@scatteh316 said:
@ronvalencia said:
@xantufrog said:
It's cheap and they offer APU which further reduces the cost to the console manufacturer. Keep in mind, they don't have discrete GPUs. It's really the only logical choice for these things, actually, given that they need to be compact and cannot sell at PC prices. A lot of PC gamers shit on AMD around here but an Intel+Nvidia solution would be a non-starter these days for a few reasons.
The problem with AMD is the lack of focus since Bulldozer (many threads bias, lower IPC)
Ryzen and Thread ripper is lack of focus? What a complete dumb ass comment for you to make...
Ryzen (Zen v1) was the course correction and Thread Ripper was implemented by AMD engineers in their spare time LOL.
https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3016760/amd-threadripper-was-developed-by-engineers-in-their-spare-time
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/255155-amd-declares-ryzen-development-worst-case-scenario-looks-ahead-ryzen-2
AMD: Ryzen Development Was a ‘Worst-Case Scenario’
Zen should be after K10's evolution instead of Faileddozer.
It's time dig out AMD's coprorate internal politics between fat CPU advocates vs Bulldozer advocates that will show you're the real dumb ass.
https://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=85582
Mike Butler, Chief Architect of the Bulldozer architecture, apparently doesn't work for AMD anymore.
https://m.hardocp.com/article/2011/11/29/hardocp_readers_ask_amd_bulldozer_questions
Mike Butler: It is also important to note that the "Bulldozer" architecture is configured and optimized for server throughput. The two integer execution cores present in Bulldozer are designed to deliver area- and power-efficient multi-threaded throughput.
Intel Haswell shows fat CPU core with dual threads throughput (each thread has dual integer units) dedunked Mike Butler's argument!
You're the real dumb ass.
I agree with AMD's management purging who advocated failed architectures. Architecture advocates must be pay for thier advancy
Log in to comment