AMD puts the kibosh on Quad FX platform
Now that Spider's hogging the limelight, the question inevitably had to be asked, and it seems the answer is no. The inquiry, of course, is whether or not AMD would keep on keepin' on with the lukewarmly received Quad FX platform, and judging by comments from the chip maker's own Suzy Pruitt, the end for it is nigh. More specifically, Pruitt stated that AMD had "discontinued future planning and development" for the Quad FX platform, and also noted that it had shifted most of the effort over to initiatives such as the aforementioned Spider. Notably, it was stated that the outfit would continue to support customers that have existing Quad FX-based hardware, and while specifics weren't doled out, we did hear that upgrade options for those individuals would likely not include a Phenom-branded product. So much for unwavering dedication to its enthusiast-class dual-socket technology, eh?[Via DailyTech]
Filed under: Desktops
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 30th 2007 3:07AM
Was dumb as hell from the beginning. It was about $1K/installtion away from being price competitive and then it still wasn't performance competitive. And due to the duplication of north bridges, south bridges and RAM, it couldn't even really best Intel on power either (which was odd at the time).
At least AMD realized the limitations early on (the CEO's remark that if he knew then what he knew now he'd have made multi-die processors, as apparently the market ate them up). Too bad they didn't act on it sooner.
turn_self_off @ Nov 30th 2007 6:01AM
mind me asking where this comes from?
isnt this exactly what amd's hypertransport bus is supposed to counteract?
Bobs @ Nov 30th 2007 3:58AM
AMD really needs to pull out of this slump the company has been in. It hurts everyone, even intel fanboys, very badly. The sooner they get back on track, the sooner i can rebuild my computer
Justin @ Nov 30th 2007 8:50AM
Why can't you rebuild before then, or are you that dead set against Intel? AMD's really only had one relatively short stretch on top. You might have to wait quite some time before they have another. I'm not saying that to bash them, but I'm not seeing anything on the horizon that's going to push them back ahead of Intel again.
John B @ Nov 30th 2007 9:58AM
Eh, what? What does that have to do with you not upgrading? I still buy and build AMD because it's still a great bang-for-the-buck and it still does everything that I want it to do. My high-end, AMD-based gaming rig still plays the newest games flawlessly, and I'm not so paranoid about getting those additional few minutes when encoding a video file that I absolutely, positively must have Intel to gain those extra benchmark points. What AMD offers is no more and no less than what I need. If that's the same with you, then just upgrade and stop worrying about it.
The value you get out of any technology purchase is completely relative. Both AMD and Intel have great products at great prices. If you're getting ready to upgrade, then just do it. Ignore the hard-core tech heads who look only at CPU cycles and benchmarks. Buy what you want and be happy with it. (If only the high-def format fanboys would do the same...)
Bobs @ Nov 30th 2007 10:02AM
Because its too expensive to make the jump to PCIe, AM2/LGA775, and new ram, my PC2700 wont work on many boards. Ive got an AGP 8X, and a socket A Barton core processor, its gonna cost me a lot to make the switch.
John B @ Nov 30th 2007 10:33AM
Well, that's a totally different issue. You're looking at a platform jump which -- yes, I agree -- means that the only things that you can keep are the hard drive and optical drives. Everything else needs to be upgraded.
But your post made it seem as though you didn't want to upgrade because of AMD's corporate/technology performance as of late when the truth is that right now an upgrade is a bit expensive for you. I completely understand that.
For what it's worth, I just bought a new Athlon 64 X2 4000+, motherboard (with GeForce 6100 video and 7.1 audio), case, and 2 GB through NewEgg for $220 with shipping. The hard and optical drives are from the system that's getting replaced. I recommend that you start getting parts as you can, perhaps one component per paycheck, and make the CPU the last purchase so that you can take advangate of any price drops until then.
Bobs @ Nov 30th 2007 11:21AM
Well, its more or so finding the right motherboard, i cant seem to find one that suits my needs. Yeah, AMDs are great, i mean, i got this barton core to play crysis, and ATI kinda screwed up my graphics card with the newer catlyst drivers (they literally broke the drivers, 7.7 and above wont work, but they wont tell you that)
Frankenstein Black @ Nov 30th 2007 10:10AM
Woe, woe, woe! Does this mean that my Quad FX 4x4 rig is ass out now? and that I wont be able to add dual quad cores in the future (effectively bringing it to 8 cores)? Say it aint so, SAY IT AINT SOOOOO!!!
AMD F me and the other 4x4 owners (yea, yea I know, all 2 of us) and all you are doing is CREATING INTEL CUSTOMERS!!
John B @ Nov 30th 2007 10:37AM
Oh, quit your bitching! No piece of hardware is obsolete until it no longer servers your purpose.
I still have a 350 MHz PC running DOS/WFW 3.11 so that I can play some of the older games that don't run well (if at all) in an emulator. You make it sound like because I can't buy a replacement CPU that AMD is screwing me over as well.
If your quad rig is doing what you want it to do and if it will do so for the foreseeable future, then quit your grousing. It's doing exactly what you paid for it to do.
Jay @ Nov 30th 2007 4:29PM
Bad news for FX owners but its something we're going to have to live with. I built my computer just a month ago and I'm using AMD Athlon 64 FX-74 Windsor 3.0GHz Socket F (1207 FX) DSDC with a ASUS L1N64-SLI WS Dual L (1207FX) motherboard like every other FX owner probably have. A lot of investment when into making this computer (more than $1500) but at least I can stick another FX processor and somewhat give it an "upgrade". So what if they're not going to work on the Athlon FX series. They're going to release better processor with better everything. Like for example the PCIe 2.0 which people are going to have to replace their motherboards if they want to fully use their currently out graphics cards. Theres new types of memories developing which will also make people replace their currently systems and so on and so on. One thing I learned about computer technology is that you CAN NOT keep up with the technology. Theres always something new developing and one day you'll have the top-of-the-line computer and next day you have an out-dated machine.
I sent an email to AMD about this issue and this is what they said.
Jay @ Nov 30th 2007 4:31PM
hmm the link didn't get posted but they pretty much said there is no upgrade at the moment and they currently do have any information regarding the FX processors.
Jay @ Nov 30th 2007 4:32PM
don't*
Photonboy @ Nov 30th 2007 9:30PM
*Important note:
The future of processing is headed towards GPGPU, or more specifically parallel processing via the Stream Processors. The load will increasingly be taken OFF of the CPU. Future designs will use the CPU to step through the programs, but then the raw crunching will be done by the stream processors.
AMD is currently working on a combined CPU/GPU chip which will most likely include stream processors and possibly other chips.
Raw processing power via GPGPU will take a while to get going but there will be no looking back once we'er there. Video transcoding, gaming, CAD, Science applications will all look to GPGPU. The question is how long Stream Processing software will take to get going.
AMD is behind NVidia for graphics card sales. AMD may be forward thinking in designs like the ATI HD3870 with 320 stream processors, superior Idle power management and DX10.1 (keeping an eye to the future), however I think they underestimated the average Gamers desire for what produces the RAW gaming power for the buck "right now." AMD needs to combine their forward-thinking strategies with releasing products that people want right now.
AMD is reminding me a little bit of Sony. Sony expected the PS3 to do better because it is advanced hardware and they have a long-term strategy of where they see the market but they need to appreciate what the average consumer is going to shell out their money for in the short term.
I hope this sheds some light on why I think AMD is taking the approach they are.
joe @ Jan 16th 2008 12:54AM
im another sucker who bought asus 4x4 that won't ever get to upgrade to 8 cores...it was such a huge rumor but oh well
someone show me a linux app that is going to tax all four of my cores to 100%...its not gonna happen