AMD Gives Away Free Chips at Intel Developer Forum

[Marcus Yam]

AMD stands outside asking people if they're hungry for another chip.

AMD Gives Away Free Chips at Intel Developer Forum : Read more

 

[rad666]

Pointless gorilla marketing, but amusing nonetheless.

 

[iam2thecrowe]

Good to see AMD finally promoting their product, which is where they are lacking even more than the performance of their cpu's. If they promoted their products more back in the Athlon XP/64 days, when they actually had a superior product, they would be much more successful today.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Good to see AMD finally promoting their product, which is where they are lacking even more than the performance of their cpu's. If they promoted their products more back in the Athlon XP/64 days, when they actually had a superior product, they would be much more successful today.

Back then it wasn't just marketing but also they couldn't FAB enough chips. They shut down one of their FABs here in the US and only had their Dresden Germany FAB which cut their ability to produce.

As for this, pointless. They don't have anything to truly compete with Intel on anything except a price basis and they seem to be trying to rekindle the GHz race when they proved with the Athlon 64 that GHz is not always better. Yet I have seen some people tout AMDs 4GHz+ status when that 4GHz+ doesn't mean jack in the consumer world if the single core performance isn't there and most consumer apps don't use more than 2 cores let alone 4.

 

[griptwister]

I am hungry for a different chip. I'm hungry for a AM3+ SteamRoller 8 core CPU.

 

[rolli59]

Nice one!

 

[JPNpower]

ha ha ha, genius. I love it.

Now since this post contains the words APPLE, NVIDIA, and INTEL. Watch the dislike count rise for absolutely no reason.

Oh and I bet that somewhere below is a raging future not introduced GPU performance debate.

 

[omnimodis78]

This would only have been cool and catchy if AMD were really giving away chips, rather than some lame attempt at humour and word-games. Oh yeah, sooo funny "chips" as in what? Oh wait, maybe AMD is trying to raise some cash by getting in the junk-food industry? Junk...get it? Junk... hey why not, you (looking at you Marcus) put the whole Pringles spin on this pointless story.

 

[dudewitbow]

This would only have been cool and catchy if AMD were really giving away chips, rather than some lame attempt at humour and word-games. Oh yeah, sooo funny "chips" as in what? Oh wait, maybe AMD is trying to raise some cash by getting in the junk-food industry? Junk...get it? Junk... hey why not, you (looking at you Marcus) put the whole Pringles spin on this pointless story.

look up what AMD did during AMD fan day in the same city, San Francisco. the event was free as well. Then there was the AMD Test drive program where AMD more or less sponsored several users on the AMD fan community by giving them:


AMD A10-6800K APU
FM2 A85X Motherboard
2x4 AMD Radeon, RP 1866 Performance Memory
Fractal Arc Midi R2 Case
Fractal Tesla R2 650W Power Supply Unit
Kingston SSDNow V300 Series 2.5", 60GB SATA III Internal Solid State Drive
LG 24X DVD Burner
Windows 7 OS Disc


AMD does give free chips, people just arent aware that they are doing it.

 

[ddpruitt]

AMD know's it has something that may turn the tide, finally they're trying to capitalize.

FYI for those that think AMD can't compete, Intel's share of CPU's is extremely small in the grand scheme. The money's in cheap low end devices, just think of what's running your phone, tablet, game console, etc. The only Intel logo is on your PC.

 

[megamanx00]

So they make good chips other than the Radeon line, or were those bad as well

 

[kinggremlin]

Pretty pointless. Like anyone attending IDF doesn't know who AMD is. Anyone who actually cares which CPU is in their system isn't going to be affected by this type of marketing. Doesn't help that AMD doesn't have anything to compete in the highend with Intel either. Akin to handing out Kia flyers at a Ferrari convention.

 

[tolham]

I'm hungry for an APU that seamlessly crossfires with a discreet GPU.

games only need a mid-level CPU, because they rely heavily on the GPU. my middle-aged i5 2500 runs bioshock infinite smooth as butter, but I'll need to upgrade my GPU if I want to max out the graphics. AMD already makes CPUs that have integrated graphics, but they're meant to stand alone. if AMD made an APU that can be easily paired with a GPU, then gamers like me, who are savvy enough to build their own rig but not enthusiastic/rich enough to overclock and have multiple video cards, could build a budget rig that pumps out high-end graphics.

 

[m32]

Good to see AMD finally promoting their product, which is where they are lacking even more than the performance of their cpu's. If they promoted their products more back in the Athlon XP/64 days, when they actually had a superior product, they would be much more successful today.

Back then it wasn't just marketing but also they couldn't FAB enough chips. They shut down one of their FABs here in the US and only had their Dresden Germany FAB which cut their ability to produce.

As for this, pointless. They don't have anything to truly compete with Intel on anything except a price basis and they seem to be trying to rekindle the GHz race when they proved with the Athlon 64 that GHz is not always better. Yet I have seen some people tout AMDs 4GHz+ status when that 4GHz+ doesn't mean jack in the consumer world if the single core performance isn't there and most consumer apps don't use more than 2 cores let alone 4.

I know your trying to bash AMD but most 'modern' apps use more than 2 cores. Just stick with "Intel is better" instead of misinformation to prove a point.

 

[jimmysmitty]

AMD know's it has something that may turn the tide, finally they're trying to capitalize.

FYI for those that think AMD can't compete, Intel's share of CPU's is extremely small in the grand scheme. The money's in cheap low end devices, just think of what's running your phone, tablet, game console, etc. The only Intel logo is on your PC.

What does AMD have? So far we have very little on AMDs next CPU and what we do know is it is still based on the same modular design and same process tech. Both are not bad but not performing enough to push Intel and further competition and technology.

AMDs best market currently would be GPUs honestly. Their ULP parts are very slow, much like Atom is, and I have yet to mess with a ULP AMD system using Android to gauge if they perform any better than ARM.

As for the phones and tablets, Intel is well on their way to pushing into that market. AMD hasn't yet. They may have something but I don't see much out of them so I can't say.

Game consoles are a great market but honestly its still much like the consumer PC market. Its doesn't make them the money they need. Servers are the biggest market and currently Intel owns that market as AMD hasn't produced a better performer. AMD and Intel both make way more money there than they do anywhere else.

Good to see AMD finally promoting their product, which is where they are lacking even more than the performance of their cpu's. If they promoted their products more back in the Athlon XP/64 days, when they actually had a superior product, they would be much more successful today.

Back then it wasn't just marketing but also they couldn't FAB enough chips. They shut down one of their FABs here in the US and only had their Dresden Germany FAB which cut their ability to produce.

As for this, pointless. They don't have anything to truly compete with Intel on anything except a price basis and they seem to be trying to rekindle the GHz race when they proved with the Athlon 64 that GHz is not always better. Yet I have seen some people tout AMDs 4GHz+ status when that 4GHz+ doesn't mean jack in the consumer world if the single core performance isn't there and most consumer apps don't use more than 2 cores let alone 4.

I know your trying to bash AMD but most 'modern' apps use more than 2 cores. Just stick with "Intel is better" instead of misinformation to prove a point.

My biggest gripe with AMD is that they are slacking. Its true. They haven't had a really competitive product in anything but price for a while when it comes to CPUs. Oh and the fanboys. Those annoy me the most just due to their sheer inability to admit anything the company they prefer is bad. I had people saying Phenom I was a good CPU when in reality it was crap. Pentium 4/D? Mostly crap, some gems (805/820) but overall crap. Bulldozer? Not crap but nothing amazing either and a power draw that was insane.

And no, I am not bashing AMD. I am making an observation as they have recently been focusing on clock speed hence the FX 9650, basically a FX-8350 overclocked to 4.8GHz, 5GHz with turbo. Bashing would be stating that they suck and Intel does everything better when in fact, AMD still has one up on Intel and that's in IGPs. Intel is catching up pretty fast but not quite up to AMDs level yet.

And for the record, while my current system is a 2500K (I am sorry but at the time and for $250 it was unbeatable even with what AMD had for the price) my wife has a Phenom II 965BE and HD7970, my HTPC has a Athlon II X2 250 HD5450, and I have a HD7970 Vapor-X hoping that Hawaii XT is worth the upgrade because while a GTX 780 or Titan will boost my gaming performance, they aren't worth the cost.

And remind me of how many consumer end, not specialized programs a professional might use, use more than 2 cores? Or how many games efficiently use 4 cores? Right now 2 cores is fine for the majority of users. 4 cores is better but not by enough to state more programs use 4 cores as they don't unless they are specialized for a certain market/career field.

 

[_zxzxzx_]

You caught my attention...with the wrong chip.

 

[John Bauer]

ha ha ha, genius. I love it.

Now since this post contains the words APPLE, NVIDIA, and INTEL. Watch the dislike count rise for absolutely no reason.

Oh and I bet that somewhere below is a raging future not introduced GPU performance debate.

b8

 

[dustructo]

Sounds like a desperate ploy. They must be really sad now that MS has DX11.2 coming out and will most likely sweep their HUMA under the rug.

 

[PreferLinux]

ha ha ha, genius. I love it.

Now since this post contains the words APPLE, NVIDIA, and INTEL. Watch the dislike count rise for absolutely no reason.

Oh and I bet that somewhere below is a raging future not introduced GPU performance debate.

I voted you down solely because it is totally irrelevant to the thread – i.e. very good reason. It had nothing to do with any of the companies you named.

 

[silverblue]

What does AMD have? So far we have very little on AMDs next CPU and what we do know is it is still based on the same modular design and same process tech. Both are not bad but not performing enough to push Intel and further competition and technology.

Steamroller is being produced using 28nm bulk instead of the usual 32nm SOI. We also don't know how Steamroller will perform, but I imagine it'll improve on previous iterations.

You mentioned the FX-9650. I think you meant the 9590; the 9650 is a codename banded about for the Steamroller flagship without any proof that it's the real product name.

 

[cypeq]

Amd is great where value matters, and intel when you need peak performance. We all want strong competition but amd doesn't have right arch in the moment.

 

[garrick]

the general populous while vaguely aware of Intel are mostly unaware of AMD. I guess that's what happens when Intel has way more capitol to spend on advertising.

 

[whyso]

I knew they had manufacturing problems!

 

[Narcissistic_Martyr]

Good to see AMD doing a bit of marketing. Personally I think AMD has really been blowing a fabulous opportunity with it's current iGPU lead in laptops. AMD needs to start insisting that every AMD laptop sold in a store be loaded with several easily accessible games that the APU can run and start putting their A10 series chips in reasonably sized laptops. Then when folks are buying their back to school laptops at big box store inc. they can see that that AMD laptops offer superior entertainment value which ought to improve sales.

 

[daglesj]

All this talk about "AMD isnt competitive!" baffles me. Competitive at what? The incredibly important world of 'benchmarking'?

Really? So AMD doesn't have a chip that rivals Intel's $500-$1000+ chips? Outside enthusiast circles...who cares?

AMD is competitive in plenty of areas. How many of those $1000 chips does Intel sell a year? Hardly any.

I bet the cheapest i3 outsells the top i7 1000 to 1. I bet Intel wishes they could quit selling those chips as I bet it costs more to push them out than they make back on them.

I roll out plenty AMD systems to customers. Not one has ever returned it and said "sorry it's no good for Crysis or transcoding 30GB Blu-rays!"

Why? maybe cos hardly anyone does that....in the real world. The future of mass computing are not those top end i7 chips you all idolise. They are dinosaurs of an older age. Most people just don't need or want them anymore. AMD knows this, hence why they are aiming at the other end of the market.

AMD are plenty competitive in the real world. All their chips do the jobs they are intended for. They lose out to poor marketing most of the time.

The world has moved on. Good enough...is good enough.