Intel and AMD Quad-Core Rhetoric Heats Up
July 21, 2006 | by Geoff Duncan
Chipmakers AMD and Intel are engaging in a race of words, both claiming progress toward quad-core computing even as Intel engages in a serious restructuring.
Processor makers AMD and Intel are already engaging in a war of words over the not-yet-born quad-core processor market, each claiming in their quarterly financial statements that their quad-core products are on track for strong debuts. However, despite a substantial internal restructuring aimed at streamlining the company's internal processes, Intel is expected to be out the door with its Kentsfield and Clovertown quad-core designs by the end of 2006, with AMD vowing to demonstrate its quad-core solutions in the same timeframe.
For its part, Intel announced disappointing quarterly earnings (down 57 percent from the same period last year) along with an internal shakeup designed to cut costs and streamline the company's internal development and decision-making processes. The moves involve shuffling around high-level management so simplify the overall corporate structure, ahead of expected layoffs among Intel's rank-and-file. Intel's management isn't giving any numbers, but analysts put overall pending layoff figures around ten percent of the company's overall workforce, or about 10,000 employees. These cost-cutting moves are probably the only thing keeping investors from further eviscerating Intel's stock price in the face of gloomy earnings outlooks for future quarters: Intel's Core 2 Duo (aka Conroe and Merom) processors might tip the overall processor performance battle in Intel's favor, but Intel's battle with AMD is forcing the company to price the technology at painfully low levels—pain that certainly extends to it competitor, AMD.
For its part, AMD pledges to demonstrate its "true" quad core processor architecture by the end of the year, although neither analysts nor the company itself expect expect units to actually reach market until mid-2007. AMD is referring to its new microarchitecture design as a "true" quad-core with four separate processor cores on a single die, to contrast it with Intel's forthcoming Kentsfield and Clovertown processors which are essentially separate dual-core Core 2 Duo and Xeon processors layered together. AMD's 4x4 architecture also provides for two HyperTransport AM2 sockets, each responsible for two cores and one bank of DD2 memory; in contrast, Intel's quad-core offerings all reside on a single bus, which may give AMD's eventual products a performance advantage, albeit at higher manufacturing costs.
Post Your Comment...Comments
Pat on Jul 23rd, 2006 at 9:59 PM:
The reason AMD is lowering prices is to compete with the upcoming Core 2 Duo, a processor that beats out AMD in almost every benchmark. Scramble? ....hardly.
Karl Viklund on Jul 24th, 2006 at 4:58 AM:
AMD did cut their prices today by alot. The model 5000+ will be priced like 3800+ was priced before and I guess 3800+ will be very very cheap. And when you think about it, 3800+ is screaming fast. I'm sitting on a 3000+ today and it's realy realy fast and it's enough for most things so I think this was very smart by AMD it will drive up the sales of AMD chips and today they announced they they will buy ATi so the future looks great and promesing. I will continue to build computers on the AMD chip but Intel looks great.
star gate sg1 on Jul 24th, 2006 at 1:20 PM:
Greg: It's true what you said about AMD. But so did Intel. Who is acctually scrambling is AMD.
We'll see what happes to quad core...
Not So Sure on Jul 26th, 2006 at 6:47 PM:
I don't think so Greg. If you're buying a new system in a month or so (far enough off that MB's aren't outrageously overpriced), I think you're more likely to look at either 6300 or maybe one model up than an AMD.
Well at least that's what I'd do.
OTOH, if you already have an AMD 939 board (like i do), there's no compelling reason to change platforms, unless you live on the bleeding edge.
In the end, the question is how long will it take for AMD to have competitive products in the $180-$230 range.
The 6300 comes close to an FX62. And there's no way that chip is dropping below $300.00.
I'm pulling for AMD, but I think this round goes to Intel.
John on Jul 30th, 2006 at 10:35 PM:
One thing you all seem to be forgetting when considering cost is the price of the whole system vs just the processor cost. If the processor price is vastly different, e.g. two or three hundred dollars different, then you have a point about which company is scrambling. But for now, the company still scrambling is Intel..... inspite of the better benchmarks.... we'll have to wait and see how the market reacts.
Comment on this article
Please keep your comments relevant to this article. Email addresses are not displayed, they are only required to verify you are human.
When you submit your comment, an email will be sent to your email address with a confirmation link. Once you have clicked on that confirmation link your comment will be posted.
HTML is not allowed.

Greg on Jul 21st, 2006 at 12:53 PM:
I was just told that AMD has lowered the prices on a lot of their processors. I think Intel is going to have to scramble hard to get back on track.