The ultimate Amiga One (what it should be)

[BIG-IRON]

The ulimate Amiga one deserves better hardware, like it or not the ppc/g-series is hardly what we shold be depending on. The Athlon 64/Opteron is the future even Intel has adopted AMD64 for its future instruction set, and as for speed the 64 is faster than cpus with almost 2 times the speed.
    I worry that by going with the g-series the Amiga has chosen a loosing horse. If you think this is a raw speed choice when I say the 64 I would argue against that, the 64 is quite elegant do some research if you arent familiar with it. The 64 uses less power than the intel making it ideal for laptops and has the 64 bit instruction set, and its cheap at 200 bucks for the 3200. If I had my way the new Amiga would look like this. The parts listed below could be purchased from the pomona computer show for around 1,500 bucks (I actually just built this rig to run XP) so price is not a problem.

Athlon 64-3400
1 gig DDR 400 ram
2 WD Raptor 74 gig 10,000 rpm serial ata hd's in raid 0
1 WD 160 gig 7200 rpm hd for mass storage
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro or ATI X800 video card
Sound Blaster Audigy sound card
52x cd burner
8x dvd burner
Full tower with 450 watt ps
21 inch monitor (viewsonic etc) flatpanels still arent good for games due to slow refresh rates.

[BIG-IRON]

LOL umm yea and the Athlon 64 isnt Intel.....um did you even read the post?

[BIG-IRON]

Common guys! remember when the amiga 1000 came out? it was revolutionary not just for its os but its architecture! We need an Amiga that we can get people other than Amiga geeks to buy or it will wither on the vine. Try telling a friend to buy an amiga one with a 3 year old cpu, locked at 900 mhz with sdram thats just as ancient and oh by the way it 1400 bucks, I hope I have a camera close by to catch the look on their face! We cant just say that OS4 is state of the art we need to be able to say the whole machine is the art that others are judged by. For you rabid fans of the G series if you did some research you would find out the G5 wouldnt exist as it does without AMD's help thats right IBM went to AMD for a partnership, AMD and IBM worked on SOI, Low K and copper interconnects which now reside in the G5. If you want to stick with the G series for god sakes step up to the 5 or go with the fastest 4 you can get your hands on, throw in ddr ram and PCI express or agp 8X! common guys we can help Amiga come back to life but not with the current rig being offered.

[BIG-IRON]

You are confusing the architecture with the instruction set, up until now most cpus used the x86 32 bit code, that was created by intel. Intel just recently announced that it was scrappin the Intanium 64 bit instruction set and going with the AMD64(thats just the name of the codes) instruction set.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0%2C3973%2C1561875%2C00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532

Tom Halfhill, an analyst at In-Stat/MDR in San Jose, said Monday that he had compared the instruction sets of AMD's 64-bit chips, called AMD64, with the 64-bit extensions to be used in the Intel Xeon processor and future desktop chips. The smoking gun, Halfhill said, was Intel's choice to mimic a decision AMD made in its early Opteron designs, and later reversed.

[BIG-IRON]

Sorry your wrong get your facts straight,I have both industry knowledge and about 500 different posts on various news and tech geek sites saying the same thing. Intel is using the AMD64 extensions like this site here.

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2004Feb/bch20040218023905.htm

Note it says they are "identical to AMD64"

Or this one

http://www.devx.com/amd/Article/20555?trk=DXRSS_LATEST

Some diehard fans of AMD64 technology have expressed concern that Intel's exact cloning of the technology might be detrimental to AMD. However, Glaskowsky points out that Intel's entry into the world of 64-bit extensions is unalloyed good news for AMD. Prior to Intel's move, AMD's 64-bit extensions had only technical superiority, but didn't have market penetration. Because no other vendor was selling chips with those extensions, conservative purchasers had reason to hesitate.

However, now that Intel has joined the fray, Glaskowski predicts, prospective purchasers will begin examining the technology on a comparative basis. For AMD, such comparisons are good news. As benchmarks have shown, the AMD64 implementation performs very well. We don't know how much better the numbers are than Intel's, because the latter chips won't ship until June at the earliest. However, due to the high-bandwidth Hyper-Transport processor-to-memory bus of the Opteron architecture, AMD will likely retain a significant performance edge. (See Transport Your Application to Hyper Performance.)

In support of the position that these developments favor AMD, we can see that the uptake of AMD64-based processors in server systems has advanced considerably since the Intel announcement. Hewlett-Packard has announced new product lines based on AMD64 processors, while IBM and Sun have expanded their offerings.

It is clear that Intel's adoption of the 64-bit extensions is a major boost for the architecture, and will actually help drive adoption of AMD's Opteron and Athlon 64 processors. And it's clear that as both companies continue their decades-long battle, buyers will enjoy the benefits of ever richer feature sets and amazing performance without having to worry at all about compatibility.

http://news.com.com/2100-1006-5159067.html


Or this one

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5160169.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed

[BIG-IRON]

First i'd like to thanks mikeymike for his anti-troll duties! best i've seen on any message board yet. Second is it just me or does Sir-Inferno look like one happy {bleep}? Lastly what a rousing thread! great brain power in this group I do believe. That doesnt change the fact that I'm right....hehehe hugs and kisses to ya all!