Talk:AMD
|
|
There might be quite a bit of redundancy going on here, with both this article, the Athlon article, and the AMD64 describing the various processors in detail, where the Athlon article focuses on their processor series, and the AMD64 article focuses on the 64-bit "Hammer" series.
So, for example, to update this article with the release of Athlon 64 and Athlon FX, you need to update all three articles. It's understandable both the Athlon and AMD64 will need to, but the actual company article...?
My point is -- shouldn't this one mostly just cover the company profile of Advanced Micro Devices, with Related Links to Athlon and AMD64, and possibly other closely related articles? I'm asking before doing anything, because this could lead to some major changes in this article. (mostly abstractions, and the most detailed discussion of Athlon in particular perhaps being that it's one of their most well-known processor brands)
Jugalator 06:44, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
- I agree completely, actually, but deciding how to break out that sort of thing may be difficult. Perhaps a simple description of the company itself and a release timeline here, along with "Their most recent offerings have been the Athlon and the AMD64" with those properly Wikified . . . Phil Bordelon 02:40, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)
The AMD K5 and K6-x processors were not clones of the Intel Pentium, nor did they lack support for L2 cache. They were hybrid x86-RISC designs very much like the Athlon and Pentium 4 of today. Their only common ground with the Intel fifth-generation CPUs was the socket they went into. The K5, K6 and K6-2 all had their L2 cache on the motherboard, same as the Pentium, and the K6-III had 256K on the chip itself.
Should this page mention the thermal and mechanical problems that seemed to plague early versions of the Athlon? The infamous videotape on Tomshardware showing smoke curling up within seconds from Athlons when their heatsinks were removed did much to scare users away from AMD and back to Intel. And AMD certainly wasn't helped by the mechanically fragile and difficult-to-install Athlon package when Intel had already designed its Pentium 4 with a large and rugged copper heat sink and on-chip automatic thermal protection.
Phil Karn 28 Feb 2004
- I see no reason why not. I assume current chips don't do this? - David Gerard 17:41, Feb 28, 2004 (UTC)
The AMD Elan SC520 chips (which represent the entire Elan line), as well as the Am186 Series get no mention here.
It would be nice to have some more info about the -company- instead of just it's products.. ---- Noone
Re-structuring AMD stuff
Inter and I have begun to discuss improving the swarm of AMD-related pages. He suggested that we stage the conversation here. Perhaps others will join and help?
I was going to build myself an new server and I wanted to use an AMD chip. So, of course, I turned first to the Wikipedia for background.
There is a lot of information, but I found it quite chaotic and inconsistent. And, frankly, much of it wasn't up to the Wiki standards we might aspire to.
- That's typical. ;-) When many different editors make edits to the same articles in the same category, there's bound to be a heap of inconsistencies. Inter 10:17, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Currently, I know of these AMD-related links:
- AMD Opteron
- Athlon 64
- List of AMD microprocessors
- List of AMD Athlon microprocessors
- List of AMD Athlon 64 microprocessors
- List of AMD Athlon XP microprocessors
- List of AMD Duron microprocessors
- List of AMD Sempron microprocessors
- List of AMD Opteron microprocessors
- List of AMD Opteron models
- List of AMD CPU slots and sockets
- AMD64
- Duron
- I'd suggest to move some of these pages, especially the Duron, Athlon 64, AMD64 and AMD Opteron. Some of this can almost certainly be merged with something else. Inter 10:17, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Some of these — for example List of AMD Opteron microprocessors and List of AMD Opteron models — point to the same place through redirects. But it would be nice to get a consistent structure.
And speaking of consistency, some pages that I think ought be look pretty much alike — for example List of AMD Athlon microprocessors and List of AMD Opteron microprocessors — look really different. I'm not a Double-E, so I can't say for certain that this is wrong, but it certainly looks wrong.
- In the spirit of consistency they should look more alike. If all of them have the same structure it looks better. Inter 10:17, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
And lots of techno-babble words aren't defined, directly or by link. Look, for example, at the table headings in List of AMD Athlon microprocessors. I happen to know what an FSB, but the table needs a link to explain it.
- Easily fixable. There are probably other words in the tables which should link to other articles aswell. Inter 10:17, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I've done some clean up (you can find my fingerprints here and there), but I'd guess I've done 5% of the work that might be done. So as a straw-man proposal, I'm suggesting this structure to all of the articles:
- AMD (this article). About the company and it's history.
- List of AMD microprocessors. Just an outline of the history of AMD's technical CPU offerings
- AMD Athlon. About the chip family: what makes it cool, different. Why is an Athlon XP like an Athlon 64 (there must be some reason they have the same name).
- List of AMD Athlon microprocessors. Every Athlon model every made, with interesting information about it.
- AMD Opteron.
:.-1 s/Athlon/Opteron/g<-- vi joke :-)- List of AMD Opteron microprocessors. Same vi joke.
- AMD Duron. Ditto.
- Et cetera.
- AMD Athlon. About the chip family: what makes it cool, different. Why is an Athlon XP like an Athlon 64 (there must be some reason they have the same name).
- List of AMD slots and sockets
- Slot A. What makes it cool, different, etc.
- Socket 940. And again
- OK. The AMD article should list every other AMD article. That is, to have one point of departure in the AMD article hierarchy I propose the main AMD page to be the staging point. I realize that the See Also section can get fairly crowded, hence my merge suggestion above. Inter 10:17, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The AMD Athlon article might link upward to List of AMD microprocessors and link downward to List of AMD Athlon microprocessors, but not all over the place to Opteron and Duron and so on articles (I was getting really lost the first time I went through, so I'm proposing a strict hierarchy to make it easier to remember where you are).
- No, the articles shouldn't link all over the place but in the spirit of WP they can link anywhere they like. If we do it in the text, it's fine, but having a large See Also section on every single article might not be so desireable. Inter 10:17, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oh, and all of the List of AMD <mumble> microprocessors article would look alike, to the extent that it is possible to do that.
It's easy to see how we ended up where we are: smart people just adding stuff as it came to them. It's the Wiki-way, and thank all the Wiki-gods for it. But maybe it's time to step back and organize it.
As a place to start:
- What should a List of AMD <mumble> microprocessors page look like? Are all the table headings in List of AMD Athlon XP microprocessors to many? Are the table headings in List of AMD Opteron microprocessors too few? I'd be inclined (another straw-man) toward
- Model number
- Frequency
- Multiplier (whatever that is)
- A CPU multiplier is simply the number of times the FSB speed should be multiplied. Say if you have an FSB speed of 133 and a multiplier of 10. That gives you a CPU core speed of 1.33Ghz. Inter 10:17, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Core name
- Memory interface
- Form factor (i.e. what socket)
- Release date
Thoughts?
- I like the above table outline. I'm not totally sure if Memory interface needs to be on it. Inter 10:17, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
DanielVonEhren 00:29, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I have looked at the article (AMD) some more and taken a copy of the AMD64 content in it. I feel it's gotta go. I either wanna merge it to the AMD64 article but I'm not sure if I want that article around either. Let me think about it. Inter 20:48, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I have thought about it and I think there's enough content and articles here to make a category and possibly a template for navigation. Inter 21:39, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I will look at this eventually. I just have alot to do at the moment with other projects on both here and Commons. Inter 10:45, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Flash History Missing
Alright, I've now fixed the whole article. It talks about the technology from the point of view of how and why it was important in the corporate history of AMD, rather than providing spec sheets. I've also added a section of AMD's flash business, which was a massive omission. It would still benefit from some tidy up, but I think you now get a much better feel for what AMD is about, and how they company developed. But we could do with more pre-1990 stuff now. 1970 odd to 1990 is thread bare. Timharwoodx 18:20, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Dual Core/X2
Should we add a section about AMD's X2, their new dual core chip, or should we wait till it is actually out on the market place? Coments please. --CoolFox 16:18, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)