Anyone else feel bad for AMD? I do.

[gilang01]

i have a 280x, but seeing where AMD's going right now, I'm planning on going GREEN next year (or as soon as pascal comes out).

[wrath]

Don't worry AMD will come up with something we'll be able to talk about

[Face2Face]

Just wait...

 

[TravisTea]

I just don't understand how a company like AMD keeps making progressively more powerful GPU's but doesn't bother making CPU's to keep up with those GPU's. It makes no sense, because then you hurt your own CPU market in the long run without something to help that GPU and not hold it back. It makes no sense. They need to do something big very soon or I think their CPU market will crash harder.

[Briggsy]

I feel bad for any corporate spokesperson that works for free. If you are paid to covertly bounce from forum to forum, and promote a brand disguised as a fanboy, that's awesome. if you do it for free, you are probably a bit of a loser.

[TheProfosist]

-snip-

By directly I mean in all areas, not just 1 or 2.

Being that it was based of their server architecture it makes sense that it would be competitive there. Also I agree with AMD, everything should be highly threaded. There is no reason it shouldnt be anymore. The main thing holding everything back now is software.

What a cesspool of fanboys.

So which side am I supposedly a fanboy of?

I just don't understand how a company like AMD keeps making progressively more powerful GPU's but doesn't bother making CPU's to keep up with those GPU's. It makes no sense, because then you hurt your own CPU market in the long run without something to help that GPU and not hold it back. It makes no sense. They need to do something big very soon or I think their CPU market will crash harder.

They treat the GPU's and CPU's as different markets at this point because until their new architecture comes out in what 2016 they wont be able to compete CPU wise. Gotta remember AMD GPU's used to be ATI.

AMD has been always great for price to performance. -snip-

They kinda have to be at this point as they dont have the market share or the money to be a direct competitor.

I feel bad for any corporate spokesperson that works for free. If you are paid to covertly bounce from forum to forum, and promote a brand disguised as a fanboy, that's awesome. if you do it for free, you are probably a bit of a loser.

Wait what why would you do it for free? Are you talking about team red? If so most of my experience has been not fanboy'y with them and mostly just straight talk . Also youd be stupid in my opinion to have people who refuse to be unbiased to do anything for you. The number one reason im currently against building a new AMD system is that you cant build one thats fully up to date technology wise.

[TravisTea]

They treat the GPU's and CPU's as different markets at this point because until their new architecture comes out in what 2016 they wont be able to compete CPU wise. Gotta remember AMD GPU's used to be ATI.

 

Yeah I know. I just wish they'd compete again. Who knows.. Maybe this new architecture will be something insane performance-wise. I doubt it, but wishful thinking. We need a competitor to help drive new performance and help drive more competitive pricing.

[TheProfosist]

Yeah I know. I just wish they'd compete again. Who knows.. Maybe this new architecture will be something insane performance-wise. I doubt it, but wishful thinking. We need a competitor to help drive new performance and help drive more competitive pricing.

they should at least be able to compete with intel's mainstream chips I would imagine.

[Briggsy]

Gotta also remember that AMD is investing heavily into HSA and the HSA foundation. 

 

They did a presentation recently that gives some interesting insight into why they are pushing HSA, and not frantic to beat intel directly. If you have the patience to watch the video below, they reveal that they have successfully enabled programming languages to be used by GPU core clusters, to perform cpu tasks instead of being a dumb slave to cpu instructions. One can only imagine the performance gains AMD will have unless Intel yet again adopts AMD technology.

[R_Golden]

So which side am I supposedly a fanboy of?

As far as I can tell you've been completely objective. When I made my statement I meant a majority not all. But then again a lot of the people I would see here are the same that are already known to be fanboys so I guess I shouldn't be surprised they would culminate in a thread with a title like this.

[Mush Brain]

If 390x beats Titan X i will consider it, I already gave them money with the 290, only reason I sold it was because reference cooling.

I have a video of my one AMD card I own at this current time, my 5850 PCS+

Which does a damn good job being pretty on par with current gen console.

https://youtu.be/c-fCk8Reboc

I hope AMD astonish with HBM just like they did with GDDR5.

[Dabombinable]

Being that it was based of their server architecture it makes sense that it would be competitive there. Also I agree with AMD, everything should be highly threaded. There is no reason it shouldnt be anymore. The main thing holding everything back now is software.

-snip-

'Should be' doesn't mean 'need', program developers write their programs to use the resources they need, not what they 'should'-which TBH is AMD's way of trying to get their FX CPU's out of the hole they are in, considering a locked Intel i5 with only 4 cores is very close to the performance of an "8 core" FX 8350 in multi threaded loads.

[AlexWJD]

Was that benchmark at 1440p? Because I would like to see some 4k between the too if not,

[sgloux3470]

I was just looking at some benchmarks and even though the Nvidia GTX Titan X [gotta work on the length of that naming] is the hot button topic right now, the card that everyone loves and is talking about, it still seems to get shot out of the water by AMDs R9 295x by ~20-30% but nobody is going to buy the R9 295X because the Titan X is the hot topic right now

 

Doesn't matter how well AMD performs when you only have 1/4 market share and everyone is only paying attention to Nvidia.  All the reviewers have sweet deals with Nvidia too so they always shill their shit day one.

 

Look at how much attention people gave the 960 of all things.  You had people putting out multiple videos for each after market variant when it's a mediocre card that doesn't even beat the competition from three years ago. (7970/280x)

[tmlhalo]

How many R9 295x2s can be in Crossfire? 2

How many Titan Xs can be in SLI? 4

 

How well does a single R9 295x2 perform under worse case scenario for Crossfire support? 50% or equal to a R9 290x.

How well does a single Titan X perform under worse case scenario for SLI support? 100% or equal to a Titan X.

 

The fact the two R9 290x are on one PCB means nothing. They function the same or worse than two R9 290x cards.

 

Other examples of how wrong it is to compare R9 290x crossfire to a Titan X.

"Truck A hauls 800 lbs. Truck B hauls 1,200 lbs. Two of truck A can haul 1,600 lbs therefore truck A is better than truck B."

"Basketball team A gets beat when up against team B and team C at the same time!"

" Gun A takes 1 shot. Gun B takes 2 shots. But guys I'll just dual wield two of gun B! So what happens if dude has dual wield of Gun A...?"

 

I have a GTX 690 (680 SLI) and I almost always type "(680 sli)" when posting about it because putting 2 cards on one pcb doesn't change that fact. If you ever actually buy a dual gpu card you come the the realization very quickly that you just have SLI / Crossfire once you get to see the glory of gpu monitoring software show you gpu usage. Psst it isn't one bar for usage it is two. It isn't one bar on temperature it is two. It isn't one fan speed graph it is two. It will also act like two cards when you watch one of them idle because the game doesn't support SLI / Crossfire. 

 

I hate the Titan line up. They have always been overpriced for their performance. At least with the original Titans they were a bastard card that could also be used for some workstation tasks thanks to their double precision. The Maxwell architecture doesn't do double precision well to be considered a bridge between Geforce and Quadro. It is now nothing more than an expensive single gpu gaming card from Nvidia. For all its flaws though you're still more wrong than it for comparing it against a dual gpu setup. 

[Hieb]

I was just looking at some benchmarks and even though the Nvidia GTX Titan X [gotta work on the length of that naming] is the hot button topic right now, the card that everyone loves and is talking about, it still seems to get shot out of the water by AMDs R9 295x by ~20-30% but nobody is going to buy the R9 295X because the Titan X is the hot topic right now

 

The 295X2 uses twice as much power and performs worse in games that don't have good crossfire scaling.

Comparing the Titan X to the 295X2 is kinda silly tbh since the 295X2 is just two 290Xs on one card. 2x GTX 970s would also outperform the Titan X and match the 295X2 while consuming ~300-350 watts and costing only $650.

[terbersbanni1988]

You may be saying the opposite when the 390x comes out, i want to see the AMD line-up

Because the 295x2 is two fucking GPUs. And the titan x is not mean to compete price/.performance, and neither was the 295x2, which launched at 1500$ Plus everyone forgets how fucking bad crossfire is. It's bad, I've hated every xfire setup I've ever had. It's not just eh AMD drivers, it's games not supporting it out of the box I'm tired of hearing this shit. The 295x2 smashed the titan z at half the price not the titan x. 

Make correct comparisons people. 

[TheProfosist]

'Should be' doesn't mean 'need', program developers write their programs to use the resources they need, not what they 'should'-which TBH is AMD's way of trying to get their FX CPU's out of the hole they are in, considering a locked Intel i5 with only 4 cores is very close to the performance of an "8 core" FX 8350 in multi threaded loads.

It would benefit everyone because most of intel's two core cups have 4 threads. Even on the mobile side your looking at quad cores being standard if not 8 cores. Why shouldnt this be leveraged. Same with 64bit there are benefits for both and we have been sitting on it for what the better parts of 10 years now.

Your also wrong when it comes to the whole i5 vs 8350 in multi-threaded workloads. Even a simple passmark score can prove you wrong there.

i5-4670K http://goo.gl/o63Q0cand FX-8350 http://goo.gl/lf9bmZ

So performance, especially per dollar, is not a real reason to not pickup a FX cpu. Yes, I know that's just on benchmark but other stuff like x264 will back that up.

Doesn't matter how well AMD performs when you only have 1/4 market share and everyone is only paying attention to Nvidia.  All the reviewers have sweet deals with Nvidia too so they always shill their shit day one.

 

Look at how much attention people gave the 960 of all things.  You had people putting out multiple videos for each after market variant when it's a mediocre card that doesn't even beat the competition from three years ago. (7970/280x)

You should its that small I though its always at roughly around a third. Sweet deals? Like hey here is a GPU its be nice if you reviewed it.

That's because all the board partners made so many different models and sent them all out to everyone. If you noticed some of the reviewers were actually getting a bit annoyed and cut it off after a certain point. As for a new card it doesnt have to "beat" anything it just has to fill its spot in the market. For the performance and features that you get id say the $200 price point was a perfect spot for it.