- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 12,015 (1.72/day)
System Name | Compy 386 |
---|---|
Processor | 7800X3D |
Motherboard | Asus |
Cooling | Air for now..... |
Memory | 64 GB DDR5 6400Mhz |
Video Card(s) | 7900XTX 310 Merc |
Storage | Samsung 990 2TB, 2 SP 2TB SSDs, 24TB Enterprise drives |
Display(s) | 55" Samsung 4K HDR |
Audio Device(s) | ATI HDMI |
Mouse | Logitech MX518 |
Keyboard | Razer |
Software | A lot. |
Benchmark Scores | Its fast. Enough. |
AMD is seeing the ligght at the end of the tunnel.
1) For many years AMD/ATI leapfrogged Nvidia with smaller process nodes to gain performance advantage with smaller chip sizes. It worked well for the most part.
1a) This ended when process node development stalled. 28nm anyone?
1b) AMD was and still remains tightly tied to a single foundry for financial reasons, even when it hurts them.
2) ATI before AMD bought them was free to do what worked best for graphics, as that WAS their business.
2a) AMD made a point of pushing the ATI team to play ball with integrating and making more modular systems that played better with APU/CPU technology
2b) AMD tied graphics to a single supplier, see 1b.
3) AMD spun off many of the parts of ATI that were becoming more relevant.
3a) Mobile anyone?
3b) My TV has an AMD modulator demodulator, now there are many companies that do this with ARM products that ironically feature ATI tech.
3c) AMD's piss poor direction at first caused a huge problem for them up till recently when they finally took notice they weren't the cock of the walk and the IP they have is as if not more valuable than the chips they make.
All of us know Ryzen isn't a magic bullet, the same that VEGA isn't. Its going to be at least a couple years of strategic actions and planning before AMD is as great as they once were, and unfortunately many new people will continue to play games on the GT240 and 2500 and bash AMD for not having a competitor to Nvidia or Intel that "blows it out of the water", not realizing that the money Nvidia and Intel make isn't so much on high end consumer stuff, but on server and other hardware.
1) For many years AMD/ATI leapfrogged Nvidia with smaller process nodes to gain performance advantage with smaller chip sizes. It worked well for the most part.
1a) This ended when process node development stalled. 28nm anyone?
1b) AMD was and still remains tightly tied to a single foundry for financial reasons, even when it hurts them.
2) ATI before AMD bought them was free to do what worked best for graphics, as that WAS their business.
2a) AMD made a point of pushing the ATI team to play ball with integrating and making more modular systems that played better with APU/CPU technology
2b) AMD tied graphics to a single supplier, see 1b.
3) AMD spun off many of the parts of ATI that were becoming more relevant.
3a) Mobile anyone?
3b) My TV has an AMD modulator demodulator, now there are many companies that do this with ARM products that ironically feature ATI tech.
3c) AMD's piss poor direction at first caused a huge problem for them up till recently when they finally took notice they weren't the cock of the walk and the IP they have is as if not more valuable than the chips they make.
All of us know Ryzen isn't a magic bullet, the same that VEGA isn't. Its going to be at least a couple years of strategic actions and planning before AMD is as great as they once were, and unfortunately many new people will continue to play games on the GT240 and 2500 and bash AMD for not having a competitor to Nvidia or Intel that "blows it out of the water", not realizing that the money Nvidia and Intel make isn't so much on high end consumer stuff, but on server and other hardware.