AMD Unveils Its Unified Gaming Strategy

Status
Not open for further replies.

john3569

Distinguished
Mar 22, 2013
28
1
18,535
0
gotta love the never settle reloaded bundle. too bad the ultimate reload version isnt available in canada. would have loved six free games with my 7970's. **** canada...
 

abbadon_34

Distinguished
Aug 7, 2008
1,869
0
19,960
63
AMD is commiting suicide if pushes "cloud" gaming. Right now, it doesn't work, and thus is waste of money. If, at some point it does work, there would be little to no need for high end dedicated graphics cards, thus they won't sell any product. Plus people like myself loath any "cloud" dependencies.
 

goodguy713

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2009
1,177
0
19,460
94
yea not one for storing things on cloud drives you never know who can look at what you have and on top of that I have a hard time guessing weather or not the ping will be to high currently I can easily get pings of 28 to 32 all day long in battle field 3 so having a cloud server close to main cities would be paramount other wise latenancy issues will keep people away I personally like having my own machine .. and not some cloud based rent a play system.
 

memadmax

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2011
2,492
0
19,960
95
AMD, you need to get real.
Get away from the efficiency crap and start producing chips with HORSEPOWER that will crush the competition, not chips that merely stay at arms' length either in front or behind them!
CRUSH THEM! DO IT NOW!
 

A Bad Day

Distinguished
Nov 25, 2011
2,256
0
19,790
2
I could see a few applications with this:

-High settings on a smartphone or tablet, assuming you're connected to a sufficiently fast network, and don't have a stupid 300 MB cap. The best gaming tablet available as of now is the Razer Edge Pro, but it's very bulky and heavy for a tablet. And extremely expensive for its hardware.

-Poor man's high setting gaming, if he's living in areas with ultra-quality networks such as South Korea. Why plunk down $1600 for a gaming desktop when you can pay a much smaller monthly fee for Crysis 3 on max settings? This will obviously not work in the US, where high speed internet is either expensive, or only high latency satellite/dialup is available.

-Instead of several workstations for AutoCAD or other demanding tasks, a mainframe with "dumb" terminals (just a keyboard, mouse, and screen) can be used instead.

-Same could be applied to arcade gaming. No more big, bulky machines that waste valuable space.

-Instead of lumbering a 87 pound desktop down the stairs to hook it up to a 60" inch TV, or using a lighter desktop with less capable GPU/CPU, one can simply connect the TV, keyboard, and mouse, and not have to haul anything around.

[citation][nom]abbadon_34[/nom]AMD is commiting suicide if pushes "cloud" gaming. Right now, it doesn't work, and thus is waste of money. If, at some point it does work, there would be little to no need for high end dedicated graphics cards, thus they won't sell any product. Plus people like myself loath any "cloud" dependencies.[/citation]

"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year."

-- The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957.


"Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax."

-- William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, British scientist, 1899.
 

aggroboy

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2010
197
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]abbadon_34[/nom]If, at some point it does work, there would be little to no need for high end dedicated graphics cards, thus they won't sell any product. [/citation]
If it works there would be a huge market need for big servers containing GPUs running in parallel.
 
G

Guest

Guest
[citation][nom]abbadon_34[/nom]AMD is commiting suicide if pushes "cloud" gaming. Right now, it doesn't work, and thus is waste of money. If, at some point it does work, there would be little to no need for high end dedicated graphics cards, thus they won't sell any product. Plus people like myself loath any "cloud" dependencies.[/citation]

Stressing the part where you said right now, these services probably won't be available until sometime next year. By then, you'd see much faster data connections across most countries considering the fact that the FCC is getting pretty pissed at ISP's now. They'll have to adjust, and other countries will follow suit. Remember how APU's are ideal for video compression and recompression, especially with support for HSA applications? It's all tieing together now, APU's are cheap, AMD has solutions to make both ends of the market meet.

Get a cheap system with an APU, a subscription to a cloud service for gaming and you're going to see faster progression in gaming technology because servers can be upgraded without too much hassle and consumers don't have to upgrade often.

The main thing that bothers people is latency when it comes to consoles., but keep in mind that this solution is probably aimed at consoles. Consoles already have much higher latency than PC's(TV's, controllers, frame latency etc. are all slower on consoles), so this could make sense for single player/ co-op gamers in the near future and as latencies get lower, it'll also be applicable to competitive multiplayer games.
 

A Bad Day

Distinguished
Nov 25, 2011
2,256
0
19,790
2
Just a quick question about multiplayer latency, which one produces more latency?:

1. Sending control input data to a multiplayer server, then receiving the output data (location, physics, other calculations, etc) before rendering begins.

2. Sending control input data to the cloud server, then receiving the final display output data.
 

Onihikage

Honorable
Apr 29, 2012
88
0
10,630
0
If AMD was smart about pushing cloud gaming, they'd be investing heavily in fiber networks such as Google and FiOS, and offering a free month of Google Fiber (when available) with every purchase of an AMD video card.
 
"Radeon HD 7790 graphics card which AMD describes as the "ultimate choice for gamers looking to maximize their gaming experience in the USD$150 MSRP range."

At least AMD still has a sense of humor.

$150 owned by gtx 650 Ti boost 1gb not 7790. (and I'm using my $164 7850.)

 

f-14

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
2,344
0
19,960
50
the only relevant information you need to know about the cloud:
The Biggest DDoS War Ever is Slowing Down Internet
It's the largest DDoS attack ever!


It's dubbed as the largest distributed denial of service (DDoD) attack in the history of the Internet, reportedly slowing down portions of the Web for brief periods of time across the globe. Anti-spam service Spamhaus is the target, suffering daily attacks since March 19 that have generated up to 300 Gbps of DDoS traffic.
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Spam-DDos-Cyberbunker-Spamhaus-CloudFlare,news-16890.html
the cloud: it's only reliable until some little script kiddie gets pissed off or somebody says something bad about wiki leaks then anon gets all pissed off, or some disaster strikes severing connections and lines.

and worse still when your game company doesn't renew it's contract with it's online multiplayer host or just plain goes out of business. or if you go mobile.

that's what's known as
cloud catastrophe
, and it happens atleast once a day everyday.

did i just knock the snot out of your head, because that was such a hard blow to 'the cloud' it should have at the very least once you experience
cloud catastrophe
it will suck all that precious joy and love you have for the cloud after 3 incidents, and the longer you experience
cloud catastrophe
the more you will come to HATE anything and every one who has anything to do with pushing 'the cloud'
 

ddpruitt

Honorable
Jun 4, 2012
1,109
0
11,360
45
[citation][nom]memadmax[/nom]AMD, you need to get real.Get away from the efficiency crap and start producing chips with HORSEPOWER that will crush the competition, not chips that merely stay at arms' length either in front or behind them!CRUSH THEM! DO IT NOW![/citation]

Except now that they've gone efficiency they're powering Wii U, PS4, and Xbox 720.

When was the last time a single supplier powered an entire generation of consoles?

And not just the CPU's, the graphics horsepower too. It's the same reason ARM completely dwarfs Intel. Raw mind bending horsepower is for the few that can afford it.
 

seinfeld

Distinguished
Jan 31, 2007
103
0
18,680
0
if this means that all devices that are PC, consoles etc can connect to eachother and play the same games platform wise. then i only see positives! I've always wanted to play forza on my PC, and GT5 and 6. perhaps when they switch to x86 architecture. It wont mtter whos hardware you have!
 

griptwister

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2012
1,437
0
19,460
72
Few of the top comments have no idea what the hell they are talking about. Get off the Nvidia and Intel bandwagon and you'll see that AMD is finally making useful technology that can be used in the future... These innovations remind me a lot of the DreamCast system, that system was ahead of its time and no one used it because other companies were more mainstream. Give AMD a chance to thrive before you throttle their necks. They were the first in the CPU game, they obviously know what they're doing now. And utilization can = better performance over nvidia's technologies. Keep in mind the GTX Titan is a 2013 single card and will probably never be used as a dual gpu single card. Seriously, use your brain. Or evolve one.
 

Duckhunt

Honorable
Sep 22, 2012
339
0
10,810
10
Now you are just spewing rubbish about horse power. The cpu and hardware on the desktop is under utilized and if AMD can make its code more efficient it can make better use of the current tech. I used the an AMD processor on BF3 and I have the i7 and I can't see any difference. If anything the bottleneck is the card.

What id like to see is AMD work closer with gaming companies to make a light gun. Give us a gun that has clips and simulates a gun for the desktop. FOR GOD SAKES. I hate the mouse. Its just so emasculating. The mouse is so puny it distracts from the game. I feel so geekish. I end up going down to the firing range and caping off a few rounds. I want to be able to have this experience on gaming.
 

rantoc

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2009
1,859
1
19,780
0
[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]Just a quick question about multiplayer latency, which one produces more latency?:1. Sending control input data to a multiplayer server, then receiving the output data (location, physics, other calculations, etc) before rendering begins.2. Sending control input data to the cloud server, then receiving the final display output data.[/citation]

Multiplayer wise where the game connects to a multiplayer server:

The cloud option have to do all the following during one single frame - Your client send its controls to the render server, the render server sends it to the multiplayer server, the multiplayer server handles it and sends it to the render server, the render server renders the frame, the render server compresses the video frame, the render server sends to client, the client decompresses the video frame and finally displays it. All this while the game reports the latency between the render and multiplayer server fooling the cloud user into believing it also includes the client render server processing time which it doesn't!

While the local only have those stages: Your client send its controls to the multiplayer server, the multiplayer server handles it and sends it to the client, the client renders the frame and done. It also reports the REAL latency between the client and the multiplayer server.

Even without external multiplayer server - Playing a single player game the local rendering beats the crap out of any cloud solution as no control/video streams are sent over the internet that we all know isn't ready for this.

Now feel free to guess what alternative have the lowest latency! =)

I can understand if someone have a device that's to weak to render locally take to the cloud but can really hope that person don't expect it to run as smooth.
 

rantoc

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2009
1,859
1
19,780
0
[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]I could see a few applications with this:-High settings on a smartphone or tablet, assuming you're connected to a sufficiently fast network, and don't have a stupid 300 MB cap. The best gaming tablet available as of now is the Razer Edge Pro, but it's very bulky and heavy for a tablet. And extremely expensive for its hardware.-Poor man's high setting gaming, if he's living in areas with ultra-quality networks such as South Korea. Why plunk down $1600 for a gaming desktop when you can pay a much smaller monthly fee for Crysis 3 on max settings? This will obviously not work in the US, where high speed internet is either expensive, or only high latency satellite/dialup is available.-Instead of several workstations for AutoCAD or other demanding tasks, a mainframe with "dumb" terminals (just a keyboard, mouse, and screen) can be used instead.-Same could be applied to arcade gaming. No more big, bulky machines that waste valuable space.-Instead of lumbering a 87 pound desktop down the stairs to hook it up to a 60" inch TV, or using a lighter desktop with less capable GPU/CPU, one can simply connect the TV, keyboard, and mouse, and not have to haul anything around."I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year." -- The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957."Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax." -- William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, British scientist, 1899.[/citation]

In theory its a wonderful idea but in reality its not, the internet is not ready for this by a long shot. Cloud gaming companies show weak results and go to the grave, OnLive is one good example - Even with ample financial support it still went bankrupt because the internet was both their best friend and worst enemy.

Like F-14 said, all that's needed to ruin those examples of a good recreational day is a single script kiddie and if all were playing on the cloud it would affect millions of people.

In reality Cloud gaming is the poor mans gaming, they got a terminal that connects to a mainframe that does the lifting and they pay with it in latency / service reliability beside the price of the service. They also risk to loose all the investments in titles the day the next cloud company goes to the grave.
 

ohim

Distinguished
Feb 10, 2009
1,195
0
19,360
26
Even if i don`t like this "cloud" anything stuff, as a company you must give it a try , remember Blockbuster not wanting to go the way of Netflix and look where it got them today. You never know with new trends and technology. For a company this small and with such big financial trouble i sure like to hear now and then about them doing stuff.
 

demonhorde665

Distinguished
Jul 13, 2008
1,492
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]abbadon_34[/nom]AMD is commiting suicide if pushes "cloud" gaming. Right now, it doesn't work, and thus is waste of money. If, at some point it does work, there would be little to no need for high end dedicated graphics cards, thus they won't sell any product. Plus people like myself loath any "cloud" dependencies.[/citation]


I was thinking it would be neat to see a cloud gaming solution that allows gamers to off load a certain percentage of the render pipeline to their gpu while the rest is streamed. this would be the best of both worlds. As people that want a beastly video card (and to use it) could set the stream to 0% and the on system rendering to 100% while people with less than stellar cards could go for what ever mix get's them best visuals and performance. but yes with current cloud implementations, it looks more scary than interesting.
 

bustapr

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2009
1,613
0
19,780
0
the decision to make a high end cloud gaming gpu is genius on amd imo. nvidia already had their solution a while ago and have been the only ones really cashing in on that growing market. not amd has a better solution with the beast that is GCN 2.0(?) and the obvious cash in that is Gaikai servers just around the corner. its a smart move to have some focus on cloud gaming for the next year or 2. they obviously wont abandon the pc gpu market in which they compete vigorously.

as much as some people might hate cloud gaming, you have to admit that it isnt becoming a fad and that it has a foot already in the gaming community. the only thing really holding it back from being relevant in most gaming discussions is the problem of bandwidth. AMD would be retarded to not notice this cash opportunity and bring in their far superior GCN arquitecture to this growing market.
 

ojas

Distinguished
Feb 25, 2011
2,924
0
20,810
15
[citation][nom]abbadon_34[/nom]AMD is commiting suicide if pushes "cloud" gaming. Right now, it doesn't work, and thus is waste of money. If, at some point it does work, there would be little to no need for high end dedicated graphics cards, thus they won't sell any product. Plus people like myself loath any "cloud" dependencies.[/citation]
Um, the high-end cards would be powering the servers? They'd need to be sold to the cloud gaming companies? AMD will make money of that? Just like Nvidia with their GRID.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS