## cdawall (Aug 17, 2007)

trt740 said:


> Well you rock Tatty you rock!!!!! Please get rid of that God forasken Avatar LOL. That big tumor is killing me on your head. I can believe Tatty is a black hearted Intel fan, God help us. Man hes ugley too just a reflection of his intel blackhearted soul . I for one am fed up with EVGA and Intel, second motherboard works but won't Id my SATA DVD/CD burner . The other board a Tr wouldn't oc a quad (got mislead on that ) new board is crap ola, and the new replacement is headed to my ebay account as is my e6700. I'm getting a AMD system and gonna pocket the difference since I have seen zero real world improvement, except for (maybe a little when burning a dvd). AMD here I come. I'm leaning towards a Brisbane 4000+ to oc to 3.0 and a 2900xt. God love ya AMD, or a AMD 6000+/6400+ and pocketing maybe 50.00 to 100.00 dollars depending on the motherboard I buy, and no video card. Intel makes great stuff as does Nvidia but I have turned back from the darkside ( I am a Jedi as my father was before me)I have freed myself from the dark vale of the Sith.!!!!!



get an opty 1210 they do 3.2ghz+ though i would recommend a 6000+ if you want over 3.3ghz if not 3.2ghz on the opty is doable on stock PIB cooling


----------



## trt740 (Aug 18, 2007)

*Dragged to the darkside.*



trt740 said:


> Well you rock Tatty you rock!!!!! Please get rid of that God forasken Avatar LOL. That big tumor is killing me on your head. I can believe Tatty is a black hearted Intel fan, God help us. Man hes ugley too just a reflection of his intel blackhearted soul . I for one am fed up with EVGA and Intel, second motherboard works but won't Id my SATA DVD/CD burner . The other board a Tr wouldn't oc a quad (got mislead on that ) new board is crap ola, and the new replacement is headed to my ebay account as is my e6700. I'm getting a AMD system and gonna pocket the difference since I have seen zero real world improvement, except for (maybe a little when burning a dvd). AMD here I come. I'm leaning towards a Brisbane 4000+ to oc to 3.0 and a 2900xt. God love ya AMD, or a AMD 6000+/6400+ and pocketing maybe 50.00 to 100.00 dollars depending on the motherboard I buy, and no video card. Intel makes great stuff as does Nvidia but I have turned back from the darkside ( I am a Jedi as my father was before me)I have freed myself from the dark vale of the Sith.!!!!!
> 
> 
> Ahhh!!!!! I was lured back and  it's all Tatty's fault If he had not taught me how to overclock Ahhhhhh!!!!! Q6600 B3 stepping  (yes I know it's not a s good as G0 stepping) $267.98 shipped  the price dragged me back to the darkside. Damn Intel to hell and their chips.
> ...


----------



## JC316 (Aug 19, 2007)

trt740 said:


> trt740 said:
> 
> 
> > Well you rock Tatty you rock!!!!! Please get rid of that God forasken Avatar LOL. That big tumor is killing me on your head. I can believe Tatty is a black hearted Intel fan, God help us. Man hes ugley too just a reflection of his intel blackhearted soul . I for one am fed up with EVGA and Intel, second motherboard works but won't Id my SATA DVD/CD burner . The other board a Tr wouldn't oc a quad (got mislead on that ) new board is crap ola, and the new replacement is headed to my ebay account as is my e6700. I'm getting a AMD system and gonna pocket the difference since I have seen zero real world improvement, except for (maybe a little when burning a dvd). AMD here I come. I'm leaning towards a Brisbane 4000+ to oc to 3.0 and a 2900xt. God love ya AMD, or a AMD 6000+/6400+ and pocketing maybe 50.00 to 100.00 dollars depending on the motherboard I buy, and no video card. Intel makes great stuff as does Nvidia but I have turned back from the darkside ( I am a Jedi as my father was before me)I have freed myself from the dark vale of the Sith.!!!!!
> ...


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Aug 19, 2007)

Screw all this fanboy bullcrap! Whichever CPU is the best (price : performance wise) then that should be what you buy. I do like to support AMD as they're the underdogs - but if Intel have a better set of products for the right price, they'll get my money everytime.


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 19, 2007)

InnocentCriminal said:


> Screw all this fanboy bullcrap! Whichever CPU is the best (price : performance wise) then that should be what you buy. I do like to support AMD as they're the underdogs - but if Intel have a better set of products for the right price, they'll get my money everytime.



Agreed and I do!  Got this 6850 for less than the price of a 6600 and only a little bit more than a 6000+....but that was one of those very rare lucky days!


----------



## mandelore (Aug 19, 2007)

meh... im waiting on a phenom, then ill be happy. if its shit, ill go nuts and probs kill aload of locals


----------



## a111087 (Aug 19, 2007)

mandelore said:


> meh... im waiting on a phenom, then ill be happy. if its shit, ill go nuts and probs kill aload of locals



I will warn them


----------



## trt740 (Aug 20, 2007)

mandelore said:


> meh... im waiting on a phenom, then ill be happy. if its shit, ill go nuts and probs kill aload of locals





Your 185 is a great chip keep it for a while.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 31, 2007)

just read a article thats states these chips will do 3.57ghz on air and most likely 3.6ghz or higher on water


----------



## hat (Aug 31, 2007)

My 5200+ does 2772 (172MHz increace frpm stock) on the stock cooler WHILE BEING UNDERVOLTED .025 volts. I got a good chip.

The 6400+ is higher binned and should hit 3.5 easy


----------

