Do you think AMD will be able to take back market presence?

[t33to]

The past few days of joining these forums and conversing with so many hobbyists and pro's has lead me to believe that for the most part AMD hasn't produced anything all that ground breaking in a long time. I suppose one could argue they are perhaps great for budget-bang-for-buck builds but even this seems a bit controversial as some of Intel's offerings can produce quite nice budget builds as well.

 

So it's just got me thinking, are we in the early phases of seeing Intel gaining a desktop-cpu monopoly? And how do you guys feel about that? I'm not really a fan of AMD stuff and haven't been for a while, but I've always appreciated that there is at least one other chip maker giving Intel a run for it's money.

 

Lastly, what is AMD coming out with in the future?

[Guest Kloaked]

They're not going anywhere, and Nvidia hasn't released anything groundbreaking either yet.

[Amazingasian]

No they're not.  AMD is still a major competitor in the GPU market due to the better mid-high end GPU's.  AMD is also coming out with Zen later next year.

[ThatOneRussian]

Is this a way to start a flamewar?

[Mohenjo]

imagine if nvidia didnt have a competitor, pc gaming would fucking die  

[The Cool n00B]

AMD's CPU division is in the shitter right now. Zen's gonna be their hail Mary.

 

Radeon, on the other hand, is just fine (mostly). So when you say AMD/ATI, that really means the GPUs, where they're losing market share but still okay.

[Whorax]

No, AMD isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

[Enderman]

theyve got stuff coming, just be patient

they also gained like a few % more marketshare in the last quarter

[AnnoyedShelf]

The past few days of joining these forums and conversing with so many hobbyists and pro's has lead me to believe that for the most part AMD hasn't produced anything all that ground breaking in a long time. I suppose one could argue they are perhaps great for budget-bang-for-buck builds but even this seems a bit controversial as some of Intel's offerings can produce quite nice budget builds as well.

 

So it's just got me thinking, are we in the early phases of seeing Intel gaining a desktop-cpu monopoly? And how do you guys feel about that? I'm not really a fan of AMD stuff and haven't been for a while, but I've always appreciated that there is at least one other chip maker giving Intel a run for it's money.

 

Lastly, what is AMD coming out with in the future?

AMD helped push the industry towards HBM, as well as improving performance of integrated graphics.  They also helped push towards better graphics API's like DX12 and Vulkan by using their own Mantle API.  Plus their HSA technology, which just happens to not be used by many applications.  Not to mention Zen on the way.  They've done plenty.

 

EDIT: And we can't forget about their AdaptiveSync technology, FreeSync, which doesn't require a proprietary scalar.

[Guest Kloaked]

Is this a way to start a flamewar?

 

What good does that reply do? I always see posts like this on potentially controversial topics and they're always the first ones before any posts that are remotely close to baiting or trolling appear.

 

imagine if nvidia didnt have a competitor, pc gaming would fucking die  

 

Actually no it wouldn't. If they were the only graphics vendor around, it could also potentially be better for everyone performance-wise since devs only have to worry about one major graphics vendor.

 

EDIT: Before I get shit thrown at me, it would be the same thing if Nvidia wasn't around.

 

Prices going up, though? That would remain to be seen, but it isn't something to even speculate on as it won't even happen.

[t33to]

Is this a way to start a flamewar?

 

Nope, I'm completely immunized to fanboyism. I buy what works for my needs and don't stay loyal to brands. I can't speak for others however. I'm choosing intel/nvidia for my next build simply because their support and adoption in the Linux community is considerably higher.

 

theyve got stuff coming, just be patient

they also gained like a few % more marketshare in the last quarter

 

Great, that's what I want to hear!

 

Anyone care to shed the lowdown on Zen? Is that a new cpu architecture moving to a sub 20nm process?

[KemoKa]

In the CPU side, they've suffered for a long time (partly because of some complicated shenanigans with the Intel C Binary compiler, and partly because they actually are genuinely kinda shitty). Their 8 cores were pretty flippin' fast at the time of their release, but Intel really smacked them upside the head with Sandy Bridge and they've done so ever since. And all AMD has come out with is more of the same derivative architecture. The 9590 represents the absolute most that they could squeeze out of Bulldozer. It's terrible.

On the other hand, ATI has done exceptionally well in the GPU side. Maxwell turned out to be nowhere near as good as it was shilled to be, apart from the top end, and so it turns out that AMD's GPUs from the past three years are actually very competitive with Nvidia, especially for the price, especially at mid-tier. Their cards are computational monsters. The 290X is crazy, and always has been. It's the Titan Killer, for goodness' sakes, and if the Ashes benchmark is even a sliver to go by, it could be the Titan Killer all over again. the Fury X is an absolute beast at OpenCL, it's actually pulling 8.6 TFLOPS of power. That's crazy, that is absolutely insane, nothing Nvidia has can touch that. Problem is, not a whole lot of it can be put towards games, because it's limited by DX11 and OpenGL.

 

So, no, AMD is doing fine. Their next lineup, the Arctic Islands GPUs should be very interesting indeed, because this time they're not just rebadges (hopefully >.>) and are actual all-new kickass architectures (hopefully >.>)

 

[Guest Kloaked]

Great, that's what I want to hear!

 

Anyone care to shed the lowdown on Zen? Is that a new cpu architecture moving to a sub 20nm process?

 

Google is a beautiful thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_(microarchitecture)

[Clyne]

What good does that reply do? I always see posts like this on potentially controversial topics and they're always the first ones before any posts that are remotely close to baiting or trolling appear.

 

 

Actually no it wouldn't. If they were the only graphics vendor around, it could also potentially be better for everyone performance-wise since devs only have to worry about one major graphics vendor.

 

EDIT: Before I get shit thrown at me, it would be the same thing if Nvidia wasn't around.

 

Prices going up, though? That would remain to be seen, but it isn't something to even speculate on as it won't even happen.

Ehh that happened with 3dfx when they had like 90 percent of the 3D desktop GPU market... Everybody basically focused on Glide but DirectX came and everybody left Glide along with 3dfx Voodoo failures left 3dfx for dead. 

[Deletive]

CPU side they've done almost nothing in important markets and have failed to deliver in others, GPU well they brought HBM in a consumer chip so by no means are they really sitting on their asses there.

AMD is doing fine, If they gain part of the server market back, they'll be able to gain plenty of ground (by releasing a server chip that is comparable to haswell, but cheaper) putting them in a really good spot before Zen even takes off by the end of that year. Intel has been improving quite a bit in the core space but the overall amount of improvements have been minimal for most workloads even in the server space. This will probably change in the next few years if AMD gets it together.

 

[MageTank]

I feel like i've seen this title before... 

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/395080-is-amd-slowly-dying/

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/453758-has-amd-hit-rock-bottom/

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/297489-is-amd-dead/

 

Really wish these threads would stop already. If you wanted a legitimate answer to this question, you could have searched the forum. You could also just type AMD in google, click news, and see if they have anything planned (spoiler alert: they do). 

 

Point is, no, they are not dying yet. Especially not "rapidly". They still have Arctic Islands and Zen to count on, before they even have the chance to see the bitter end. That's discounting the reality of bailouts, mergers, acquisitions, etc that happen all too often in situations like these. 

[Naes_]

I feel like i've seen this title before... 

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/395080-is-amd-slowly-dying/

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/453758-has-amd-hit-rock-bottom/

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/297489-is-amd-dead/

 

Really wish these threads would stop already. If you wanted a legitimate answer to this question, you could have searched the forum. You could also just type AMD in google, click news, and see if they have anything planned (spoiler alert: they do). 

 

Point is, no, they are not dying yet. Especially not "rapidly". They still have Arctic Islands and Zen to count on, before they even have the chance to see the bitter end. That's discounting the reality of bailouts, mergers, acquisitions, etc that happen all too often in situations like these. 

AMD will never die. It can't. Its the yin to Nvidias yang.

 

Without AMD, Nvidia will have no competition. And the growth in graphical technology will stop. 

[t33to]

I feel like i've seen this title before... 

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/395080-is-amd-slowly-dying/

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/453758-has-amd-hit-rock-bottom/

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/297489-is-amd-dead/

 

Really wish these threads would stop already. If you wanted a legitimate answer to this question, you could have searched the forum. You could also just type AMD in google, click news, and see if they have anything planned (spoiler alert: they do). 

 

Point is, no, they are not dying yet. Especially not "rapidly". They still have Arctic Islands and Zen to count on, before they even have the chance to see the bitter end. That's discounting the reality of bailouts, mergers, acquisitions, etc that happen all too often in situations like these. 

 

I get what you're saying, but I don't buy into the one thread-evangilism of the internet and forums. I come to forums to communicate with people and get answers in real time. Of course there is always google, but sometimes it's nice to have open discussions. If the mods of the forum want to delete the post, that's their call. But we're all here to chat aren't we? There's no reason for you to be here if it upsets you, no offence intended.

[Belgarathian]

AMD's CPU division is in the shitter right now. Zen's gonna be their hail Mary.

 

Radeon, on the other hand, is just fine (mostly). So when you say AMD/ATI, that really means the GPUs, where they're losing market share but still okay.

 

Gained 0.8% market share last quarter....

[t33to]

In the CPU side, they've suffered for a long time (partly because of some complicated shenanigans with the Intel C Binary compiler, and partly because they actually are genuinely kinda shitty). Their 8 cores were pretty flippin' fast at the time of their release, but Intel really smacked them upside the head with Sandy Bridge and they've done so ever since. And all AMD has come out with is more of the same derivative architecture. The 9590 represents the absolute most that they could squeeze out of Bulldozer. It's terrible.

On the other hand, ATI has done exceptionally well in the GPU side. Maxwell turned out to be nowhere near as good as it was shilled to be, apart from the top end, and so it turns out that AMD's GPUs from the past three years are actually very competitive with Nvidia, especially for the price, especially at mid-tier. Their cards are computational monsters. The 290X is crazy, and always has been. It's the Titan Killer, for goodness' sakes, and if the Ashes benchmark is even a sliver to go by, it could be the Titan Killer all over again. the Fury X is an absolute beast at OpenCL, it's actually pulling 8.6 TFLOPS of power. That's crazy, that is absolutely insane, nothing Nvidia has can touch that. Problem is, not a whole lot of it can be put towards games, because it's limited by DX11 and OpenGL.

 

So, no, AMD is doing fine. Their next lineup, the Arctic Islands GPUs should be very interesting indeed, because this time they're not just rebadges (hopefully >.>) and are actual all-new kickass architectures (hopefully >.>)

 

 

That's good to know! I just heard Crimson drivers came out today. It would be interesting to hear if any performance gains were made. The Catalyst driver suite is for the most part was has kept my AMD / ATI purchases to a minimum.

[paos]

The past few days of joining these forums and conversing with so many hobbyists and pro's has lead me to believe that for the most part AMD hasn't produced anything all that ground breaking in a long time. I suppose one could argue they are perhaps great for budget-bang-for-buck builds but even this seems a bit controversial as some of Intel's offerings can produce quite nice budget builds as well.

 

So it's just got me thinking, are we in the early phases of seeing Intel gaining a desktop-cpu monopoly? And how do you guys feel about that? I'm not really a fan of AMD stuff and haven't been for a while, but I've always appreciated that there is at least one other chip maker giving Intel a run for it's money.

 

Lastly, what is AMD coming out with in the future?

 

if you take into account intels "pentium anniversary edition", AMD has absolutely no advantages over intel *at the moment*, imho.

[Naes_]

I actually kind of want AMD to improve.

 

I have never liked AMD and its possible that i never will.

 

But if AMD start producing GPUs and CPUs that are better than what Nvidia and Intel are producing, then the speed at which everyone is developing new hardware will increase dramatically!

 

Also, Nvidia is getting to used to being superior. They're getting lazy.. AMD needs to give em a good kick up the ass

[t33to]

I actually kind of want AMD to improve.

 

I have never liked AMD and its possible that i never will.

 

But if AMD start producing GPUs and CPUs that are better than what Nvidia and Intel are producing, then the speed at which everyone is developing new hardware will increase dramatically!

 

Also, Nvidia is getting to used to being superior. They're getting lazy.. AMD needs to give em a good kick up the ass

 

Me too. I hate seeing stagnation in the technology world. Ever since Apple started releasing new hardware every X years it's like instead of actually innovating stuff they just change enough things to make a new product. I remember when Pentium 4's were out and they were getting killed by Athlon chips, when the Barton core 2500+ cpu came out I didn't know a single person in University that had any Pentiums.

[MageTank]

I get what you're saying, but I don't buy into the one thread-evangilism of the internet and forums. I come to forums to communicate with people and get answers in real time. Of course there is always google, but sometimes it's nice to have open discussions. If the mods of the forum want to delete the post, that's their call. But we're all here to chat aren't we? There's no reason for you to be here if it upsets you, no offence intended.

I am not upset, nor is the discussion itself a problem. The problem comes from the title, and the riot it almost always causes. "Is AMD dying rapidly?". It implies AMD is already dying, but questions the rate at which they are dying. This causes problems for fanboys of both sides.

 

A better, civil title would have been "Do you think AMD will be able to take back market presence?". That is a real question. That opens dialogue. Even your post contradicts the title. You mention nowhere in your post of AMD dying fast. You also only mention a CPU monopoly (i know, this is the CPU subforum) but AMD as a whole entity is more than just CPUs. 

 

I did not mean any hostility towards you. I've just been around on these forums long enough to know how these threads turn out. These kind of discussions, no matter how civil you try to keep them, will always spiral out of control once one fanboy gets a hold of it. It's why we tend to avoid them entirely.

[Dabombinable]

What good does that reply do? I always see posts like this on potentially controversial topics and they're always the first ones before any posts that are remotely close to baiting or trolling appear.

 

 

Actually no it wouldn't. If they were the only graphics vendor around, it could also potentially be better for everyone performance-wise since devs only have to worry about one major graphics vendor.

 

EDIT: Before I get shit thrown at me, it would be the same thing if Nvidia wasn't around.

 

Prices going up, though? That would remain to be seen, but it isn't something to even speculate on as it won't even happen.

Prices go up, people say "fuck that shit" and buy older products.