Yup, AMD, come out with the kit, even though you cannot get a single demo machine to run stable!

They should have waited until they got it right ... rushing buggy kit for xmas season is not really good thinking ....

AMD are really digging their own grave as of late. The new X4 processors are slower, more expensive and run a hell of a lot hotter than their Intel equivalents. Not to mention that the new "top of the range" HD3800 series of cards get outperformed by mid-range NVidia offerings.

AMD are still struggling with their 55nm technology and getting everything to run properly, Intel are already producing 45nm chips.

I'm sorry AMD, but I am going Intel and NVidia on my next system after nearly a decade of being a loyal AMD customer.

AMD are having their arse handed to them against the current Intel and NVidia offerings never mind the new Intel chips in January and the new Nvidia boards coming through.

For the first time in maybe 5-6 years i'm really concerned that AMD may not be here in a year/eighteen months. The thought of a resurgence of a price gouging innovation stymied Intel scares the bejesas out of me.

Feel the width.

Looks reasonable, especially if $2.00 = £1.00.

Lets hope thye iron the bugs out asap.

so it happens again, well we've seen it all before

sometimes intel have the upper-hand sometimes AMD do

same with graphics sometimes its Nvidia and sometimes its ATI(AMD)

the only constant (and I learned this by buying a notebook with x1400) is that ATI drivers are still less stable than nvidia ones, in my experience.

Although it seems too near to impossible, I do really wish AMD gives "something" in 2008. Well, AMD must come back as a strong competitor to bring Intel processor price back to the earth.

I would have thought, AMD were in the perfect position to integrate lots of graphics processors on the memory chips.

In the past, it seemed, AMD's success was based on low power and innovative design. May be Intel was caught sleeping and the giant has woken up.

excuse me, im as impartial as the next guy but "having their arses handed to them" is a bit of a bold statement, weigh up the facts, at the price range of the ati 3870 there doesnt seem to be much of a challenge? the 8800gt is more expensive and only marginally better (yes it is better) but at the end of the day people buy this kind of card for price for performance if not you would buy the ultra would you not? so they win there. secondly they are expected to actually be in stock, again this cant be said for the Nvidia. so nvidia have a brilliant card, but its more expensive and almost impossible to get hold of.. yes i see amd are getting their arses handed to them?!

as for the processors, not a clue, but given the fact that the X2 ranges arent that far from the core 2 in terms of price for performance it should be able to give a tiny bit of a battle. and dont tell me all that ill educated crap about core 2's being better, yes they run cooler yes they overclock better, but for the consumer market and not enthusiasts who cares if its cooler or overclocks well. price for performance is the main issue and it can be very very close in some areas.

Maybe try a little research, NVidia don't just have the 8800GTS, they also have the 8800GT, which is the same price and aimed at the same market as the HD3800 series, but runs at nearly (~90%) the speed of a 8800GTX (~40% faster than ATI 2900XT).

I have been a fan of AMD and ATI for over 5 years, I have bought 2 systems this year, one for me and one for my partner. One system had a 2GHz clock AthlonX2 with an ATI graphics card. The other had a 2GHz clock Core2Duo with NVidia. All other parts are identical (except mobo).

The Intel system boots around 20% quicker than the AMD and benchmarks around 20% better than the AMD/ATI system for games and processing tasks.

When looking at the other characteristics, they both have the same water cooling system, the AMD system runs at about 39*C with a constant whirring of the fan, the Intel system runs at about 28*C with the fan on it's lowest setting.

I would gladly pay the whopping £20 difference in system prices for the Intel system to have a system that is quieter and more energy efficient than to pay a little bit less to have a lancaster bomber sitting in my office that can also run the radiators in my house.

And just so that you know, every system I have built in the last 5 years has been AMD based and unless AMD can pull a cool running, high-performance rabbit out of their hats then I dont want to know about their 55nm range.

Your ill informed and personal comments above are the exact reason fanboys exist.

Just so you know my day to day system right now is a DFI NF4 socket 939 system with an AMD 3200+ processor (yes single core!!) and has been for the last few years...it's not overclocked and never has been. It's used with a couple of Nvidia Quadro cards. My backend server has a Core 2 Duo 6400 with a fairly run of the mill radeon card (can't even remember the model number).

Your comment though show's a massive lack of understanding of the market.....the 'hot product' is speed driven...same as cars (why do you think Top Gear DON'T show the latest ford Focus week after week). It's these numbers that get the media coverage which filters down to the consumer media coverage and gives the range the 'sheen'.

I read a review over the weekend of a QX9650 being overclocked to 6Ghz....6Ghz FFS, that's twice the rated speed of the processor....admittedly the person who did it probably spent more on his cooling system then all the other components combined....but 6Ghz FFS.

Now if that means I can buy a Q9450 in January and crank it up to 3Ghz on air it'll pidd all over anything I've seen on the Phenom x4 numbers and all for the princely sum of about £150.

I want AMD to sort their act out...I want them to bring out processors that compete and push the envelope against Intel.....because as I said above I DON'T want an Intel that doesn't keep pushing the envelope as well.

But there's no doubt at the moment AMD are getting their arses handed to them....pretty much as you just have.

that AMD completely fucked things up by buying ATI, now their top end GPUs are struggling to compete with nVidia's mid range ones, and if AMD hadn't bought ATI, they would most likely still be scraping a profit from their mid range CPUs.

The way you critics are pronouncing doom and gloom you'd think AMD was about to go bankrupt. As for the acquisition of ATI, These things take time to come together.

Hmm . . how long have I been hearing that ? Gosh, just about ever since AMD existed, if I remember correctly.

And it'll continue for the rest of the century, I guess.

AMD has already been in worse shape, and now it has graphics potential to boost it along as well.

I don't know, but I'm guessing that AMD is going to burst the shell again in a year or two, just like it did with the Athlon range that rattled Intel's cage so much. I think AMD is going to give us a really good CPU with integrated graphics in the coming years, and that CPU is going to give Intel a hard time again.

The only frustrating thing about AMD is the fact that it screws up so regularly. But it has survived dire straights before, and I don't think that its current potential puts it in a worse situation than it was seven years ago.

In any case, I've heard "AMD is gonna die" for decades now. AMD is still here, stronger than before. Still got problems, but still here nonetheless.

I have a 3870... Yeps.. and i'll buy a couple 3850s to round it out when I get my new board.

FYI: My $219 CDN 3870 OC's easily ( beautiful temps at 55% fan speed) to 855 core, and 2600 mem (1300 x2). With this and my dirt cheap $65 x2-3600, and $70 biostar tforce 7050 mobo, I run at 3040mhz , and pull over 11000 in 3dmark 06. I managed to pay my rent back when i had to sell off my C2D oc'd to 3.1ghz, 7900gt, etc (months ago) and purchase my current box sans video card.

Holy price difference batman!

I can buy 2 3850s and run them in corss fire and match or beat a GTX or Ultra in most things... Wanna compare the prices there? $350 vs $500+?

ATI/AMD/ TSMC's 55nm process is beautiful, and once we unlock the bios; Overclocks in excess of 855 core are going to be very easy.

The sweet chip from intel is the q6600, and if there was no AMD around, that chip would not be >$300 CDN. However, just to show they aren't being overly friendly, the next step up is roughly double the cost.

Did I expect more from phenom? Yes. Did AMD screw up by going monolithic vs MCM? Yes. Notice not even intel was that ambitious. And won't be at 65nm thats for sure.

This was a gamble, that went poorly for AMD, they could have had mcm x2s for months now, had they not been so intoxicated by Hubris. Does it show AMD is dead? No. Does it show that transistor size matters? Yes.

See phenom for what it is, a gamble gone bad. The 790 series chipset will be fine, and once they, or a partner spins phenom at 45nm, it'll be fine.

As rumors go, AMDs death is vastly over played. Hyperbole in essence. They aren't they simply have to nail a good respin on 65nm, or move to 55nm / 45nm quickly, and further MCM is you're friend... Even if you have more FABs then god.

I dont consider myself misinformed or lacking understanding, but i take things for what they are, i dont see the top of the range model think wow thats amazing then go and spend my money on lesser model without research as im sure you dont either. If you do you are truly a fool.

End of the day i dont care who has the performance crown, i care what i can get for my money, i cant afford a grands worth of PC every year so why bother. I stick to midrange as do many many others. such as the previous guy who mentioned a crossfire setup for dirt cheap money.

There is a flaw in his argument as obviously crossfire and Sli dont generally scale well and lots of games dont make much use of the second card.

What im saying is that there is a lot of comments from people that theres no reason to buy and AMD. yes they are "generally" lower in performance however its always worth weighing up pro's and cons to any purchase generally i have found AMD machines to be great little machines which are cheap to build when you factor in motherboards (although i have to say recently theres some great budget boards for intel). Im sick of people who rag a product instantly because they dont do any research and generally its by the same narrowminded people who bash vista for no good reason having never tried it. (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE)

The 38xx series is a brilliant performer for the price. thats fact. Its cool, thats fact. and it SOUNDS as though it will be in good supply. yes the 8800GT is a very good card, but with stock problems and such a variety in prices causes issues.

Amd cannot perform in the high end. im pretty sure they know that, but isnt this how AMD started out? they were the underdog, but suddenly stomped on Intel. Its a battle which keeps going, its going to keep going for a long time. Intel may have dirty tactics and may start annoying people with changing chipsets but at the end of the day i rarely upgrade my machine, i will usually rebuild. which means trauling through review after review finding the best for my money. WHICH IS 3870 at the moment (dont go blabbering on about the 8800GT because a graphics card is only good if you can actually buy one and use it)

the 8800gt is a paper launch from nvidia to steal some spotlight. hell if they can get them in stock i will happily retract this statement, but 90% of shops have sold out of them.

im not trying to be an arse i promise. but read my oriignal post, its regarding domestic markets, not entusiasts so water cooled machines dont really apply to the domestic market. as for my original graphics comments i stand by them. i will never buy a processor just because a company makes the best one ever!!? think about it do you? if you do then you are nothing but a victim of clever marketing.

Well i don't know about anyone else but I've yet to actually SEE an AMD advert? Those damn blue Intel guys were everywhere at one point, you can hardly pick up a gaming magazine without it telling you it's best viewed with nVidia hardware.

When it comes to what machine I'll buy next, I'll do my homework on the net then go see if I can actually buy the damn stuff. Last time I bought hardware I didn't buy cutting edge Intel OR AMD because there just wasn't any, I got a lower range Intel Core Duo and a really cheap (really happy with it too) motherboard out of a whole list of things I'd gone out looking for.

As for graphics.. I'm sorry but I am an nVidia fanboy. I game a lot and my games tell me to run nVidia because. I have no complaints whatsoever. Seriously nothing against ATI but why bother when what I have works and has gained my trust?

It's hardly clever marketing when it's telling the truth now is it? "our product is better than theirs".. oo clever..

but why go and buy something inferior just because they actually have marketing? you wouldnt would you. and id be very suprised if you bought something without reading up on it right?

all im saying is that for the price for performance this a is a fantastic set of graphics cards. i expect the cpus to drop in price or they will seriously tank. but hell its the cheapest quad core on the market so for domestic use. why not?

i will buy the best i can afford at the time. no offence but sod brand loyalty im getting my monies worth.