Should we support AMD?

[don_svetlio]

I have a fully working 8800 GTX right here, kinda hard not to see it.

you mean 9800 GTX

[Snooli]

Still doesn't give AMD a get out of jail free card.

What is it that makes you think it is OK when Nvidia does it, and not so when AMD does?

[Guest trucker2]

I think everyone should just buy what is best for them. For high end builds intel makes sense. For budget builds Amd makes sense.

For windows I would choose amd over nvidia because where I shop they give better bang for the buck. For Linux I would go with nvidea cause a few months ago they did a complete update on their driver for my GT 520. That impressed me allot.

   There is simply no competition in the ultra-budget gaming segment, The A10-7xxx series owns it and nothing from intel comes close.

[LuX_]

Most of the computers I build for my mates usually use an AMD GPU and an Intel CPU. It seems that in Au Nvidia GPUs are really bad for Dollar to Performance compared to AMD so I don't see why they would go bankrupt.

[Manny Calavera]

 

What we know about Zen is that AMD is promising a 40% IPC increase, which doesn't sound like it's enough to completely catch up Intel's current CPUs

this is simply not true

take 7850k, improve it by 40% ipc (you already have performance that can rival older i5s), add 4 more cores and 8 hyper threads  lets say around 2 normal cores worth of performance. (intel hyperthreads performance is about 2HT = 1C )

 

thats like 10 cores worth of performance of a10 7850k + 40% IPC boost + you can overclock for extra IPC

worst case scenario, we cant utilize hyperthreading for games, 8 cores of a10 7850k + 40% IPC would easily surpass intels i5

 

we know for a fact that ivy bridge i5 in some scenario looses to 8350 in multithread. add 40% improvement to 8350?

Ivy bridge destroyed. 

 

 

the arguemnt is not if amd will catch intel with 40% ipc boost 8 cores and SMT, the argument is if they are telling the truth.

same as intel claiming "up to 10% improvement every gen" blablabla

[Dabombinable]

Why? it did for Nvidia? Nobody mentioned it then, everyone rolled with it. Why should AMD's case be any different? People who bought the 8800 GTX just swapped a Bios and got a 9800 GTX. But Nvidia locked SLI and stuff cause "WE SAY NO!". Sorry but Nvidia are just as guilty of this as AMD.

You giving Nvidia hit over that. And yet AMD gets off scott free for doing exactly the same thing. Just flash an 8GB R9 290X and boom, you have a 390X. The same goes for an R9 285 to an R9 380.

[Dabombinable]

What is it that makes you think it is OK when Nvidia does it, and not so when AMD does?

It wasn't ok when Nvidia did it. That's just it. Nvidia got shit for doing it and they didn't do it again. Cards based on older ones ended up being bumped down a model. Not called a fucking new card. Eg. R9 290X=R9 390X. Instead of GTX 680=GTX 770.

[Snooli]

-snip-

I am more interested in reverse HT AMD is said to be able of. running 4 cores as 1 thread? That is some nasty single thread performance. Go figure.

[Morgan MLGman]

I really hope that AMD Zen CPUs will be good for many reasons:

- If they're good and if they are able to compete with Intel CPUs then Intel will stop being a bullshit company. Why? They did not release anything relevant in the mainstream flow of the CPUs since Haswell. First they released Haswell, with 4570k and 4770k being the leading CPUs, then they 'refreshed' it with Devil's Canyon which didn't really bring anything besides higher clocks and better temps. Then they released Skylake which has 5-10% performance improvement over Devil's Canyon and brings DDR4 to the table.
Conclusion? Intel does this bullshit cause they've got no real competition right now. These are TWO generations of CPUs that bring only a marginal performance increase? Fuck that.
I hope that Zen really changes that.

- Same goes for Nvidia, look what they did with recent cards, they released a GTX 970 which was a pretty good card for the money but it wasn't anything extraordinary, the only competition this card had was a 290X which was simply worse. Now with the release of recent GPUs from AMD I hope they'll get their shit together cause they finally started having competition. Not even mentioning the 3,5 GB and recent async bullshit that came out from Nvidia.

- If the Zen CPUs are shitty, AMD will probably split into ATI and AMD and Microsoft will most likely buy them both, then we'll see what happens. (These are only my speculations but it seems very likely that Microsoft will do with AMD what he did with Nokia.)

[Snooli]

Just to make things clear. I am running Intel + Nvidia ATM.

[Dabombinable]

Just to make things clear. I am running Intel + Nvidia ATM.

And I'm running an AMD/Ati (Phenom II P920 to an N970, AMD's worst true quad core locked mobile CPU to the best) laptop and selling my GTX 970 for an R9 390/390X due to lack of vRAM.

[Snooli]

- If they're good and if they are able to compete with Intel CPUs then Intel will stop being a bullshit company. Why? They did not release anything relevant in the mainstream flow of the CPUs since Haswell. First they released Haswell, with 4570k and 4770k being the leading CPUs, then they 'refreshed' it with Devil's Canyon which didn't really bring anything besides higher clocks and better temps. Then they released Skylake which has 5-10% performance improvement over Devil's Canyon and brings DDR4 to the table.

Conclusion? Intel does this bullshit cause they've got no real competition right now. These are TWO generations of CPUs that bring only a marginal performance increase? Fuck that.

I hope that Zen really changes that.

What did IB and HW bring? a well OCed SB is still on par with OCed IB, HW and even somewhat to SL.

[Manny Calavera]

I am more interested in reverse HT AMD is said to be able of. running 4 cores as 1 thread? That is some nasty single thread performance. Go figure.

Sauce? That would be pretty beast, scalable performance.

[Dabombinable]

Sauce? That would be pretty beast, scalable performance.

AMD kind of already has that. Its called using a Phenom II instead of the modified/gimped version that was called an upgrade.

[Manny Calavera]

What did IB and HW bring? a well OCed SB is still on par with OCed IB, HW and even somewhat to SL.

we got nice packaging with sky lake, thats the biggest leap so far

 

nah, there is some good stuff like 5820k, but as far as performance per dolla, or free cores, intel is very uptight

i mean, locked i3`s man... such wasted potential

 

 

- If the Zen CPUs are shitty

if zen cpus are shitty, Donald Trump should buy AMD and fire AMD employees 1 by 1 and make a TV Show out of it

 

the the last guy who stays he would employ as a cleaning lady assistant

 

[Zenedge]

hopefully amd can save themselves before everything collapses

[ozziestig]

if zen cpus are shitty, Donald Trump should buy AMD and fire AMD employees 1 by 1 and make a TV Show out of it

 

the the last guy who stays he would employ as a cleaning lady assistant

What happens of Trump becomes the president, he will be to busy destroying the U.S.

[Bsmith]

Yeah, but what about the newer/better versions afterwards?

 

these(most of the time) depend on small changes, which dont include changes in the design, mostly material(like termal compound on the DIE), binning and production stuff change

[Briggsy]

There is a key difference between AMD and Nvidia graphic cards:

 

Nvidia need to do all of their optimization in drivers, because the hardware is very basic.

 

AMD optimization is done by developers, because the hardware is openly defined and easy to code for. The architecture takes care of variables.

 

If Nvidia went under, anyone using their hardware would be screwed. If AMD disappeared, anyone using their hardware would be fine for years.

[KingKeith55]

Most likely if they die the remaining parts will split back into ATI and who knows what will happen to AMD.

 

ATI was dominant in the average consumer market. This was because while the other companies were racing to make the most powerful GPU's, ATI went off and made affordable, but less powerful cards.

 

And guess who made more sales?

[airdeano]

ATI was dominant in the average consumer market. This was because while the other companies were racing to make the most powerful GPU's, ATI went off and made affordable, but less powerful cards.

And guess who made more sales?

 

sorta, AMD has been taking less margin in sales for years. making them appear

to be the affordable, but at their own expense. in 2001 the loss was $61M then 2002

brokered another loss of $1.3B, then 2003 only $274M was gone.. and for a finale

in 2007 $3.3B. and just in the past 5-years an 80% stock price loss roping the final

company assets to near non-existent to only just contribute to projects already in

development.

 

correlating more sales to actual market share in either CPU or GPU can not merit

any accolades when the take-away was much less profiting. thus the slow demise

or death of a company. since the release of Fury/X the price point was released

as profitable to AMD and no so much on the consumer. but the trending still rolls

downward..

 

even with the console market, millions upon millions of consoles purchased with

their CPU architecture, but only to find out, to get the contracting bids, they pretty

much made under 1% net profit or loss any profit to saturate that market for

name recognition, which made the console subs richer, but AMD with no

contingency of re-capping any manufacturing/distribution for developmental help

for any future revisions.

kinda sold their souls for a shot at the title, at little to no return, other than "it can be done.."

[Lusin]

I've been using AMD CPU's because they are good for budget builds and they have good price to performance.

[BrightCandle]

I ultimately want a thriving PC market with lots of competitors, certainly beyond the 2 we currently have in CPUs and the 3 we have in GPUs. But I wont buy a product that is worse value (on a range of measures not just price/performance) in order to ensure their competition survives.

 

There is an alternative, its not like once just Intel and Nvidia is around that is it and they fleece us forever more. Instead just like in the past the government will split the companies up and have them compete, it wont be perfect but its how the modern telecoms companies were formed in many countries around the world so its got a chance of reigniting competition. To some extent AMD going under could be a good thing, Intel 1 competing against Intel 2 might very well yield better results than Intel v AMD where one is so much larger and well researched than the other.

[Nexxus]

We should support whoever is making the best product for our needs

[Benji_w]

Since AMD is in a lot of trouble at the moment,

should we consider buying Radeon Graphics or AMD Processors, in order to support them back up, and boycut Nvidia a bit?

 

Because if AMD falls too low, Nvidia will own the market, and can possibly skyrocket its prices.

 

Stupid thought?

 

Can this happen? Why? Why not?

 

Please add your thoughts :lol:  :lol:

 

As an AMD users the answer is no, why? because they just can't compete until Zen and their new GPUs launch and that will be 2017 at the earliest possible time. In all honestly in a very british manner, they've gone and fucked it.