How Will AMD stay alive?

Page 14 - 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.
Well, this is deffinately a poke at both LRB and nVidia as well.
Its promoting gpgpu usage, and showing the power at the same time, while giving LRB a target thats been overshadowed up to this point, of any leaks LRB ways.
 
I doubt it's 'all that' in gpgpu, but I also don't think it was ever intended to be that.

As a gamer, I'd much rather see graphics cards being pushed in that area. No reason why CUDA can't take off, if only Nvidia weren't so monopolistic about it, but they are.
 
I wonder how much NVIDIA will cut the price of the GTX295 to compete with the 5870. They'll have to drop it considerably, I suspect, but it's going to hurt their bottom line when it's not dirt cheap to manufacture.
 


Considering that you didn't get to THGF until recently and TC has been here for well probably 2 years, you calling him a Intel "fanboy" is just hilarious. You do realize that it wasn't until recently that he parted with his age old S939 system for a Intel system because there was nothing that would make his system faster and at the time AMDs Phenom wasn't exactally the bees knees.

the first thing that got to TC was AMD throwing S939 to the side faster than anything else. And before Phenom came out TC was excited about Barcelona. In fact he and BM used to fill threads talking about how great it would be. until it came out. And it failed.

If anything TC is a tad disgruntled. Hes not truly a fanboy since all he does is takes facts such as AMD losing money = bad.Of course AMD fans tend to defend AMD even though a consistent loss in any company is never a good thing.



While its all great and dandy, I doubt GPGPU will take off except in its own little niche market. Most people use a IGP because they don't game on PCs like we do and they don't worry about having a super powerful GPU. We do. But we are a very small minority.

Just like those who like to OC. While seeing a CPU OC very high is nice, it only matters to us since thats what we do. We game, OC and critisize the crap out of the lower performer. Enthusiasts rule.

Oh and we hate on OEM PCs cuz they suck.



Probably quite a bit. But thats until the G300 series comes out. And if its not just a rebaged G200 card they might do like with the G200 and take the top teir crown back and their G300 cards will have uber high prices. Thats a if situation though. In order for nVidias G300 to beat the HD5K series I am thinking they will have to double their current SPs and as well increase the SP clock by 30-50%.

Of course thats the area where nVidia has ATI beaten. Their SP clocks are independant of the core clock and clocked much hugher than ATIs. So even with 2xs the SPs ATI can't fully beat nVidia.

Plus nVidia invests a lot into driver and software development which allows them to work with the developers to optimize their games and engines for nVidia cards where as ATI hasn't done that since the AMD take over.

But time will tell. Maybe the R800 will kill the G300. Bigger number and letter so it should, right?
 




Actually TC is a closet AMD fanboy........ :lol:
 


LOL, there's some green in me.


I think JennyH has a hard time reading all the threads where I recommend Phenom II X3's and X4's to folks wanting budget gaming systems. I've recommended AMD many times in the recent months as well as reaffirmed several AMD purchases.

I recommended Phenom II over i7 many times because of the simple price premium that i7 has (of course i5 is a new option that will be a good option at certain system build prices).

However, JennyH wants to label me an Intel Fanboy because too often I disagree with her and disprove her wild claims, speculation, and outright lies using facts.


For example, see my signature. I'm putting Jenny in there so I don't forget when Q3 and Q4 results come out. I won't claim with absolute certainty or with an iron clad "gaurantee" that AMD will lose money, but based off of past performance, current market conditions, and the fact that Intel continues to release new products with innovative features (cough on board PCIe controller, dynamic clocking of cores within a power\thermal envelope). I highly doubt AMD will make one cent of operating profit.

We'll see JennyH! Until then, you can see your foolishness in the bottom of every one of my posts.
 


This is too funny 😀

My next build in early November will most likely include a 955 BE so here's hoping that jennyh knows better than the Wall Street pundits.
 
Geez this forum requires you to check Apply sig to have your sig shown, different from the other forums I browse. Well, I like AMD processors, my last 2 were AMDs, but after reading on tomshardware about how AMD fired their creative people while keeping the yes men, coupled with the huge debt and very tough opposition of Intel, all of this makes me think that AMD will come close to bankruptcy before being bought out completely by Abu Dabi investors.

According to this current thread, even 2007 and 2008 were deficit years for AMD, back when they had the best desktop cpu technology in the world. Nowadays with 2nd place performance, it is doubtful if they will turn a profit anytime soon.
 


Do you think AMD would be in a better situation now if the AM2 lineup could have just been a drop-in upgrade for 939 boards?
 
Well, if they bump the bus to 2.4 or 2.6, the IPC is sure to go up, besides higher clocks, possibly get a total bump of 10% for their 975 over the 965 at stock, and all subsequent models will have a 4% IPC bump as well, giving them a lil bit of a push in the right direction
 


I am not a financial expert, so I am unsure about the source from which AMD derives the majority of its profits.

My guess would be from sales made by OEMs. Like Dell PCs that include an AMD processor for example. If AMD derives most of its revenues from OEM sales, then the hypothetical compatibility between 939 and AM2 would only offer a modest increase in profits, certainly not enough to get afloat from the 3 billion loss of 2007-2008.

It's ONLY the enthusiasts (by that I mean the people who open their PCs themselves, lol how many of your friends and relatives can even do that) that enjoy the neat compatibility feature of AMD. At least it weighted in my decision to purchase the 955 BE.

Maybe if the Phenom I production was not as DISASTROUS, AMD could have made more profits by selling quadcores instead of triple cores. Would that have been enough to break even? I don't think so because overall the Phenom I were slower than what Intel offered at the time.
 


Possibly. I think that that switch in sockets pissed people off a bit. Especially since the jump to DDR2 for AMD had no increase in performance. It seems that a equivalent clocked Athlon 64 S939 or AM2 resulted in the same performance.

Overall I don't think AMD had a choice. At some point they would need a new socket for newer memory support (for servers who love memory bandwidth) and overall desktops.

but still they changed sockets quite fast in the same life that Intel ran LGA775. LGA775 had a few chipset upgrades but only the very arly LGA775 chipsets don't support their 45nm lineup. And it also was very dependant on the mobo maker. Buy an Asus and most of the time thier BIOS updates go for 2+ years. Buy low end non brand name and usually there may be 2 or 3 BIOS updates if any.

In the enthusiast world that doesn't matter as long as the mobo you get supports future chips for 2 years or so since we tend to rebuild an entire PC in 2-3 years.



Eh. They are going even higher stock clock? It seems that AMD is just trying anything. As for the NB speed, I don't see it improving performance enough to make it worth while.

And the faster the stock clock, the lower the actual OCing results. And why pay more when you can probably get a 955BE, OC the CPU to a 975BE+ and save more money for a GPU?

Plus in all the "extreme" OCing stuff for AMD, they had to decrease the NB by quite a bit to achieve above certain clocks (normally 1GHz or lower NB speeds). So I am going to wounder how AMD plans to get their stock clocks higher along with the NB higher as well.

Guess we shall see.
 
That was on the ES and early models. No longer needed, and not beneficial.
Having that much of a NB speed will give close to the difference between a penryn and last gen, or 4%, or possibly a bit more, add that with the new stepping and the new chipsetd, itll be better.
Its not a 1 jump thing, and its isnt just higher clocks either, its both, plus the new boards and chips.
My guess is, with these new cards, and this new board, and the new stepping, theyll perform quite nicely and cheap to buy, itll be a win
 


What I don't understand is that why doesn't AMD, or AMD supporters just use an honest comparison... For example, the above comparison just doesn't make sense. First off, I have no idea what logic they are using to come to that conclusion. Secondly, you don't compare a CPU to a GPU like that. And thirdly, the 5870 is going to be kick butt, there shouldn't be a need to do such a weird, useless comparison; the i7 975 isn't a competitor\substitution for a video card.

Why didn't they just compare the 5870 to a rusty old bicycle or a bowl of fruit, it would have been just as useful...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom