AMD Backing Out of CPU Speed Wars Against Intel

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
There are more things then just producing PC processors.

The APU line have a lot of applications then your desktop computer. They make great HTPC boxes, cell phones and tablets.

Another area is graphics. Despite Nvidia's new cards AMD still has an impressive video card. In fact most consoles use AMD graphics chips other brands.
 
[citation][nom]airborne11b[/nom]I love how eveeyone assumes prices from intel will rise, even though amd has not been competive for many years now, but intel's chips have been getting cheaper. For wxample, entry level x58 chips were near $300 a few years ago, and even though intel has been getting better and better then amd, their good chips are niw about $215. So stop claiming intel is some evil being thats going to trie chip prices. Thats as far from reality as can be.[/citation]

Intel still has to compete against Intel. If they make new stuff it has to be better than the old stuff. That happens with video cards. I think Intel is going to mess up changing platforms to often. AMD did this after the socket A when they went with the 754(?), 939 and phased out the socket 754 quickly. My next build was an Intel system.
 
[citation][nom]kikireeki[/nom]“That era is done,” Rory Read said in an interview and added, “There’s enough processing power on every laptop on the planet today.”Would you dare saying the same thing about GPU department? I think not.[/citation]
Exactly. AMD knows how to beat Intel in that area. In addition, AMD has been about going Fusion for the past 5 or so years; Bulldozer seems to lack quite badly in FP work but you might argue that, when Fusion's finally complete, that won't be an issue for AMD. I'll also add that it's increasingly likely that an AMD APU will power one of the next generation consoles.

Unfortunately, we just don't know how things are going to pan out over the next two years (Intel might end up even more ahead), however it's not as if AMD are cancelling anything on the desktop or server... sure, it'd make far more sense for AMD to produce as many APUs as it can and ignore the high-end desktop market entirely, but with Piledriver, Steamroller and Excavator they may still have something to offer. Who knows, when things get more parallel then perhaps AMD's decision won't be the howler a lot of people have come to regard it as being.
 
Great message... when the going gets tough, just give up!

Come on AMD what happened to Fusion, what happened to harnessing the power of GPGPU for general computation?

Why not take a chance and do something radical like coupling thousands of simple RISC CPU's into a massive parallel array with the necessary software to make coding stuff for such a beast easier. Then write an emulation layer to run all the legacy x86 stuff.

How long are we gonna be stuck with the x86 arch, bolting on SSE and what not to keep it going?

Stop following and start leading.

And for your information I will not be happy with any laptop until I can simulate the entire universe right down to the last quark and at the speed of light in real-time!
 
Well there go the prices of intel highend cpu's. I've had my i7 Nehalem for over 3 years now and am super happy with it still. The last great CPU AMD made for gamers was the Phenom II. The new APU's are nice for your everyday user, which is what I guess they are targeting now. But remember what goes around comes around. How do you make great mid range items if you aren't innovating with the highend products?

AMD needs to compete with Intel, even if they are always on their heels and never out in front. I know tons of people who still go for the AMD chips just because they are pro AMD.

I wouldn't be surprised if their GPU's suffer because of this "vision" as well.
 
The CEO is correct that AMD needs not to fight with speed anymore as the speed wars were over long ago.
Finally see some post that some ppl really knows where the market is heading to (long ago). Currently it is a function war (as in add more functions or consolidate into a single package). Next war is in mobile territory (though this area has already seen so fights already). The market has already begun shifting to smaller devices that are energy efficient but also packing more power. The PC market is already saturated long ago and now does not have much room left to go (as in the PC can pretty much do almost all of the task that ppl want it to do w/o problems). With the growth of tablets and smartphones its smart of AMD to focus on that. Not too long ago a high AMD exec got canned for not focusing on the tablet market that sprang into a hot market it is today. Then after AMD announced they are looking into the ARM. Shortly after INTEL announced they are not afraid of ARM (but probably they are shaking in their boots as they keep trying but fail to make a dent in ARM dominate world). Now ARM will go after some of INTEL low end market.
 
All of theses intel vs amd arguments made me sick, so let see it from economic perspective.
In economy, you can't be wealthier if people around you are poor, because there will be no more money to buy your product. So, for you to be the wealthiest , you have to help people around you to get wealthier.
Now in intel and amd saga, in my opinion they are giving each other rooms to compete and innovate. What such things that prevent intel to add more EU's to its HD 4000 iGPU so it can outperform trinity iGPU considering that IB die size is the smallest one. What such things either that prevent AMD to die shrink its star architecture to 32 nm and bump up its clock to the level of bulldozer so its CPU can compete with SB and IB while its iGPU totally crunch the intel iGPU.
They are giving each other room, because together they can create a bigger market than just one of them.

Sorry for my bad English, I'm not a native speaker.
 
Wow, does anyone remember where Audi was in the US market 15 years, getting trounced by Mercedes and BMW. Now look at them. Thank god, they didn't have a ..ssy of a CEO like this guy. Hi, I'm giving up, cause well I can't hink of any other strategy to compete.
 
If AMD had the focus on customer and delivery down, they would be right there with Intel, the issue isn't the chips, it's the delays, if Bulldozer had come out on time like it was supposed to in 2010, AMD would be more than in the right position to compete with Intel in terms of performance.

 
[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]If AMD had the focus on customer and delivery down, they would be right there with Intel, the issue isn't the chips, it's the delays, if Bulldozer had come out on time like it was supposed to in 2010, AMD would be more than in the right position to compete with Intel in terms of performance.[/citation]
Yes, but AMD (allegedly) tore up the Bulldozer design and started from scratch.
 
No!!!!!
If intel dominates the actual desktop processor market, they will completely control prices! i dont want to have to pay $400 for a future i5!!!
 
Well thats absolutely no problem AMD.

I have made the move, i5 3570k and nVidia gtx 670, there is simply no other way to go I am afraid, you leave the average gamer no choice but to Intel, but yeah, best of luck for you in the future!
 
A bad CEO can damage a company fast and deeply; just look a HP after Apotheker.
Reason apart; this guy sounds like a loser and that will kill the brand recognition faster than the Faildozer.

Enthusiast number may be small but are very influential and loudspeaking crowd;with influence in the whole market. Nowdays even Joe SixPack can Google for reviews in the Bulldozer and skip AMD.

Yhea nobody expected that Bulldozer would dethrone I7; but at least be competitive.AMD have worst value for the money and a loser CEO;witch is not capable of giving HOPE to they employees and fans.

Sad but true
 
I hope the can at least keep up making good chips competitive with the budget to mid-range level. It really bites that there's nobody to keep Intel in line.

They have a lot of money and resources. Yes, for cheap laptops, AMD is better for gaming over Intel. However, Intel doesn't plan on having crap graphics chips forever.

 


To be fair, what he said was said over 30 years ago...





Announced months ago, and realized by consumers years ago.
To me, the AMD 64 series from 7 years ago was their last hurrah.
 

Yeah I've been thinking the same thing. AMD's Fusion line is great, but Bulldozer hardly surpassed Phenom processors and doesn't really make it worth buying for another gaming rig.
 
“It can be a very different AMD going forward, but we have a long way to go,” and many people are stuck in the past, Rory at least have their feet on the ground.
 
Maybe AMD is only making this announcement so Intel would drastically raise there price out of reach of most consumers, Forcing consumers to purchase AMD's lower priced Brand therefore raising AMD's market share.
 
intel fanboys should be happy.. they've been praying for this for ages. lol as for us wise spender.. lets see what will happen on the CPU price market...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom