AMD To Give Up Competing With Intel On x86? CPU Prices Already Shooting Up

[pantherx12]

BT? The electric/water/gas board? Royal Mail?

BT is shite.

Those 3 things are run by several different companies not one by it's self.


Royal mail is expensive as HELL lol ( fine for anything under a kilo and not expensive though I guess)


I'm shipping a tv soon, royal mail it would of cost me £30 and I'd have to go to the post office, to get a courier it costs me £10 including £500 insurance and they pick it up from my house, I don't even need to write the address on the parcel as they come with stickers!

 

[chron]

this pisses me off to no end

 

[fullinfusion]

I will rant when I get back outa Wisconsin

 

[Red_Machine]

BT is shite.

Those 3 things are run by several different companies not one by it's self.


Royal mail is expensive as HELL lol ( fine for anything under a kilo and not expensive though I guess)


I'm shipping a tv soon, royal mail it would of cost me £30 and I'd have to go to the post office, to get a courier it costs me £10 including £500 insurance and they pick it up from my house, I don't even need to write the address on the parcel as they come with stickers!

I'm talking about back when they WERE monopolies. They were all owned and operated by the government. Royal Mail still is a monopoly to some extent, but it really has gone to hell in the last decade.

 

[pantherx12]

I'm talking about back when they WERE monopolies. They were all owned and operated by the government. Royal Mail still is a monopoly to some extent, but it really has gone to hell in the last decade.

Owned and operated by the government isn't quite the same as a true monopoly as in theory* if it's government owned it's owned by the public and so people can kick up a fuss about it/protest etc etc.

Can't really do that against a business.



* In theory because the government never listens to people


Also as they were government owned they would of been seen as a necessary service I.E they can't over charge for it because people required it. (Governments supposed to provide after all, supposed to distrubute the money we give them in a sensible way and invest in things that are good, again obviously doesn't actually happen lol but it's how it should be)

 

[Recus]

• I use Sony vegas for rendering and it truly uses all cores on the AMD platform to the max, while Intel....that's just sad story behind....

Everyone know that tasks like this runs faster on GPU.

 

[yogurt_21]

you really think the existence of AMD is what's driving intel's incredible innovation rate

yes but not for the reasons the guy you quoted mentions. Simply put if AMD exits the x86 market, Intel get's chopped up like a cow on the butchers block.

All you guys worrying about amd should worry about what the U.S. govt will do to intel if it has a monopoly. Case and point. At&t had a nice monopoly on the phone markets years and years ago. They had excellent service, phone costs were low, and advancements were happening right and left.

Sombody cries to the govt. "At&t has a monopoly and we can't enter the market"

At&t gets chopped up. Phone service goes down the tube, customer service goes down the tube, and phone costs tripled.

Years later we now all pay hundreds a month for our mobile phone bills because some asshat in the U.S. govt thought their monopoly was bad. They created a dark age of phone advancement and service by breaking up a monopoly.

That's exactly what will happen to intel if amd leaves pc market.



That said. AMD isn't leaving the pc market. They're merely focusing more on mobile (ie laptops, tablets, phones) and less on desktops/workstations/servers. Looking at the market it makes sense to shift to mobile. This is especially true with the all on one chip apu style that seems to be decently successful for amd.

 

[cadaveca]

@cadaveca

So Intel own the market because they own the fabs to meet the demand, regardless of what happens? Yeah, I'll go with that.

Yeah, I mean, there is still TONNE of consumer demand, so someone needs to make chips, whatever form they take. Frankly, I see it possible that Intel could produce chips for AMD, once AMD is not producing x86 designs. of course, like I said earlier, AMD needs the small revenue they get from CPU sales to pay their bills, so it's not like they are really gonna stop making CPUs...they simply need to change people's mindsets about what they expect.

I don't agree that more computing power isn't needed though. It's one of those things that's classically "never enough" and there's always an application to soak it all up. Even though it might just be the same thing done 100 times faster, this can still be enough to bring about a paradigm shift. To give you an example, take voice recognition. It's a notoriously difficult thing for a computer to do accurately and with little training, since computers don't have the awareness and the "smarts" that humans do, to implement a proper artificial intelligence. However, the speed of today's processors allow for this functionality to a passable extent.

Another one is weather prediction. It can be pretty accurate up to about three days in advance now and that's simply because of the huge amount of processing power available on today's supercomputers.

Supercomputers, as you kinda hint at, have the power needed for super-heavy compute tasks. The one problem with such infrastructure is that the cost is highly prohibitive. Making such things MORE AFFORDABLE is the real answer to such needs.

AMD can meet that market segmanet, and they already do. It's worth noting that AMD did ship Bulldozer as a server chip first, so there's no question, really, where the priorities are. Marketing simply goofed hardcore with Bulldozer, and that is all. To me, Bulldozer is exciting, contrary to the opinion of most reviewers.

 

[Baam]

When BEASTS get cornered they get 180% more vicious and become super agressive as they are fighting for their life/survival.

When AMD gets cornered, they lay down and prepare to get rick-rolled without a fight.

-------

you could say that AMD has been fighting for a long time - If you can class rolling over as as fighting then yeah, they the best at it.

Bulldozer is not the first monumental fuck up AMD have made.... Remember the days when AMD staff said their new CPU's were 'PHENOM-INAL'?? Then Intel came out with a game changer - the Core 2 Duo and slapped AMD's new phenom around like a cheap worthless whore.

I still remember reading a article in customPC magazine about AMD talking about their phenom and their thoughts on Intels new C2D chips. Aparently, AMD knew about the new C2D chips way before the phenom was due for release but refused to delay it while they tweaked the performance some more.

And the same thing happed with Bulldozer except Bulldozer was a 'victim' of clever marketting. AMD had ample time to come up with a superior CPU since the C2D's, C2Q's and even SB chips as they were out long before AMD's BD. And what happends??? they fail to grasp victory again.

AMD's move does not suprise me. Obviously I want them to carry on competing just like everyone else does but it comes to a point in the road where flogging a horse no longer makes the horse run faster.

Unfortunately AMD's fight left them when Jerry Sanders left.

 

[dir_d]

Updated Article to the one Softpedia released yesterday.
here

 

[Inceptor]

well it just doesnt make any sense. why would they even put BD into production if they knew it was such a fail and they would quit??

I don't think they knew it would be 'such a fail' until after they were pumping out ES and seeing the performance in benchmarks, tweaking the steppings, pumping out more ES. At that point, it was too late, all they could do was delay and hope to fix a few problems. But they had no choice but to release BD eventually, at that point, in order to recoup some of their capital expenditures on R&D.

They fired the old marketing people.
The new CEO comes in a month before BD release and realizes 'heads need to roll' and 'plans need to change', but still has to release BD in order to create some cash flow and recoup expenses.
Voila, hints of restructuring. Re-jigging of roadmaps.
No surprises really.
Had to be done by someone eventually.
So now they've come out and said it officially,
"hey stop hoping for the old days of the original FX processors, we don't give a shit about that anymore"
"we're selling to our core market, and you ain't it Mr/Ms High End Enthusiast"

So much whining, unnecessary garbage, overreaction, trolling, and ego stroking going on; there's a few dozen useless posts in this thread. :shadedshu

 

[erocker]

If we're talking about "the fastest CPU on the market" I don't get it? AMD hasn't competed with Intel on this front for about five years.

 

[Deleted member 24505]

Owned and operated by the government isn't quite the same as a true monopoly as in theory* if it's government owned it's owned by the public and so people can kick up a fuss about it/protest etc etc.

Can't really do that against a business.



* In theory because the government never listens to people


Also as they were government owned they would of been seen as a necessary service I.E they can't over charge for it because people required it. (Governments supposed to provide after all, supposed to distrubute the money we give them in a sensible way and invest in things that are good, again obviously doesn't actually happen lol but it's how it should be)

I'm working for the Royal Mail

 

[Llunker]

What I dont understand is how the AMD engineers find it so damn difficult to make a solid chip that is competitive with Intel's offerings. Especially after all these years.

Because as you have seen with many AMD ex-employees--AMD likes to take shortcuts. And shortcuts in this business means your product will suffer because of them. Thats why...

Some os the best minds in the world have come from AMD and they will tell you straight up that they would still be there if upper management would fix the shortcomings of their company.

Plain and simple--fix it from the top down and you might have a better company

 

[erocker]

According to these people: http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/107133-amd-to-attempt-self-resurrection-but-not-with-arm

Mercury News' report is false. Which makes this news report false as well.

 

[Frick]

AMD not leaving x86 Market.

Among other we have a quote from an AMD employee about the stories that says AMD will abandon x86:

"A new definition of absurdity: interpreting this week's statements from AMD to believe that the company is leaving the x86 market. Get real."

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Blah. That sums up my opinion about the whole situation. Even if AMD stays in the x86 market, they are so far behind that they will never be competitive again. So what does it matter?

 

[erocker]

Even if AMD stays in the x86 market, they are so far behind that they will never be competitive again.

There's more to competition than having the fastest CPU.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

There's more to competition than having the fastest CPU.

Can you name me an area of that competition that Intel isn't handing AMD it's ass in? Besides overclocking and winning fail polls?

 

[erocker]

Can you name me an area of that competition that Intel isn't handing AMD it's ass in? Besides overclocking and winning fail polls?

Intel is making more money on all of their products. AMD still competes with them by selling CPU's. You also don't have to outcompete the competition in order to compete. AMD's current offerings aren't attractive to people like us on tech forums. It doesn't matter we are in the minority. OEM's, prebuilts, etc. are all using more AMD chips than ever before.

 

[OneCool]

Cant blame AMD if this move happens.They have to go where the money is at. Tablets,phones,TVs etc.

It wont stop me from wanting a big desktop pc for doing REAL work on.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Intel is making more money on all of their products. AMD still competes with them by selling CPU's. You also don't have to outcompete the competition in order to compete. AMD's current offerings aren't attractive to people like us on tech forums. It doesn't matter we are in the minority. OEM's, prebuilts, etc. are all using more AMD chips than ever before.

True, but I'm a selfish fucker. I want them to compete in the areas that matter to me.

 

[dorsetknob]

Anyone considered that the future market is not x86 32bit (its dead apart from legacy stuff)
64bit Processing is now and 128bit or more is the future
Chips that handle 128 bit or higher processing on multiple cores are no doubt in development ( with or without onboard gpu) and as such will be as far in advance of current 32bit chips as the x86 is over the ancient 8bit processors

"" Progress marches on (in the developers fabs ) and SKYNET grows nearer to reality""

 

[Temujin]

Hmm, AMD couldn't improve upon the integrated memory architecture (which conveniently showed up out of the blue)? Couldn't improve inter-core and controller efficiencies? Without these basic concepts, the large FX-8150 is nothing more than a larger 965BE. If AMD puts more effort in to revising Bulldozer's efficiency, it would perform quite a bit better. (i.e. Poor memory efficiency at 1866MHz).

There's money in processors. It is AMD's fault it went this badly. Cutting ties and running off to the waves of money created by mobile devices is the mother of all epic fails. In fact, I would argue that band wagon companies, while cleverly greedy, are their own worst enemies. It's band wagon thinking and planning that all be ensures their existence is limited.

I noticed a comment on whether or not power consumption was important. It is more important to enterprise than it is to consumers. Consumers would quickly accept a small 10 watt increase just to get the performance.

 

[ensabrenoir]

Bd= delorean. I applaud amd for not trying to be intel and moving in the. Dsirection they've choosen.