79wjd

This is neither politicial nor religious.

This is neither politicial nor religious.

In a shock to nobody who has a normally functioning thinker, a white painted object can be discolored by colored objects and the paint can be taken off with abrasive shit. In another shock to nobody, a magnetized strip can become demagnetized with magnets.
 
Seems like yet another case of "shit on Apple because it's cool" to me.

Then all 6 cylinder engines are less performant than 8 cylinder engines then correct? What about displacement? What about naturally aspirated versus forced induction? Like I said non understanding doesn't equal deception and the claims made aren't unique to similar marketing. Nobody caveats in marketing, they show the product in the best possible way they can. Caveats rarely show up and when they do are along the lines of "When combined with a proper diet" or "Consult your doctor if symptoms persist".
 
The performance is not moot, it's literally what is being used to justify that there is a problem in the first place, that consumers were deceived and the cores are not cores, because of said performance.
 
Edit:
Let me ask a simple question, would there have been a lawsuit and would people have complained about Bulldozer if it were exactly as it was architecturally but was twice as fast as Intel CPUs?

Expert witnesses are generally hired by each side and each aim to format their argument to best support the case they've been hired to testify for.
 
Some expert witnesses might perjure themselves, but most will just focus on facts/arguments that support their side and conveniently try to ignore ones that don't.
 
Of course, there is usually a back and forth of some sort where the expert on the opposing side can raise counter arguments.

The law isn't quite that black and white. There are many ways things can be interpreted and the outcome can often vary quite drastically between different judges.

Expert witnesses are generally hired by each side and each aim to format their argument to best support the case they've been hired to testify for.
 
Some expert witnesses might perjure themselves, but most will just focus on facts/arguments that support their side and conveniently try to ignore ones that don't.
 
Of course, there is usually a back and forth of some sort where the expert on the opposing side can raise counter arguments.

Having redundant components to make yields better is only a good solution when there is no way to cut off defective portions and repurpose as a lower tier SKU. But that's not the case with the GPU market, there IS a need for lower tier SKUs.
 
Regardless of whether you waste part of a wafer to dead weight components or to cut off non-working portions to sell a cheaper SKU, the effect is largely the same. Large monolithic dies are expensive.

The only reason to do this is to avoid the likely chance that the courts have no understanding of technology. AMD was in the right prior, and they shouldn't be paying for the misunderstanding of a handful of consumers.

Having redundant components to make yields better is only a good solution when there is no way to cut off defective portions and repurpose as a lower tier SKU. But that's not the case with the GPU market, there IS a need for lower tier SKUs.
 
Regardless of whether you waste part of a wafer to dead weight components or to cut off non-working portions to sell a cheaper SKU, the effect is largely the same. Large monolithic dies are expensive.

dont need to talk down to me
 
still doesnt answer my question
cheaper for the designer manufacturer, consumer?
 
2 smaller easily binned chips are most likely cheaper than huge monolithic
 
why do you think ryzen is doing so well

That's also a great way to lose the ability to sue. Knowingly allowing a third party to violate your intellectual property rights with the intention of driving up the amount they owe is generally frowned upon.

Fixed function hardware is vastly superior to general purpose performance wise, I mean chefs don't just use any knife because they are all able to cut things. Fixed function makes a lot of logical sense when there is a repeated performance intensive task that is required and Ray Tracing fits in to that on every front. The only issue is just how performance intensive Ray Tracing actually is and no matter how die area efficient fixed function hardware is it still requires space and that takes away from general purpose computation, balancing this is hard when we expect every generation to get faster and anything at all close to viable in regards to Ray Tracing requires a decent portion of the die to do it.
 
GPUs themselves were once considered fixed function or application specific and if you go back far enough CPU manufacturers were also trying to say they were useless and you could do it all on CPUs, they were wrong. 

Neither is a high end GPU, but like ray tracing it's nice to have in certain games and improves the gaming experience.
As for whether the cards are an "nvidia killer" I'll believe it when I see it,AMD needs to hold back on being cocky until they actually have a high end GPU.

I'd take a circular apple watch

There's nothing shady about that at all. It's very common to label the card as AMD or Nvidia and then put in whatever specific card they choose to put in. And the fact that they mark up the card also isn't shady at all given that they're in the business of making money.
 
AMD/Nvidia is just part of the model name.

Low profile you say, that got my attention!
I find that regular mechanical switches have far too much travel, but that's probably because I'm used to typing on laptops.
Then again, my desktop keyboard is a Microsoft Wireless Keyboard 1000 and that only has 3mm of travel, and even though it's a membrane keyboard, I find it far too clicky

I guess you want Navi to be DOA then.
 
HBM tends to be a really poor choice in the consumer GPU space when the aim is profitability.

The efficiency rating (80+ gold) doesn't inherently make it a good PSU. But it is, however, an excellent PSU.

Just FYI, a bettery replacement from Apple is $69 for the X/s/r/max and $49 for everything else (all free under warranty), not $200.
 
Also, given that the service message is "buried" in settings that most people likely never look at, I'm having a hard time finding a reason to give a shit about this.

Just FYI, a bettery replacement from Apple is $69 for the X/s/r/max and $49 for everything else (all free under warranty), not $200.
 
Also, given that the service message is "buried" in settings that most people likely never look at, I'm having a hard time finding a reason to give a shit about this.

When evidence comes up that there are actually impactful side effects, then we can have that discussion. But got now, it's just not supporting health reporting on batteries that weren't under Apple's control.
 
Disabling health monitoring is an easy way to determine at a glance that someone other than Apple touched the internals of the device. It can also be to prevent some kind of access to the device by means of the battery. Or to prevent malicious third parties from using low capacity batteries that lie about their health (similar to the $1 1tb flash drives).
 
At the end of the day, I can't find much of a reason to care so long as the side effects are effectively non existent.

That is incorrect. There is no such thing as personal responsibility these days.

They're not limiting what batteries you can use though. You can use any battery you want, you just won't be able to take advantage of the battery health reporting in iOS.
 

Just FYI, a bettery replacement from Apple is $69 for the X/s/r/max and $49 for everything else (all free under warranty), not $200.
 
Also, given that the service message is "buried" in settings that most people likely never look at, I'm having a hard time finding a reason to give a shit about this.