Stick a fork in'em. AMD is done

  • 102 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for jun_aka_pekto
jun_aka_pekto

25255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#51 jun_aka_pekto
Member since 2010 • 25255 Posts

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

No kidding. AMD was competing pretty well with Intel during the 486 era. Then AMD fell behind with the Pentium generation. When the next gen (Pentium 2) arrrived, fricking Intel jacked up the prices. It wasn't until Thunderbird when AMD came roaring back and CPU prices started to drop again.

SolidPandaG

AMD Athlon 64/X2's was also the reason why Intel kicked R&D into high gear to create C2D/C2Q's. While doing so Intel bought all pending patents on cpu tech preventing AMD from using new modern tech. Which is why Intel was fined and sued 1.45+ billion for trying to run AMD into the ground.

Awesome. Really. They deserve a golf clap for that.

Now... how about the present?

It won't be immediate. But, Intel can pull off another Pentium 2 in the future. You know the Pentium 2 era sucked because the overclocking darling was a Celeron (the Celeron 300A). The prices Intel charged for the P2's were ridiculous. But, I ponied up the cash regardless even though I wasn't happy about it.

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23824

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#52 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23824 Posts

[QUOTE="SolidPandaG"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] AMD Athlon 64/X2's was also the reason why Intel kicked R&D into high gear to create C2D/C2Q's. While doing so Intel bought all pending patents on cpu tech preventing AMD from using new modern tech. Which is why Intel was fined and sued 1.45+ billion for trying to run AMD into the ground. jun_aka_pekto

Awesome. Really. They deserve a golf clap for that.

Now... how about the present?

It won't be immediate. But, Intel can pull off another Pentium 2 in the future. You know the Pentium 2 era sucked because the overclocking darling was a Celeron (the Celeron 300A). The prices Intel charged for the P2's were ridiculous. But, I ponied up the cash regardless even though I wasn't happy about it.

Lol denial is a powerful blinding tool, Also Pentium 4 's in 2002 above 2.4 ghz were $400+ While the Athlon XP 2400+ was only $190 . Then in 2003 P4 3.0 ghz was $600+ while Athlon XP 3200 was only $464.
Avatar image for ronvalencia
ronvalencia

29612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#53 ronvalencia
Member since 2008 • 29612 Posts

This news saddens me..both as a former AMD cpu user and a current AMD gpu user...I sure hope they pull through..Im sure someone will either buy them out or bankruptcy will give them a fresh start as mentioned..Its a shame because unlike the cpus the gpus are actually starting to beat Nvidia..Many fond memories of building AMD systems by myself and with friends..As Coke mentioned before..Long live theAthlon 2800+ and 9800 pro(even though ATI att)..The components in the first PC I ever built for myself..Hope ya make it AMD!!

neogeo419

Hopefully, Qualcomm (world's number 5, Q1 2012) takes over AMD (world's number 12, Q1 2012). http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-blogs/other/4391415/AMD--who-will-buy-

Avatar image for SolidPandaG
SolidPandaG

218

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#54 SolidPandaG
Member since 2005 • 218 Posts

If AMD gets bought out, I'm not sure if their x86 license is able to cross over. I remember reading once that it's non transferable should they get absobred but it might have changed during their last renewal. Who knows.

I do know that if Godzilla was powered by a CPU, it would most definitely be an Intel chip.

Avatar image for way2funny
way2funny

4570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#55 way2funny
Member since 2003 • 4570 Posts

Intel is not stupid, Intel won't let AMD die. Yes, Intel has AMD where Intel wants them, but Intel doesn't want AMD to die, they want AMD to breathe enough so they wont be sued for a monopoly.

But the fact is, Intel has the best CPUs right now. Anyone who argues is just in denial. AMD CPUs are god enough, but theres a reason why everyone who has a decent gaming budget gets an i5. Don't hate Intel for making money, right now they make the best cpu's in the world, so yeah your going to pay more for them.

Avatar image for GummiRaccoon
GummiRaccoon

13799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56 GummiRaccoon
Member since 2003 • 13799 Posts

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="SolidPandaG"]

I don't think it's a good thing at all but the current status quo is what it is and will continue to remain so, even in AMD's absence.

You can blame them for the state of the current x86 market since they haven't given Intel reason to get up off their rears for quite some time now.

Despite what many people here will tell you, having AMD's pathetic CPU division just croak already and die won't affect the market as much as they'll have you believe.

SolidPandaG

OMG do you understand that Intel partly responsible for putting AMD in the mess its in now? Its sad that you are so naive to think Intel wont raise prices and stagnate the market if AMD totally drop out of the cpu market. just look at Intel's E series cpu and or six core cpu's that will give you an idea what happens when you dont have competition in that bracket of performance

The sad part is you repeating this ad nauseum. Preaching it over and over doesn't make it true. It's just conjecture on your part. The market, as it currently stands, is stagnant, no thanks to AMD's pathetic showings the past several years. You can thank them for that. Ever since their fall from grace back in 2006, they've provided inferior products, first at the same price bracket as Intel, then reluctantly at lower quotes in an effort to appeal to the consumer.

I find it ironic how you talk about how the market will stagnate when it's fairly obvious that Intel has already slowed down its tick-tock principle because of a lack of competition. This is currently occuring even with AMD in existence at the moment. Look at these incremental CPU cycles they have going, from Nehalem, to Westmere (which they didn't even bother to ship to consumers), to Sandy, now to Ivy, and soon to Haswell. Every single iteration is at best seen as a minor step up from its predecessor. Why do you think that's the case? Why has Intel still not supplied stock 4+ GHz SKU's? It obviously has little to do with power consumption at the moment since some Sandy's and Ivy's can go up to 5 GHz. No, they refuse to do so because they have no incentive.

You wanna talk market stagnation? You're in it bro. You're seeing it as we speak but you choose to keep posting as if it's something we should be dreading in the near future if Green buckles and folds.

You are right, repeating it doesn't make it true. However, you have it backwards, he isn't repeating it to make it true. He is repeating it because it is true. Just take one economics class please, and you will understand why everyone considers you so ignorant.

Avatar image for GummiRaccoon
GummiRaccoon

13799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57 GummiRaccoon
Member since 2003 • 13799 Posts

Intel is not stupid, Intel won't let AMD die. Yes, Intel has AMD where Intel wants them, but Intel doesn't want AMD to die, they want AMD to breathe enough so they wont be sued for a monopoly.

But the fact is, Intel has the best CPUs right now. Anyone who argues is just in denial. AMD CPUs are god enough, but theres a reason why everyone who has a decent gaming budget gets an i5. Don't hate Intel for making money, right now they make the best cpu's in the world, so yeah your going to pay more for them.

way2funny

Says the guy that overpaid for his cpu by over 300%

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23824

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#58 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23824 Posts

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

Intel is not stupid, Intel won't let AMD die. Yes, Intel has AMD where Intel wants them, but Intel doesn't want AMD to die, they want AMD to breathe enough so they wont be sued for a monopoly.

But the fact is, Intel has the best CPUs right now. Anyone who argues is just in denial. AMD CPUs are god enough, but theres a reason why everyone who has a decent gaming budget gets an i5. Don't hate Intel for making money, right now they make the best cpu's in the world, so yeah your going to pay more for them.

GummiRaccoon

Says the guy that overpaid for his cpu by over 300%

No only 200% it it right :P:
Avatar image for way2funny
way2funny

4570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#59 way2funny
Member since 2003 • 4570 Posts

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

Intel is not stupid, Intel won't let AMD die. Yes, Intel has AMD where Intel wants them, but Intel doesn't want AMD to die, they want AMD to breathe enough so they wont be sued for a monopoly.

But the fact is, Intel has the best CPUs right now. Anyone who argues is just in denial. AMD CPUs are god enough, but theres a reason why everyone who has a decent gaming budget gets an i5. Don't hate Intel for making money, right now they make the best cpu's in the world, so yeah your going to pay more for them.

GummiRaccoon

Says the guy that overpaid for his cpu by over 300%

How do you know how much I payed for my CPU? And what did I say that was wrong? I go to whoever has the best CPUs, sometimes its AMD sometimes its Intel, tough luck, I have no brand loyalty, I go to where the preformance is at

Avatar image for way2funny
way2funny

4570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#60 way2funny
Member since 2003 • 4570 Posts

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

Intel is not stupid, Intel won't let AMD die. Yes, Intel has AMD where Intel wants them, but Intel doesn't want AMD to die, they want AMD to breathe enough so they wont be sued for a monopoly.

But the fact is, Intel has the best CPUs right now. Anyone who argues is just in denial. AMD CPUs are god enough, but theres a reason why everyone who has a decent gaming budget gets an i5. Don't hate Intel for making money, right now they make the best cpu's in the world, so yeah your going to pay more for them.

04dcarraher

Says the guy that overpaid for his cpu by over 300%

No only 200% it it right :P:

FYI I only payed 290 dollars for my CPU

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23824

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#61 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23824 Posts

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

Says the guy that overpaid for his cpu by over 300%

way2funny

No only 200% it it right :P:

FYI I only payed 290 dollars for my CPU

now that was a nice deal, how you pulled that off?
Avatar image for way2funny
way2funny

4570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#62 way2funny
Member since 2003 • 4570 Posts

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] No only 200% it it right :P:04dcarraher

FYI I only payed 290 dollars for my CPU

now that was a nice deal, how you pulled that off?

Benefits of being an employee

Avatar image for GummiRaccoon
GummiRaccoon

13799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#63 GummiRaccoon
Member since 2003 • 13799 Posts

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="way2funny"]

FYI I only payed 290 dollars for my CPU

way2funny

now that was a nice deal, how you pulled that off?

Benefits of being an employee

of best buy?

Avatar image for way2funny
way2funny

4570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#64 way2funny
Member since 2003 • 4570 Posts

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] now that was a nice deal, how you pulled that off? GummiRaccoon

Benefits of being an employee

of best buy?

No of Intel. And what did I say that was wrong or biased?

Avatar image for GummiRaccoon
GummiRaccoon

13799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 GummiRaccoon
Member since 2003 • 13799 Posts

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

Benefits of being an employee

way2funny

of best buy?

No of Intel. And what did I say that was wrong or biased?

So let me get this straight, I called you out on being biased in intels favor, and you tell me that you aren't biased because you work at intel?

Avatar image for way2funny
way2funny

4570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#66 way2funny
Member since 2003 • 4570 Posts

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

of best buy?

GummiRaccoon

No of Intel. And what did I say that was wrong or biased?

So let me get this straight, I called you out on being biased in intels favor, and you tell me that you aren't biased because you work at intel?

I dont work for the processor division.

I go to where the best processors are, and right now the best processors are intels. 6/7 years ago I went to AMD. How is that biased?

Avatar image for GummiRaccoon
GummiRaccoon

13799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#67 GummiRaccoon
Member since 2003 • 13799 Posts

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

No of Intel. And what did I say that was wrong or biased?

way2funny

So let me get this straight, I called you out on being biased in intels favor, and you tell me that you aren't biased because you work at intel?

I dont work for the processor division.

I go to where the best processors are, and right now the best processors are intels. 6/7 years ago I went to AMD. How is that biased?

"The best processors right now are intel" - Some intel employee (don't worry he's not in the CPU division)

Avatar image for way2funny
way2funny

4570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#68 way2funny
Member since 2003 • 4570 Posts

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

So let me get this straight, I called you out on being biased in intels favor, and you tell me that you aren't biased because you work at intel?

GummiRaccoon

I dont work for the processor division.

I go to where the best processors are, and right now the best processors are intels. 6/7 years ago I went to AMD. How is that biased?

"The best processors right now are intel" - Some intel employee (don't worry he's not in the CPU division)

Prove me wrong

Avatar image for Daanyal
Daanyal

773

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69 Daanyal
Member since 2009 • 773 Posts

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

I dont work for the processor division.

I go to where the best processors are, and right now the best processors are intels. 6/7 years ago I went to AMD. How is that biased?

way2funny

"The best processors right now are intel" - Some intel employee (don't worry he's not in the CPU division)

Prove me wrong

I'm sorry, but Gummi is acting like a total idiot here. He said that the performance is at Intel, so he got an Intel processor.

@way2funny May I ask what you do at Intel? Also, if the performance was at AMD, would you still have gone and gotten an Intel processor?

Avatar image for djdarkforces
djdarkforces

812

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70 djdarkforces
Member since 2009 • 812 Posts

amd hasnt really failed problem is they have gone to ahaed and current programs just dont utilize there full potential of there cpu

Avatar image for imprezawrx500
imprezawrx500

19187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71 imprezawrx500
Member since 2004 • 19187 Posts

Really all that this is showing is how pc cpus have pretty much reached their limit of what most people need or want. There is no ned for any more processing power in x86 cpus for anything much besides power users.

The market has moved to the mobile space where even intel is struggling to take on qualcom and nvida. Tablets and phones are what are selling fast now and where all the development is happening. It wont be long before mobile chips have caught up to laptops from a few years ago.

Its not like amd will stop making cpus. They will keep making them just less development for new ones.

Avatar image for kraken2109
kraken2109

13271

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#72 kraken2109
Member since 2009 • 13271 Posts

The funny thing is that desktop CPUs are way more powerful than people need. Laptop CPUs are getting closer and closer.

For 95% of users there is no difference between and i3, Phenom IIX4 or a hex core i7.

Avatar image for GummiRaccoon
GummiRaccoon

13799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#73 GummiRaccoon
Member since 2003 • 13799 Posts

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

I dont work for the processor division.

I go to where the best processors are, and right now the best processors are intels. 6/7 years ago I went to AMD. How is that biased?

way2funny

"The best processors right now are intel" - Some intel employee (don't worry he's not in the CPU division)

Prove me wrong

Prove that working for intel makes you biased in favor of intel?

Avatar image for way2funny
way2funny

4570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#74 way2funny
Member since 2003 • 4570 Posts

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

"The best processors right now are intel" - Some intel employee (don't worry he's not in the CPU division)

Daanyal

Prove me wrong

I'm sorry, but Gummi is acting like a total idiot here. He said that the performance is at Intel, so he got an Intel processor.

@way2funny May I ask what you do at Intel? Also, if the performance was at AMD, would you still have gone and gotten an Intel processor?

Depends on the preformance gap since I'm able to get them 50% off, but I have no problem buying an AMD processor. I actually preferred buying only AMD up until 2007/2008. Price (for me) and preformance were easily Intel right now.

I work on linux device drivers btw

Avatar image for SolidPandaG
SolidPandaG

218

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#75 SolidPandaG
Member since 2005 • 218 Posts

You are right, repeating it doesn't make it true. However, you have it backwards, he isn't repeating it to make it true. He is repeating it because it is true. Just take one economics class please, and you will understand why everyone considers you so ignorant.

GummiRaccoon

I don't have anything backwards. You only wish it was the case so you could conveniently dismiss the argument as fallicious. His drivel is based on standard theory, which makes absolute sense from an economic perspective, but the situation the current x86 suppliers find themselves in is anything but standard. The problem (and what none of you seem to grasp) is that Intel is already a monopoly in the mid to high end sector. Here's an article reiterating the point:

http://www.techpowerup.com/155920/AMD-To-Give-Up-Competing-With-Intel-On-x86-CPU-Prices-Already-Shooting-Up.html

AMD is long gone from the segment I'm describing. They are no longer relevant in that space. CPU prices have adjusted accordingly following the Bulldozer debacle and will remain where they are for the desktop segment, regardless of whether AMD folds or not. Their top of the line Bulldozers put no pressure on any Intel SKU's, so it's effectively an Intel monopoly in that segment.

Constantly repeating for me to take an economics course doesn't exempt you from being unable to recognize the holes in your argument. All you're doing is using ad hominem attacks because you don't seem to be capable of actually refuting my points with concrete points/facts.

Avatar image for DieselCat18
DieselCat18

3006

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#76 DieselCat18
Member since 2002 • 3006 Posts

It'll be a shame if they run out of money by this time next year. I only bought Amd CPUs between 1998 and 2006. Wouldn't of even considered going Intel. Long live the FX55 :)acanofcoke

Oh yeah!

and the FX-60 & 4800+

939 socket was a great platform....:)

*+

Avatar image for GummiRaccoon
GummiRaccoon

13799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#77 GummiRaccoon
Member since 2003 • 13799 Posts

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

You are right, repeating it doesn't make it true. However, you have it backwards, he isn't repeating it to make it true. He is repeating it because it is true. Just take one economics class please, and you will understand why everyone considers you so ignorant.

SolidPandaG

I don't have anything backwards. You only wish it was the case so you could conveniently dismiss the argument as fallicious. His drivel is based on standard theory, which makes absolute sense from an economic perspective, but the situation the current x86 suppliers find themselves in is anything but standard. The problem (and what none of you seem to grasp) is that Intel is already a monopoly in the mid to high end sector. Here's an article reiterating the point:

http://www.techpowerup.com/155920/AMD-To-Give-Up-Competing-With-Intel-On-x86-CPU-Prices-Already-Shooting-Up.html

AMD is long gone from the segment I'm describing. They are no longer relevant in that space. CPU prices have adjusted accordingly following the Bulldozer debacle and will remain where they are for the desktop segment, regardless of whether AMD folds or not. Their top of the line Bulldozers put no pressure on any Intel SKU's, so it's effectively an Intel monopoly in that segment.

Constantly repeating for me to take an economics course doesn't exempt you from being unable to recognize the holes in your argument. All you're doing is using ad hominem attacks because you don't seem to be capable of actually refuting my points with concrete points/facts.

I guess you don't know what an oligopoly is.

Yes prices are higher than if there was perfect competition but they aren't as high as they would be with a monopoly. I can tell your understanding is shallow because you keep parroting that "it's like a monopoly already", which it is, because an oligopoly is as close as you can get to a monopoly before it becomes one. But prices are lower. AMD was keeping Intels prices in check and your gleeful cheering at the idea of getting back into a monopoly is illogical and bizarre.

Make sure to dig deeper on wikipedia and thesaurus.com before you come back.

Avatar image for godzillavskong
godzillavskong

7904

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#78 godzillavskong
Member since 2007 • 7904 Posts

[QUOTE="SolidPandaG"]

Pretty much called it a few months back with my now legendary "how much longer till AMD's CPU division is put out of its misery?" thread. Links:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ultramobile-tablet-apu-cpu,18546.html

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2277556

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2276376

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2276102

Posting this for the epic fail. The good news is that not much will really change in the CPU landscape since they've been irrelvant for nearly 6 years now. Intel will still continue chugging along at its dreadfully slow pace since the introduction of Conroe. The sad news is I can't use AMD CPU's as paperweights any longer. Shame really.

hartsickdiscipl

That's funny.. my "irrelevant" CPU has been running all of my programs and games just fine for the last 2 and a half years.

Mine too. No issues here. I think a large percentage of AMD users are very satisfied with their products and would buy AMD again if given the choice. Intel may have the market share, but I seriously doubt AMD is going anywhere anytime soon.
Avatar image for hartsickdiscipl
hartsickdiscipl

14787

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#79 hartsickdiscipl
Member since 2003 • 14787 Posts

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="SolidPandaG"]

Pretty much called it a few months back with my now legendary "how much longer till AMD's CPU division is put out of its misery?" thread. Links:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ultramobile-tablet-apu-cpu,18546.html

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2277556

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2276376

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2276102

Posting this for the epic fail. The good news is that not much will really change in the CPU landscape since they've been irrelvant for nearly 6 years now. Intel will still continue chugging along at its dreadfully slow pace since the introduction of Conroe. The sad news is I can't use AMD CPU's as paperweights any longer. Shame really.

godzillavskong

That's funny.. my "irrelevant" CPU has been running all of my programs and games just fine for the last 2 and a half years.

Mine too. No issues here. I think a large percentage of AMD users are very satisfied with their products and would buy AMD again if given the choice. Intel may have the market share, but I seriously doubt AMD is going anywhere anytime soon.

If I felt like I needed to upgrade right now, I'd definitely get a 3570k or 2500k. I just don't feel any need to upgrade right now. When it becomes time to upgrade, I'll consider options from both companies and buy the best CPU within my price range.

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23824

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#80 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23824 Posts

[QUOTE="godzillavskong"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

That's funny.. my "irrelevant" CPU has been running all of my programs and games just fine for the last 2 and a half years.

hartsickdiscipl

Mine too. No issues here. I think a large percentage of AMD users are very satisfied with their products and would buy AMD again if given the choice. Intel may have the market share, but I seriously doubt AMD is going anywhere anytime soon.

If I felt like I needed to upgrade right now, I'd definitely get a 3570k or 2500k. I just don't feel any need to upgrade right now. When it becomes time to upgrade, I'll consider options from both companies and buy the best CPU within my price range.

Same here, I choose what ever gives me the best bang for my buck. when I grabbed my Phenom 2 955 back in 2010 Intel only had the 1st generation of icores out and it would have cost me another $150+ just for a slight performance jump and have SLI option.

Avatar image for Yams1980
Yams1980

2861

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 27

User Lists: 0

#81 Yams1980
Member since 2006 • 2861 Posts

i'm not sure why some people are so happy to dance on AMD's grave. If they go under, Nvidia will charge whatever they want for their graphics cards, and we won't see improvements as often. Same goes with Intel, they will pretty much be able to charge anything they want if AMD went under.

What I want is a 3rd company involved here, IBM has made cpus for more focused markets, maybe they should try to get involved against AMD and Intel. I think the ps3 uses a cpu made by IBM which at the time was pretty powerful. Maybe even the 360 uses an ibm cpu, i can't remember. But they are more then capable to get into mainstreem cpu prodution if they wanted.

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23824

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#82 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23824 Posts

i'm not sure why some people are so happy to dance on AMD's grave. If they go under, Nvidia will charge whatever they want for their graphics cards, and we won't see improvements as often. Same goes with Intel, they will pretty much be able to charge anything they want if AMD went under.

.

Yams1980
one word "idiots"
Avatar image for kraken2109
kraken2109

13271

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#83 kraken2109
Member since 2009 • 13271 Posts

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="godzillavskong"] Mine too. No issues here. I think a large percentage of AMD users are very satisfied with their products and would buy AMD again if given the choice. Intel may have the market share, but I seriously doubt AMD is going anywhere anytime soon. 04dcarraher

If I felt like I needed to upgrade right now, I'd definitely get a 3570k or 2500k. I just don't feel any need to upgrade right now. When it becomes time to upgrade, I'll consider options from both companies and buy the best CPU within my price range.

Same here, I choose what ever gives me the best bang for my buck. when I grabbed my Phenom 2 955 back in 2010 Intel only had the 1st generation of icores out and it would have cost me another $150+ just for a slight performance jump and have SLI option.

Same, if I was buying a CPU now I would get an intel, but when I bought my Phenom it was by far the best option.

Also

8940829.jpg

Avatar image for ztron370
ztron370

387

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#84 ztron370
Member since 2005 • 387 Posts
Cpu:Intel i7 3770k Gpu:2x7950 crossfire
Avatar image for way2funny
way2funny

4570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#85 way2funny
Member since 2003 • 4570 Posts

[QUOTE="Yams1980"]

i'm not sure why some people are so happy to dance on AMD's grave. If they go under, Nvidia will charge whatever they want for their graphics cards, and we won't see improvements as often. Same goes with Intel, they will pretty much be able to charge anything they want if AMD went under.

.

04dcarraher

one word "idiots"

I dont think any sane people want AMD dead. Even Intel doesn't want AMD dead. Intel has had oppurtunities to stick a fork in em but chose not to

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23824

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#87 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23824 Posts

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] one word "idiots"GummiRaccoon

I dont think any sane people want AMD dead. Even Intel doesn't want AMD dead. Intel has had oppurtunities to stick a fork in em but chose not to

says the intel employee

lol, lets not forget all the crap intel did to get fined and sued for more then 1.45 billion.

Avatar image for imprezawrx500
imprezawrx500

19187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#88 imprezawrx500
Member since 2004 • 19187 Posts
Intel may own the desktop and notebook market but they have this big problem called phones and tablets that is where all the sales are now. Qualcom and Nvida pretty much own that market and Intel is yet to find a way to make a chip that can go in one without killing the battery in a quarter to half the time the Qualcom ones do. Amd reducing it's effort on cpus is just showing where the market is moving.
Avatar image for superclocked
superclocked

5864

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#89 superclocked
Member since 2009 • 5864 Posts
TC, you must not keep up with technology news, or you haven't been on the technology scene very long. The original Phenom was like Bulldozer, disappointing. But just as AMD fixed the problems with the original Phenom, they're also fixing the problems in the Bulldozer architecture. AMD is making performance improvements across the entire chip with it's Steamroller revision. Piledriver only offered reduced power usage features btw. Try doing some research before posting next time ;) Also, I've got to say that anyone who wants Intel to have no competition in the CPU market is complete f****** idiot...
Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#90 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts
[QUOTE="superclocked"]TC, you must not keep up with technology news, or you haven't been on the technology scene very long. The original Phenom was like Bulldozer, disappointing. But just as AMD fixed the problems with the original Phenom, they're also fixing the problems in the Bulldozer architecture. AMD is making performance improvements across the entire chip with it's Steamroller revision. Piledriver only offered reduced power usage features btw. Try doing some research before posting next time ;) Also, I've got to say that anyone who wants Intel to have no competition in the CPU market is complete f****** idiot...

Exactly, I currently use a I5 2500k in my new machine but I would love to hop over to AMD next time I build a machine.. I can't believe why any one would want to limit themselves...
Avatar image for SolidPandaG
SolidPandaG

218

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#91 SolidPandaG
Member since 2005 • 218 Posts

TC, you must not keep up with technology news, or you haven't been on the technology scene very long. The original Phenom was like Bulldozer, disappointing. But just as AMD fixed the problems with the original Phenom, they're also fixing the problems in the Bulldozer architecture. AMD is making performance improvements across the entire chip with it's Steamroller revision. Piledriver only offered reduced power usage features btw. Try doing some research before posting next time ;) Also, I've got to say that anyone who wants Intel to have no competition in the CPU market is complete f****** idiot...superclocked

I never said I wanted Intel to have no competition.Don't put words in my mouth... and don't speculate as to what a certain poster's stance is because you can look like a tool. I'm merely calling it like it is while laughing at AMD's predicament, because it's their pathetic management that's ultimately landed them in this horrible position.

I can't help but be fascinated by this train wreck of a company and how poorly its been run post Conroe. The entire division on the top floor of the Green building needs to be axed because such a consistent display of incompetence is mind boggling.

Also, the only thing that still causes head scratching are the apologists, actually forgiving AMD for bringing out an inferior - not in all cases, but several - product to its predeccesor. That, in itself, is completely inexcusable in my book. Bulldozer regressed in many ways from Phenom II and to ignore such an epic fail is homerism at its finest.

You're basically saying "it's cool dude, don't worry, even though they royall screwed up and produced a turd, they're fixing that turd."

They shouldn't have produced that turd to begin with.This isn't a small, family run business, this is a corporation that produces "high end" CPU's. Forgive me for expecting better.

Avatar image for GummiRaccoon
GummiRaccoon

13799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#92 GummiRaccoon
Member since 2003 • 13799 Posts

[QUOTE="superclocked"]TC, you must not keep up with technology news, or you haven't been on the technology scene very long. The original Phenom was like Bulldozer, disappointing. But just as AMD fixed the problems with the original Phenom, they're also fixing the problems in the Bulldozer architecture. AMD is making performance improvements across the entire chip with it's Steamroller revision. Piledriver only offered reduced power usage features btw. Try doing some research before posting next time ;) Also, I've got to say that anyone who wants Intel to have no competition in the CPU market is complete f****** idiot...SolidPandaG

I never said I wanted Intel to have no competition.Don't put words in my mouth... and don't speculate as to what a certain poster's stance is because you can look like a tool. I'm merely calling it like it is while laughing at AMD's predicament, because it's their pathetic management that's ultimately landed them in this horrible position.

I can't help but be fascinated by this train wreck of a company and how poorly its been run post Conroe. The entire division on the top floor of the Green building needs to be axed because such a consistent display of incompetence is mind boggling.

Also, the only thing that still causes head scratching are the apologists, actually forgiving AMD for bringing out an inferior - not in all cases, but several - product to its predeccesor. That, in itself, is completely inexcusable in my book. Bulldozer regressed in many ways from Phenom II and to ignore such an epic fail is homerism at its finest.

You're basically saying "it's cool dude, don't worry, even though they royall screwed up and produced a turd, they're fixing that turd."

They shouldn't have produced that turd to begin with.This isn't a small, family run business, this is a corporation that produces "high end" CPU's. Forgive me for expecting better.

"I'm totally ignorant of intel violating the laws in many companies that illegally put AMD in the position it's in"

Avatar image for GummiRaccoon
GummiRaccoon

13799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#93 GummiRaccoon
Member since 2003 • 13799 Posts

[QUOTE="superclocked"]TC, you must not keep up with technology news, or you haven't been on the technology scene very long. The original Phenom was like Bulldozer, disappointing. But just as AMD fixed the problems with the original Phenom, they're also fixing the problems in the Bulldozer architecture. AMD is making performance improvements across the entire chip with it's Steamroller revision. Piledriver only offered reduced power usage features btw. Try doing some research before posting next time ;) Also, I've got to say that anyone who wants Intel to have no competition in the CPU market is complete f****** idiot...SolidPandaG

I never said I wanted Intel to have no competition.Don't put words in my mouth... and don't speculate as to what a certain poster's stance is because you can look like a tool. I'm merely calling it like it is while laughing at AMD's predicament, because it's their pathetic management that's ultimately landed them in this horrible position.

I can't help but be fascinated by this train wreck of a company and how poorly its been run post Conroe. The entire division on the top floor of the Green building needs to be axed because such a consistent display of incompetence is mind boggling.

Also, the only thing that still causes head scratching are the apologists, actually forgiving AMD for bringing out an inferior - not in all cases, but several - product to its predeccesor. That, in itself, is completely inexcusable in my book. Bulldozer regressed in many ways from Phenom II and to ignore such an epic fail is homerism at its finest.

You're basically saying "it's cool dude, don't worry, even though they royall screwed up and produced a turd, they're fixing that turd."

They shouldn't have produced that turd to begin with.This isn't a small, family run business, this is a corporation that produces "high end" CPU's. Forgive me for expecting better.

What are pentium 4s?

Avatar image for Lach0121
Lach0121

11779

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#94 Lach0121
Member since 2007 • 11779 Posts

Im sure AMD has a few more things up their sleeves before "going under."

My Phenom II quad is a pretty decent cpu. That being said my next rig will be a pretty powerful intel cpu, because I could actually get a benefit of having that extra cpu power, when I make music.

For gaming I don't think it would matter near as much.

In our current economical system... Companies use the lack of competition to get complacent. Which leads to two things, drop in quality, or a severe raise in price. Neither is a good thing.

I prefer Nvidia, for many reasons. But I still like that AMD has some GPUs that compete with them.

I will be going with Intel my next build, but I still want AMD to do great things.

Avatar image for hartsickdiscipl
hartsickdiscipl

14787

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#95 hartsickdiscipl
Member since 2003 • 14787 Posts

[QUOTE="superclocked"]TC, you must not keep up with technology news, or you haven't been on the technology scene very long. The original Phenom was like Bulldozer, disappointing. But just as AMD fixed the problems with the original Phenom, they're also fixing the problems in the Bulldozer architecture. AMD is making performance improvements across the entire chip with it's Steamroller revision. Piledriver only offered reduced power usage features btw. Try doing some research before posting next time ;) Also, I've got to say that anyone who wants Intel to have no competition in the CPU market is complete f****** idiot...SolidPandaG

I never said I wanted Intel to have no competition.Don't put words in my mouth... and don't speculate as to what a certain poster's stance is because you can look like a tool. I'm merely calling it like it is while laughing at AMD's predicament, because it's their pathetic management that's ultimately landed them in this horrible position.

I can't help but be fascinated by this train wreck of a company and how poorly its been run post Conroe. The entire division on the top floor of the Green building needs to be axed because such a consistent display of incompetence is mind boggling.

Also, the only thing that still causes head scratching are the apologists, actually forgiving AMD for bringing out an inferior - not in all cases, but several - product to its predeccesor. That, in itself, is completely inexcusable in my book. Bulldozer regressed in many ways from Phenom II and to ignore such an epic fail is homerism at its finest.

You're basically saying "it's cool dude, don't worry, even though they royall screwed up and produced a turd, they're fixing that turd."

They shouldn't have produced that turd to begin with.This isn't a small, family run business, this is a corporation that produces "high end" CPU's. Forgive me for expecting better.

I guess you missed the part about how Intel was fined billions of dollars for their dirty business practices and more or less put AMD in this position. It wasn't so much the AMD brass that did this, it was Intel. Wake up.

Avatar image for NamelessPlayer
NamelessPlayer

7729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#96 NamelessPlayer
Member since 2004 • 7729 Posts

Note that

1. Intel is also focusing on ultramobile devices e.g. Ultrabooks and tablets.

2. Intel Sandybridge/Ivybridge is already "APU" type processors.

For X86's survival, X86 vendors should be pushing for mobile bias parts. The real competition comes from ARM based devices e.g. MS Surface RT's sellout is a wakeup call for X86 vendors.

Atm, I happy with my tablet with Windows 8 Pro (x86) RTM. For tablets, Windows 7 was a joke against Android and iOS.

ronvalencia
Indeed, things are getting increasingly mobile-focused these days. Most people (read: people who don't hang out in these forums) don't have the need for Crysis-crushing computing performance. But as for Windows 7 being a joke on tablets...I'll just say that I don't want Windows 8 on my HP 2730p at all (a convertible Tablet PC, of all things) due to that Metro crap, Windows 7 is quite serviceable, iOS is the real joke for the functionality I demand out of a tablet, and Android just started becoming viable thanks to Samsung's Galaxy Note lineup...which still doesn't have software on the level of OneNote or Bluebeam PDF Revu to take advantage of their Wacom digitizers, but I'm sure that it'll catch up given enough time and developer support. (XP Tablet PC Edition, let alone Windows for Pen Computing before it, didn't launch with OneNote or all the other killer apps we all know, after all.) Anyway, back on topic: I really, really don't want to see AMD falter here. We need competition. But given the benchmarks I'm seeing, it looks like they're having a NetBurst/Northwood-vs.-Prescott fiasco of their own where their new chips can't even consistently outperform their old ones. I want the Athlon (XP/64)-era AMD back, the AMD that consistently dominated Intel for gaming performance while really driving up performance year after year. Intel was big enough to recover from the whole NetBurst/Pentium 4 situation and come back swinging with Core 2, but I don't know about AMD at this point given the layoffs they just had.
Avatar image for SolidPandaG
SolidPandaG

218

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#97 SolidPandaG
Member since 2005 • 218 Posts

[QUOTE="SolidPandaG"]

[QUOTE="superclocked"]TC, you must not keep up with technology news, or you haven't been on the technology scene very long. The original Phenom was like Bulldozer, disappointing. But just as AMD fixed the problems with the original Phenom, they're also fixing the problems in the Bulldozer architecture. AMD is making performance improvements across the entire chip with it's Steamroller revision. Piledriver only offered reduced power usage features btw. Try doing some research before posting next time ;) Also, I've got to say that anyone who wants Intel to have no competition in the CPU market is complete f****** idiot...GummiRaccoon

I never said I wanted Intel to have no competition.Don't put words in my mouth... and don't speculate as to what a certain poster's stance is because you can look like a tool. I'm merely calling it like it is while laughing at AMD's predicament, because it's their pathetic management that's ultimately landed them in this horrible position.

I can't help but be fascinated by this train wreck of a company and how poorly its been run post Conroe. The entire division on the top floor of the Green building needs to be axed because such a consistent display of incompetence is mind boggling.

Also, the only thing that still causes head scratching are the apologists, actually forgiving AMD for bringing out an inferior - not in all cases, but several - product to its predeccesor. That, in itself, is completely inexcusable in my book. Bulldozer regressed in many ways from Phenom II and to ignore such an epic fail is homerism at its finest.

You're basically saying "it's cool dude, don't worry, even though they royall screwed up and produced a turd, they're fixing that turd."

They shouldn't have produced that turd to begin with.This isn't a small, family run business, this is a corporation that produces "high end" CPU's. Forgive me for expecting better.

What are pentium 4s?

They were turds, just like Bulldozer. That's why I had an Athlon 64 (shocking, I know).

See, I have no problem admitting that. You're under the assumption I'm an Intel homer. I just favor present superiority, which is a term you can no longer associate with AMD.

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23824

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#98 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23824 Posts

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="SolidPandaG"]

I never said I wanted Intel to have no competition.Don't put words in my mouth... and don't speculate as to what a certain poster's stance is because you can look like a tool. I'm merely calling it like it is while laughing at AMD's predicament, because it's their pathetic management that's ultimately landed them in this horrible position.

I can't help but be fascinated by this train wreck of a company and how poorly its been run post Conroe. The entire division on the top floor of the Green building needs to be axed because such a consistent display of incompetence is mind boggling.

Also, the only thing that still causes head scratching are the apologists, actually forgiving AMD for bringing out an inferior - not in all cases, but several - product to its predeccesor. That, in itself, is completely inexcusable in my book. Bulldozer regressed in many ways from Phenom II and to ignore such an epic fail is homerism at its finest.

You're basically saying "it's cool dude, don't worry, even though they royall screwed up and produced a turd, they're fixing that turd."

They shouldn't have produced that turd to begin with.This isn't a small, family run business, this is a corporation that produces "high end" CPU's. Forgive me for expecting better.

SolidPandaG

What are pentium 4s?

They were turds, just like Bulldozer. That's why I had an Athlon 64 (shocking, I know).

See, I have no problem admitting that. You're under the assumption I'm an Intel homer. I just favor present superiority, which is a term you can no longer associate with AMD.

Yet you post nothing but Anti AMD postings and bash them.Yet you ignore the fact that AMD 8 cores actually do outpace intel's quad core offerings with multi threaded apps and games.

The irony

Avatar image for GummiRaccoon
GummiRaccoon

13799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#99 GummiRaccoon
Member since 2003 • 13799 Posts

[QUOTE="SolidPandaG"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

What are pentium 4s?

04dcarraher

They were turds, just like Bulldozer. That's why I had an Athlon 64 (shocking, I know).

See, I have no problem admitting that. You're under the assumption I'm an Intel homer. I just favor present superiority, which is a term you can no longer associate with AMD.

Yet you post nothing but Anti AMD postings and bash them.Yet you ignore the fact that AMD 8 cores actually do outpace intel's quad core offerings with multi threaded apps and games.

The irony

The funny thing is pentium 4s weren't bad. Panda is a doofus.

the socket 423 willamette pentium 4s were bleh and prescotts were bleh but northwood was a bro

Avatar image for LordEC911
LordEC911

9972

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#100 LordEC911
Member since 2004 • 9972 Posts

I never said I wanted Intel to have no competition.Don't put words in my mouth... and don't speculate as to what a certain poster's stance is because you can look like a tool. I'm merely calling it like it is while laughing at AMD's predicament, because it's their pathetic management that's ultimately landed them in this horrible position.

I can't help but be fascinated by this train wreck of a company and how poorly its been run post Conroe. The entire division on the top floor of the Green building needs to be axed because such a consistent display of incompetence is mind boggling.

Also, the only thing that still causes head scratching are the apologists, actually forgiving AMD for bringing out an inferior - not in all cases, but several - product to its predeccesor. That, in itself, is completely inexcusable in my book. Bulldozer regressed in many ways from Phenom II and to ignore such an epic fail is homerism at its finest.

You're basically saying "it's cool dude, don't worry, even though they royall screwed up and produced a turd, they're fixing that turd."

They shouldn't have produced that turd to begin with.This isn't a small, family run business, this is a corporation that produces "high end" CPU's. Forgive me for expecting better.SolidPandaG


So since you are so super smart. Outline a business plan on what you would have done different from 2006 forward at AMD. Also, since you seem to know everything about EE, how about outlining some basic CPU designs that would best Conroe.

You clearly know little to nothing about how the actual industry works, so please keep your mouth shut.