Intel scared of Bulldozer, more people excited by AMD's upcoming cpu.

Page 2 - 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.



We dont know yet it could be very good for some thing but bad for gaming then amd fanboys will be pissed lol we know when it comes out
 


^^ this i certainly disagree with. For anyone looking to buy a netbook/notebook or HTPC, AMD's fusion tech is something that not only sparks interest but is something they should be keeping a close eye on.

Even if bulldozer completely flops, I still can't wait to see what they have to offer in terms of APUs and just how it'll play with discrete GPUs and overall power consumption and features. Forget bulldozer's supposed performance and future benchmarks for a second. They don't represent what an overwhelming majority of people look for in a CPU. videos/gaming is the most intensive task most users see on a day-to-day basis, particularly in the mobile market, which i don't need to remind you, is absolutely booming. Granted x86 may not be the best approach for that segment, I think AMD would be a bit more willing to abandon it and tread on new ground whereas Intel seems to have chosen to stick with x86 through hell and high water.

All of us tech geeks are waiting for Bulldozer and seeing how it'll compare to SB but we're completely ignoring the giant purple elephant in the room that is fusion. SB's most impressive quality was the power consumption : performance ratio and the most underwhelming being the HD3000 (along with the motherboard chipset differences and limitations, which I still don't get). Intel and AMD have gone back and forth over the better part of a decade and longer with respect to who has the better CPU, but for a while now AMD has easily knocked Intel on it's behind when it comes to GPUs. So whether or not AMD succeeds with BD doesn't make or break AMD. They have far more to win and lose with their fusion project.
 
Gamers make up some a very small part of the computer indstry look at the dang ipads more people have those then a decent computer lol. People want things on the go not a huge liquid cooled desktop to max out games on. So hes right this may open better doors for mobile computing.
 
Ah yes, thats a good point, I did not think about the notebook market.
If BD is a flop then this fusion could make its way into phones, tablets , etc etc.
And when AMD shifts into that market then I really dont think AMD fanboys will be pleased haha.
 
Theres o so much money in the moble phone,tablet market billions more then pcs.
 
Even nvidia are making an ARM based CPU.
And windows 8 will have ARM support.
Its already happening, consoles/tablets/smartphones are taking over lol.
 



I have a Ipad 2 and i think its a pos IMO lol they have alot of work to do
 


I don't think they'll be displeased, at least not the majority of them. People who use AMD CPUs for work and certain applications might, but AMD will always be making server CPUs and desktop CPUs.

Let's put it this way...

I would rather be gaming on a micro atx and a single GPU with playable framerates while sacrificing some performance that I'd only see on synthetic benchmarks than buying another huge full tower with crossfire GPUs and a CPU where I only stretch it to 40-50% a couple hours a day.
 
Will bulldozer be a big leap over the current Phenom II, almost certainly yes. Will it be an Sandy Bridge killer, I wouldn't hold my breath. It might be slightly faster in the way the original Athlon with 100MHz bus and SDR PC100 RAM was slightly faster than a PIII of the same speed, or it might be slightly slower. We'll find out when it launches.
 
The only people that give a damn about AMD chips are people that cannot afford intel chips. The only people that care are the people that want something for nothing. You know the people that buy AMD's triple core and try to unlock the 4th and then come on fourms complaining that they cant overclock or having a heat issue.

Intel has never and will never market to those people because they dont need you. AMD business model is to lay under the table while Intel breaks bread and they pick up the scraps. The problem is that AMD doesnt want to be better than the dollar store of cpus. So if your fine supporting a business model that does nothing but play second fiddle and is happy doing it, more power to you. I want performance outta my rig and AMD is not and has not performed at all.

This 'bulldozer' doesnt exist to me. Wheres the benchmarks? Wheres the leaked engineering samples? Wheres the pics of the silicon? Hell I can say what I want but it doesnt make it truth until I can prove it.

AMD will never be respected by me due to the fact that im not a little kid that needs to mow lawns and after that can only afford a triple core. I need muscle and AMD is not that and the problem is that they are fine with that. Theyre not converting ANY SANDY BRIDGE USERS. Theyre still putting along with the SAME cheap customer base.

Ill leave my rant with this information. According to Steam hardware survey, as of Feb 2011 these are the numbers.

CPU
Intel=%72.37
AMD=%27.63

GPU
Nvidia=%59.11
AMD=%32.98

Nobody is worried about AMD but the fans of AMD. This is your last hope. Im sorry but your just too late.
 
I'd be much more excited if I hadn't been JUST early enough in putting together a new rig that I got revision 2.0 of the 890GPA-UD3H... Revision 3 will support AM3+. So annoying.

Then again, I'm also regretting that I didn't wait for Sandy Bridge. Look, the above poster is making unwarranted claims based on his personal feelings. AMD and Intel were matching each other up until SB's release, with AMD being cheaper (granted) but offering more performance per dollar (that the maximum level of performance that could be offered is beside the point). Your generalization of AMD users being "little kids that need to mow lawns" is offensive and rather naive. More like, AMD users knew that it was more important to get more bang for their buck than to have the absolute fastest, bestest CPU they could get. AMD CPUs can perform just fine in any typical user scenario; it's only once you start getting into enthusiast territories of overclocking the bejesus out of your CPU (which AMD cores can do quite well, actually, but anyways) and running benchmarks to stroke your e-peen that the marked up price of Intel cores was worth it.

Am I saying that Sandy Bridge isn't the best performer by far? By no means. I've been an AMD fanboy for years, yet I can acknowledge that SB has AMD beat. But bear in mind that AMD's lineup right now consists of CPUs released no later than 2010, with the Phenom 2 architecture dating back all the way to early 2009. Wow, big surprise there that Intel's late 2010-early 2011 processors beat processors from two years ago!

But you're being a bit of a dick, silky, because you seem to be excluding anyone who doesn't have a bottomless wallet. Right up until late 2010 (the reason that my commitment to a Phenom II build is now faulty), AMD's CPUs were a fantastic choice for anyone looking to spend under $1000 on their rig yet still have a great high-mid-end system. Sandy Bridge's fantastic price-to-dollar ratio finally brought Intel into AMD's market share of conservative builders who liked to watch their spending, but consider the fact that it took them at least a year to get there.

Don't discredit AMD out of hand because it's cheap and not as powerful. Both are true... but AMD has a history of pricing its components at a better ratio of performance-to-cost than Intel ever did, and once BD comes out I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't match SB's raw performance but were a solid $100 cheaper. Of course, going by what you said, you probably would just hate them for being an economic option...
 
The thing is, silky, in terms of every day usage the majority of readers both here and especially those without any tech knowledge at all would be getting more productivity by buying a lower end CPU (or bang for your buck type of CPU) and chipping in extra $$$ for an SSD or a better graphics card.

When I first started making PC's I would spend the most I possibly could on a CPU, thinking that the heart of the rig was the most important. But after a couple of years I realized that I'll get more out of my rig if I improved on some of the other parts and bought a slightly slower CPU. For this reason I've been going AMD with a single 1156 build which I sold, because the CPU was overpowered at the sake of the GPU, which was underpowered.

With the money I've saved on motherboards and CPUs I've been able to buy bigger SSDs and faster graphics cards and still get better performance while gaming than someone who'd have went Intel on the same budget. You're not going to win with that argument, buddy.
 
People like silkysalamander make the long wait all the more bearable. 😀

It's gonna be a fuuuuuun day when I bump this thread in 10 weeks time. :)

(Just FYI, the majority of those steam hardware survey users don't even have a cpu that is half as powerful as a simple athlon x4, and most of the graphics cards are 8800 series nvidia...so yeah there goes your "power user" theory)

And another thing, just to burst your bubbles that this doesn't matter or it's "too late" or AMD is only selling to AMD fans.....

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/itfacts/retail-cpu-market-share-in-october-2005-amd-498-intel-485/9426

Where did that 50% market share in 2005 come from? Outer space? Nah silky, only you live there. 😀
 
He doesn't care about cheap because his paper delivery job pays for the highest end intel cpu's and overpriced nvidia hardware. 😀
 



You should certainly never have any children, either, and with an attitude like yours I doubt you will be having sex, anyway.

Another worthless THG thread based upon a statistically useless internet poll, another statistically useless internet 'hardware survey', thread-crapping, flame- and fan-boys. Tom's is now far from an enthusiast site -- this section should be renamed

Puffery - Bandwagon - Propaganda - Flaming
 
Fanboys still argue numbers. You guys are pethetic period. And then get all butthurt and get personal with me when you dont even know me. The life of a fanboy! You dont own any stock in the company but you preach crap and THEN CANT POST ANY FIGURES TO BACK UP YOUR USELESS CLAIMS.

Again, nobody cares about AMD period. AMD fanboys are so happy now becuase they may get a decent chip thats still 2 generations behind.

So fanboys, if you can cherry pick out what you want of my post to try to paint me how you want, why didnt you touch on the other stuff I said? Oh I know, the life of a fanboy has great quoting skills that they take into fourms and cherry pick soundbites.

Please fanboys direct me to where you get you info from that AMD is king. Please link us to pics of the wafer. Please link us to the benchmarks. Please link us to the leaked engineering sample on ebay.


LOL. DOLLAR STORE OF CPUS.
 


Funny how you hold fanboys in such contempt when you are so clearly one yourself... And the hypocrisy is overwhelming. WE were the ones making personal attacks? No, you started it by likening AMD users to kids mowing lawns.
 


blah blah blah. I started it. And I just finished it with my last post.

Go ahead and lock up yet another fanboy thread start. The AMD camp is scared but the op said that Intel was scared...

Again, pethetic.

Links please from you or anybody that has something to say.......

Dont worry, Ill wait.........
 


Pethetic isn't it?
 


I linked a website with discussion, you were the one who started yelling. Scared huh? You have good reason to be because your sad little world where money = quality is about to be exploded. I sure hope you keep spending your newspaper delivery tips on overpriced intel chips, because thats what they will all be soon. 😀

Oh btw, it's pathetic, not pethetic. Maybe you should spend more money on English lessons instead of top of the range pc gear.
 


I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at here. Did you read anything anyone said in response to you, or are you just trolling? I'm leaning towards the latter. Let me summarize for you, make it easier since you struggle with reading comprehension apparently:

The only people that give a damn about AMD chips are people that cannot afford intel chips. The only people that care are the people that want something for nothing. You know the people that buy AMD's triple core and try to unlock the 4th and then come on fourms complaining that they cant overclock or having a heat issue.
Click to expand...

This is a faulty statement. While people preferred AMD because of their lower price, it wasn't because they didn't have the actual cash in hand to buy a better part, they just didn't want to waste all their money on the CPU when other components in the computer could be improved (the case of the GPU bottlenecking the CPU, etc., or wanting to add a SSD). I, and other posters, acknowledged that Sandy Bridge is the best value right now, even over AMD. What you seem not to understand, though, is that this is specifically because we are NOT fanboys, but because we like to actually think about purchases before we make them. Maybe I'm just speaking for myself, but I'd pretty much buy whatever I feel has the best performance-to-cost ratio, no matter what brand it is.

Intel has never and will never market to those people because they dont need you. AMD business model is to lay under the table while Intel breaks bread and they pick up the scraps. The problem is that AMD doesnt want to be better than the dollar store of cpus. So if your fine supporting a business model that does nothing but play second fiddle and is happy doing it, more power to you. I want performance outta my rig and AMD is not and has not performed at all.
Click to expand...

This is a fallacy, again, based on what YOU believe. The actual business model is that AMD attempts to offer a great performance-per-dollar ratio, while Intel wants to get the best performance they can at any price. They're not at the same table, they're at two totally different ones. AMD wants to be the better value of the two, and Intel wants to offer the better performance. They appeal to two entirely different demographics, except that Sandy Bridge has muddied the waters and put Intel deep into AMD's territory. AMD has BD to prove that they remain the king of offering good performance (if not top-end) for a great price.

This 'bulldozer' doesnt exist to me. Wheres the benchmarks? Wheres the leaked engineering samples? Wheres the pics of the silicon? Hell I can say what I want but it doesnt make it truth until I can prove it.
Click to expand...

"It doesn't exist because I can't see it!" Well, with that logic, I guess stars aren't really giant balls of nuclear fire since I've only heard rumors, and never actually seen one for myself.

AMD will never be respected by me due to the fact that im not a little kid that needs to mow lawns and after that can only afford a triple core. I need muscle and AMD is not that and the problem is that they are fine with that. Theyre not converting ANY SANDY BRIDGE USERS. Theyre still putting along with the SAME cheap customer base.
Click to expand...

So if you aren't a little kid, are you a teenager that just got into computers? Sandy Bridge is an incredibly recent development. That AMD isn't "converting SB users" ignores the fact that SB has only been on the market for a few months. You make it sound like Intel has had SB out for years, when it's only very recently come out in full distribution (remember the motherboard shortages? And the debacle with flawed mobo architectures? Yeah.)

Ill leave my rant with this information. According to Steam hardware survey, as of Feb 2011 these are the numbers.

CPU
Intel=%72.37
AMD=%27.63

GPU
Nvidia=%59.11
AMD=%32.98

Nobody is worried about AMD but the fans of AMD. This is your last hope. Im sorry but your just too late.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see a link to that survey, so I can see just how big the polling base was.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom