AMD Ready To Fight in 2012, Says CEO

Status
Not open for further replies.

phamhlam

Distinguished
Aug 24, 2011
384
0
18,810
6
Really? I think Intel is dominating. Espicially with >60% market share. Just look on the fourms. Even though AMD gives you more core and a cheaper price, many people still recommends Intel. i5 2500k & i7 2600k FTW!!!
 

NightLight

Distinguished
Dec 7, 2004
563
6
18,995
1
in other words: you lost in the high end race, and you know it. don't count out intel in the mobile sector either, i suspect they've got it covered. The only thing I respect amd for is keeping prices in check.
And I admit, I am biased for having amd after amd chip failing on me after all these years, wich could be just bad luck. (and I have never overclocked)
 

sarcasm

Distinguished
Oct 5, 2011
51
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]phamhlam[/nom]Really? I think Intel is dominating. Espicially with >60% market share. Just look on the fourms. Even though AMD gives you more core and a cheaper price, many people still recommends Intel. i5 2500k & i7 2600k FTW!!![/citation]

No, I still recommend AMD for lower end to mid-low computing needs. For example, I'd rather have a Phenom II X4 over an i3, or an APU over Intel Atom for HTPC. However, once you get to the upper range, then yes I agree an i5 and i7 are worthy of our money.
 

ern88

Distinguished
Jun 8, 2009
880
12
19,015
12
I think AMD should re think whatever strategy they have. And start revamping and re thinking on ways to come back to the desktop fight with Haymakers. I went with Intel for a new processor after I saw Bulldozer sink past it tracks on release day. They have to focus on keeping the graphics department on the straight and narrow and get the CPU de-railer fixed and chugging again!!!!
 
Dec 2, 2011
273
0
18,810
9
Doesn't sound like AMD plans on competing with Intel on desktops at all. It's a shame really, My first AMD processor was a k6-2. Man that thing was a beast... I'm gonna miss those guys.
 

bavman

Distinguished
May 19, 2010
1,006
0
19,360
46
[citation][nom]sarcasm[/nom]No, I still recommend AMD for lower end to mid-low computing needs. For example, I'd rather have a Phenom II X4 over an i3, or an APU over Intel Atom for HTPC. However, once you get to the upper range, then yes I agree an i5 and i7 are worthy of our money.[/citation]

Really? Even though the i3-2100 still dominates the p2 x4 at pretty much everything?
 

salgado18

Distinguished
Feb 12, 2007
752
139
19,170
4
Really? I think Intel is dominating. Espicially with >60% market share. Just look on the fourms. Even though AMD gives you more core and a cheaper price, many people still recommends Intel. i5 2500k & i7 2600k FTW!!!
You do know he is talking about mobile, don't you? 2500k and 2600k are desktop processors that AMD admited won't try to overtake with technology alone. And in mobile space, I only recommend Intel if I can't find an AMD alternative, as many times the extra cores will help, and when it won't nobody will miss an i3/i5. AND if anything 3D at all appears on screen, the Intel platform is doomed to crawl.

I firmly believe AMD is on the right track for efficient mobile notebook platforms, especially after the OpenCL article from Toms. Yes, Bulldozer seems to be a failure, but just because the ecosystem it tried to enter is not ready for it (mid-heavy threaded software). But I have faith in them, and exciting times are still to come (from both manufacturers).
 

SteelCity1981

Distinguished
Sep 16, 2010
1,129
0
19,310
12
But lets look at the demographic where the market is. Is the chip market in the highend segment? No. Is the chip market in the portable and utlra portable segment now? Yes. AMD made a smart move by shifting their focus towards the segments where most consumors are buying. AMD got in a lot of trouble trying to compete with intel in the highend segment where it's a small market and don't have the resoruces to compete. So it was a waste of time and money trying to compete against something that isn't where the market is. In order fro them to survive they had to shift focus and do the most logical thing that they can to compete and make profit from and they are doing just that with their focus on portable and ultra portable devices in the chip segment. It was either doing that or going under.
 

kronos_cornelius

Distinguished
Nov 4, 2009
365
1
18,780
0
I think AMD's best hardware is their fusion chip, but I hope they don't give up on Bulldozer.

I suspect they may be working on a Tegra3 clone given that they, like Nvidia, have a good grasp on how to do Graphics and Processors.
 

sarcasm

Distinguished
Oct 5, 2011
51
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]bavman[/nom]Really? Even though the i3-2100 still dominates the p2 x4 at pretty much everything?[/citation]

Uhhh.... i3-2100 vs 970BE.... 3DS Max 2010, Photoshop CS5, After Effects CS5, Blender, Cinebench, ABBYY Fine Reader, 7 Zip, Main Concept, Handbrake, etc. all show the 970BE beat the i3-2100 by a considerable margin. Yes there are a few areas that the i3 bested the 970BE, but overall having 4 real cores vs 2 is measureable. So you're claim of "at pretty much everything" is baseless and ignorant.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sandy-bridge-core-i7-2600k-core-i5-2500k,2833-15.html
 

jjtober1

Distinguished
Oct 4, 2011
102
0
18,710
5
Wow, Read is actually sounding like a good choice, I'm really starting to like this guy. I'm glad he isn't fooling himself about trying to get into the smartphone market right now.
 

livebriand

Distinguished
Apr 18, 2011
1,004
0
19,290
1
Bulldozer failed and AMD doesn't have any good higher-end chips., but the APUs are pretty good for what they are. There's a reason my desktop has an i5 750 and my laptop has an AMD E350. Plus, the ati graphics division is quite competitive (beating nvidia right now).
 

soccerdocks

Distinguished
May 24, 2011
175
0
18,710
5
[citation][nom]sarcasm[/nom]Uhhh.... i3-2100 vs 970BE.... 3DS Max 2010, Photoshop CS5, After Effects CS5, Blender, Cinebench, ABBYY Fine Reader, 7 Zip, Main Concept, Handbrake, etc. all show the 970BE beat the i3-2100 by a considerable margin. Yes there are a few areas that the i3 bested the 970BE, but overall having 4 real cores vs 2 is measureable. So you're claim of "at pretty much everything" is baseless and ignorant. http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 33-15.html[/citation]

Yes, but that is all video/photo editing. That is a small portion of the market when compared to the office and gaming markets. Even a Pentium G630 is on par with a Phenom x4 955 for gaming uses and will be ahead for most office uses because of the significantly better single threaded performance.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-10.html

This means that pretty much the only place where AMD beats Intel is in a cheap computer that will be used primarily for rendering. There aren't as many people who are looking for something like that.
 

lashabane

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2009
184
0
18,680
0
One of the reasons I went with AMD is because they're the underdog.

If it's not about Intel VS AMD anymore, then I guess I don't have to feel bad about my next processor.
 

sarcasm

Distinguished
Oct 5, 2011
51
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]soccerdocks[/nom]Yes, but that is all video/photo editing. That is a small portion of the market when compared to the office and gaming markets. Even a Pentium G630 is on par with a Phenom x4 955 for gaming uses and will be ahead for most office uses because of the significantly better single threaded performance.http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 20-10.htmlThis means that pretty much the only place where AMD beats Intel is in a cheap computer that will be used primarily for rendering. There aren't as many people who are looking for something like that.[/citation]

That's why my original post is that I recommend the Phenom II X4 over the i3 line because its a more balanced chip. In gaming, it's a toss up between the two, but overall content creativity and general uses, the Phenom II is a much better buy. There's only a $10 price difference between the i3-2100 and Phenom II X4 970.
 

sarcasm

Distinguished
Oct 5, 2011
51
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]lashabane[/nom]One of the reasons I went with AMD is because they're the underdog.If it's not about Intel VS AMD anymore, then I guess I don't have to feel bad about my next processor.[/citation]

One of the reasons I "had" an AMD chip was because its all I could afford at the time. Now I'm working full time again and am able to get my current i7 2600k. I don't care what brand is who, all I know is that I want what's best for my own uses and my budget. It just turns out that the i7 2600k is the best for practically everything. I even had an FX-8120 at one point and it was great during highly threaded apps, but during gaming it just didn't cut it for me.
 

Azimuth01

Distinguished
Mar 14, 2009
73
0
18,630
0
no amd processors for desktops, so my next upgrade will have to be an intel. I don't mind this, but I will have to pay 2x as much because there will be no competition.
I wonder if cyrix is willing to considering making a comback?
 

kristoffe

Distinguished
Jul 15, 2010
147
5
18,695
2
keep going strong AMD, you're causing intel to make awesome processors like the i7 gens. thank you and your stuff still is nice.
 

lashabane

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2009
184
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]sarcasm[/nom]One of the reasons I "had" an AMD chip was because its all I could afford at the time. Now I'm working full time again and am able to get my current i7 2600k. I don't care what brand is who, all I know is that I want what's best for my own uses and my budget. It just turns out that the i7 2600k is the best for practically everything. I even had an FX-8120 at one point and it was great during highly threaded apps, but during gaming it just didn't cut it for me.[/citation]
I currently have a x4 955 because it was in my budget and gave me the best bang for my buck at the time.
Now I want an i5-2500k but have been holding off for price drops/special deals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS