Intel and Raja to Take on AMD and NVIDIA

If there is anyone that can pull it off. It is ChipZilla. Sell shovels during a gold rush...:D
 
Seems like a distraction to the fact innovation has halted in CPU.
 
WorldExclusive said:
They will try but won't be able to in their higher end Pro products. Macbook's can have an Apple chip, but Macbook Pro's must have Intel inside.
Otherwise, they should stop all computer sales if they take that step.
Click to expand...
Professionals have already given up Apple computers. The common person doesn't care about performance. All they care about is how they look sitting at Starbucks drinking their $10 coffee with their MacBook out.
 
WorldExclusive said:
Intel has AMD on their side now. I think it can morph into Intel taking over AMD GPU division or forming a partnership.
I think Nvidia is a big threat to dominate computing via AI in a short period of time. Intel cannot compete by only making CPUs.
Click to expand...

I think that's the play. They are probably working on something for AI Compute hardware, might as well use it for a GPU launch since the hardware will be similar.

With AI-in-the-Cloud / Compute being a big thing now, they're probably tired of watching nVidia swallow the market with their compute rack appliances, I'm sure they want a piece of that pie.
 
Spidey329 said:
I think that's the play. They are probably working on something for AI Compute hardware, might as well use it for a GPU launch since the hardware will be similar.

With AI-in-the-Cloud / Compute being a big thing now, they've watched nVidia swallow the market with their Compute rack appliances, I'm sure they want a piece of that pie.
Click to expand...
Hadn't thought of that and you're probably right.
 
umeng2002 said:
Intel would be more anti-consumer than nVidia.
Click to expand...
I do not personally think either can be worse than the other, they are both highly competitive as well as highly anti-consumer focused IMHO.

they both seem to want to cut as much features (or pick and choose what gets what feature for no damn reason at all
(not based on product X more features cost less or product Z costs more but fewer features enabled type thing)
so they can to nail out high clock speeds and/or trim back as much quality components as possible
(Vreg, VRM, Thermal Interface or whatever)

and/or give as little as possible while expecting the premium $$$$$ even when they often do not seem as concerned as they should be to give the premium product the prices they want to charge should be being accounted for

and/or doing everything they possibly can to ensure everyone else seems to come out looking like crap when they very much are "objects are worse in the mirror" or however you want to word it.

I suppose my point is just that, yes they are business out to make money after all, but, to use their $$$$$$$$$ to sling mud instead of making the best they possibly can (to show they ARE better) even if it allows others products to "shine" as well as their own, or, at the very least not going out of their way to hamper others just so they can make a quick buck

I have not had a personal want or need for Intel for many years (they do put out some nice parts but the way they give the minimum possible or FORCE upgrades even when previous socket has the capability to use them is stupid)

Ngreedia are useless because they tend to show up AFTER everyone else has done the hard work and pound their chest "look at me, look at me...oh, don't look under the hood nothing to see there" approach and very very often if a problem major or minor is "discovered" they outright do not admit fault, find all the excuses they can to downplay it or "point at the other guy" approach.

--------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------
all IMHO of course, but seriously, AMD does not seem to go out of their way to do the minimum amount possible nor do they "sabotage" others to make themselves look/feel good, rather they tend to give the best they can even if it might mean they do not have a direct gonna make $$$$$$$$ from it or they do not make as much per unit sold because they went that extra mile.

folks seem to forget that AMD basically does it all (cpu-gpu-motherboard etc etc vs Intel which is more or less cpu specifically and Nv which is more or less gpu specifically)
I am quite sure they do not prioritize mining performance as much as people claim they do, rather it is the way they designed their parts that tends to make them SUPERIOR for mining/hashing performance for many many years now.

but when you "owed" many many millions of $$$ for many many years while main competition was still making $$$$$$$$$$$$$
for AMD to even come close to competing (after a decade or so of not according to many folks "opinion")
means Intel/Nv were massive slack asses OR AMD was still competing even when they had no pot to piss in simple as that..

BOOHOO they do not compete with a top end gpu costing many hundreds or thousands of $$ meant to be as fast as can possibly be made, BOOHOO they do not have a crazy over the top give it all she got approach L33T multi socket multi core 200000Ghz behemoth system ^.^
---------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
anyways.....maybe Intel with Raja come out with a pretty decent IGP (more so than they have had over the last decade or so) but there likely is a great deal they cannot do because of patent limitations and such...knowing them, they will do it anyways and go to court, lose the case, and not bother paying it because they make $$$$$$ hand over fist while they tie up those who have less $$$$$$ than they do (like Nv did with 3DFX or Creative buying out Aureal not directly similar court cases and such, but, in both cases the "winner" even though were in the wrong had more $$$$$$ so they got the patents/product dirt cheap)
 
Another thing to wonder is this: How much money is Intel is willing to lose to break into the market?

Suppose Intel’s flagship performs like a GeForce GTX 1260, but Intel would have to sell it at GeForce GTX 1280’s price just to break even.

Would Intel be willing to sell at a loss to gain market share?
 
Last I heard Intel had Billions to burn. Just like NVidia. AMD not so much, but they are working their price to performance niche well.
 
Mega6 said:
Last I heard Intel had Billions to burn. Just like NVidia. AMD not so much, but they are working their price to performance niche well.
Click to expand...

Well, how much money do you think Intel is willing to burn (development, subsidizing, etc.) to gain market share?
 
_mockingbird said:
Well, how much money do you think Intel is willing to burn (development, subsidizing, etc.) to gain market share?
Click to expand...

I would expect a lot if they see this as their best current diversification play.

Also they are going to have lower costs then NV easily. Last I checked NV didn't own their own fabs. So I imagine unless their performance really really sucks hard they won't have to operate at a loss.

Intel quit on the smart phone market, they haven't won a console in awhile, and even if they won the next gen that business isn't coming in any time soon. Analysts got on the ARM server bandwagon a bit early but I still think Intel knows that threat is very real.... Cray going ARM means x86 isn't even safe when it comes to supercomputers. May the computer gods help Intel if Apple does switch to ARM chips that can be demonstrated to destroy x86 at specific things like video editing ect. It could create a snow ball effect, if google picked the same time to do some sort of Super ARM + AI asics or such sillyness in a Chrome+ piggy backing off the Apple PR push. I am sure Intel has thought about that in their worse case scenarios.

I would wager they could burn money for a long time and shareholders would be 100% fine with that... grow or die, shareholders understand that. I think they may see AI as saturated... they pouched most of the brains from AMDs GPU division, and NV seems pretty distracted with their AI / Compute stuff. So Intel likely sees GPU sales as a ripe market right now. Also if they could design a real show stopper in house GPU and figure out how to really tie it into a SOC package they could have some ammo to fight off a big High end ARM push.
 
Last edited:
ChadD said:
I would expect a lot if they see this as their best current diversification play.

Also they are going to have lower costs then NV easily. Last I checked NV didn't own their own fabs. So I imagine unless their performance really really sucks hard they won't have to operate at a loss.

Intel quit on the smart phone market, they haven't won a console in awhile, and even if they won the next gen that business isn't coming in any time soon. Analysts got on the ARM server bandwagon a bit early but I still think Intel knows that threat is very real.... Cray going ARM means x86 isn't even safe when it comes to supercomputers. May the computer gods help Intel if Apple does switch to ARM chips that can be demonstrated to destroy x86 at specific things like video editing ect. It could create a snow ball effect, if google picked the same time to do some sort of Super ARM + AI asics or such sillyness in a Chrome+ piggy backing off the Apple PR push. I am sure Intel has thought about that in their worse case scenarios.

I would wager they could burn money for a long time and shareholders would be 100% fine with that... grow or die, shareholders understand that. I think they may see AI as saturated... they pouched most of the brains from AMDs GPU division, and NV seems pretty distracted with their AI / Compute stuff. So Intel likely sees GPU sales as a ripe market right now. Also if they could design a real show stopper in house GPU and figure out how to really tie it into a SOC package they could have some ammo to fight off a big High end ARM push.
Click to expand...

You forget that Intel is run by bean-counters who decided to use TIM on $1000+ processors so that it can save pennies.

I doubt that a division that is steadily burning a lot of money would last long.
 
lostin3d said:
I have some ambivalence about this. On one hand definitely want more competition in the GPU field. AMD, at the momemt, doesn't seem capable of truly keeping up on the GPU front. On the other, Intel isn't exactly high on my credibility/goto list since their lackluster CPU's over the last 5+ years. Sure a few interesting features here and there but a modern I7 is still only marginally better than SB for gaming,5%-10% at most usually with 1080p or greater. Thanks to your reviews I've also been more impressed with the gains in AMD's CPU's in the last 12-18 months.

I can't help but wonder that beside GPP this also might be influenced by Apple stating their move away from Intel and Intel realizing they need a new market to grow into.
Click to expand...

The next 10+ years will be the age of the GPU. Every industry is going to need gpu processing to achieve their next level ai/deep learning/processing requirements. With the dominance of CPU waning in large business data sectors, it's no fun to sell 1 low power CPU for every dozen GPUs running on it, if you can even keep that market share for your cpu. If intel is going to get into gaming it will be as an aside from their engineering of professional products.

Nvidia is around 150b market value right now with Intel at 250b. On Nvidias current pace they are going to overtake Intel in short order.

Everything large and scalable needs GPUs to run the simulations, and Intel is desperately in need of new growth sectors. They didn't get to the top without making sound decisions for the future. There's a reason the CPU market became so stagnant. It has already reached saturation and the shift was already on towards the GPU parallel processing/scalability.
 
Last edited:
Raja is so full of shit. This is what brought AMD graphics down, and Intel will always carry on being low end offerings, they simply dont strive for anything else, and OEMs won't pay top dollar for "Premium" Integrated Graphics, that are bested by a $80 add in card or chip.
 
I only wonder if Raja will be able to get a grip on this project, or will he let it slip through his fingers.

I have no faith in Raja, he hasn't exactly set the scene on fire proverbially of course.
 
dragonstongue said:
I do not personally think either can be worse than the other, they are both highly competitive as well as highly anti-consumer focused IMHO.

they both seem to want to cut as much features (or pick and choose what gets what feature for no damn reason at all
(not based on product X more features cost less or product Z costs more but fewer features enabled type thing)
so they can to nail out high clock speeds and/or trim back as much quality components as possible
(Vreg, VRM, Thermal Interface or whatever)

and/or give as little as possible while expecting the premium $$$$$ even when they often do not seem as concerned as they should be to give the premium product the prices they want to charge should be being accounted for

and/or doing everything they possibly can to ensure everyone else seems to come out looking like crap when they very much are "objects are worse in the mirror" or however you want to word it.

I suppose my point is just that, yes they are business out to make money after all, but, to use their $$$$$$$$$ to sling mud instead of making the best they possibly can (to show they ARE better) even if it allows others products to "shine" as well as their own, or, at the very least not going out of their way to hamper others just so they can make a quick buck

I have not had a personal want or need for Intel for many years (they do put out some nice parts but the way they give the minimum possible or FORCE upgrades even when previous socket has the capability to use them is stupid)

Ngreedia are useless because they tend to show up AFTER everyone else has done the hard work and pound their chest "look at me, look at me...oh, don't look under the hood nothing to see there" approach and very very often if a problem major or minor is "discovered" they outright do not admit fault, find all the excuses they can to downplay it or "point at the other guy" approach.

--------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------
all IMHO of course, but seriously, AMD does not seem to go out of their way to do the minimum amount possible nor do they "sabotage" others to make themselves look/feel good, rather they tend to give the best they can even if it might mean they do not have a direct gonna make $$$$$$$$ from it or they do not make as much per unit sold because they went that extra mile.

folks seem to forget that AMD basically does it all (cpu-gpu-motherboard etc etc vs Intel which is more or less cpu specifically and Nv which is more or less gpu specifically)
I am quite sure they do not prioritize mining performance as much as people claim they do, rather it is the way they designed their parts that tends to make them SUPERIOR for mining/hashing performance for many many years now.

but when you "owed" many many millions of $$$ for many many years while main competition was still making $$$$$$$$$$$$$
for AMD to even come close to competing (after a decade or so of not according to many folks "opinion")
means Intel/Nv were massive slack asses OR AMD was still competing even when they had no pot to piss in simple as that..

BOOHOO they do not compete with a top end gpu costing many hundreds or thousands of $$ meant to be as fast as can possibly be made, BOOHOO they do not have a crazy over the top give it all she got approach L33T multi socket multi core 200000Ghz behemoth system ^.^
---------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
anyways.....maybe Intel with Raja come out with a pretty decent IGP (more so than they have had over the last decade or so) but there likely is a great deal they cannot do because of patent limitations and such...knowing them, they will do it anyways and go to court, lose the case, and not bother paying it because they make $$$$$$ hand over fist while they tie up those who have less $$$$$$ than they do (like Nv did with 3DFX or Creative buying out Aureal not directly similar court cases and such, but, in both cases the "winner" even though were in the wrong had more $$$$$$ so they got the patents/product dirt cheap)
Click to expand...

lol you have to tell me what the heck are you smoking, it should be a really good thing it distort the reality so amazingly.. lol.. I should test it.
 
thats pretty cool Kyle. Because when it literally comes down to brass tacks, its about the hardware and the enthusiast(s). Pushing personal feelings aside is a great sign of character. Well done sir.

And I'd love to see another competitor throw their hat in the gpu ring. Just like cpus the more the merrier. Better for us, better for costs, better for everyone.
 
ChadD said:
I would expect a lot if they see this as their best current diversification play.

Also they are going to have lower costs then NV easily. Last I checked NV didn't own their own fabs. So I imagine unless their performance really really sucks hard they won't have to operate at a loss.

Intel quit on the smart phone market, they haven't won a console in awhile, and even if they won the next gen that business isn't coming in any time soon. Analysts got on the ARM server bandwagon a bit early but I still think Intel knows that threat is very real.... Cray going ARM means x86 isn't even safe when it comes to supercomputers. May the computer gods help Intel if Apple does switch to ARM chips that can be demonstrated to destroy x86 at specific things like video editing ect. It could create a snow ball effect, if google picked the same time to do some sort of Super ARM + AI asics or such sillyness in a Chrome+ piggy backing off the Apple PR push. I am sure Intel has thought about that in their worse case scenarios.

I would wager they could burn money for a long time and shareholders would be 100% fine with that... grow or die, shareholders understand that. I think they may see AI as saturated... they pouched most of the brains from AMDs GPU division, and NV seems pretty distracted with their AI / Compute stuff. So Intel likely sees GPU sales as a ripe market right now. Also if they could design a real show stopper in house GPU and figure out how to really tie it into a SOC package they could have some ammo to fight off a big High end ARM push.
Click to expand...

Great thoughts, I would just extend them a bit more and say that x86 is done and Intel can see the writing plainly on the wall. Don't forget Microsoft's ARM transition across all segments, they're are doing the same i.e. custom ARM w/ propierary AI accelerators. I expect Microsoft to make the own custom server silicon and save billions.
 
oldmanbal said:
The next 10+ years will be the age of the GPU. Every industry is going to need gpu processing to achieve their next level ai/deep learning/processing requirements. With the dominance of CPU waning in large business data sectors, it's no fun to sell 1 low power CPU for every dozen GPUs running on it, if you can even keep that market share for your cpu. If intel is going to get into gaming it will be as an aside from their engineering of professional products.

Nvidia is around 150b market value right now with Intel at 250b. On Nvidias current pace they are going to overtake Intel in short order.

Everything large and scalable needs GPUs to run the simulations, and Intel is desperately in need of new growth sectors. They didn't get to the top without making sound decisions for the future. There's a reason the CPU market became so stagnant. It has already reached saturation and the shift was already on towards the GPU parallel processing/scalability.
Click to expand...

Speaking of market cap.. AMD has no hope to remain a viable direct competitor to NVIDIA and Intel's GPU's, time to sell RTG to somebody that can properly fund them.
 
Neo_East said:
Speaking of market cap.. AMD has no hope to remain a viable direct competitor to NVIDIA and Intel's GPU's, time to sell RTG to somebody that can properly fund them.
Click to expand...

You would make a great CEO, our Radeon rollout was not perfect, sell. I guess AMD should have given up on CPU as well. Oh wait, they released a competitive CPU called Ryzen. That seems to be going well.

On the contrary, there is more than enough room in the GPU market for more than two companies. Maybe AMD will never be competitive in GPUs again, maybe they will. You just can't count them out yet although most people want to again and again.
 
Intel is focused on reaching the goal of developing their own SoC with the help of AMD (baby steps, Kaby Lake-G). I hope they play nice, share IP and respect each other's markets. Having fully cooperative SoC development brings opportunity to remove limitations (improved communication between cores and GPU, higher bandwidth, lower latencies, less drastic frame rate changes, elimination of stuttering etc) once everything is on a single die. A lot of potential is here.
 
Last edited:
Mega6 said:
You would make a great CEO, our Radeon rollout was not perfect, sell. I guess AMD should have given up on CPU as well. Oh wait, they released a competitive CPU called Ryzen. That seems to be going well.

On the contrary, there is more than enough room in the GPU market for more than two companies. Maybe AMD will never be competitive in GPUs again, maybe they will. You just can't count them out yet although most people want to again and again.
Click to expand...

EPYC not getting any meaningful server wins. Ryzen finding a little success after years of Intel market exploitation. GPU badly behind NVIDIA. ARM rising in Mac, Windows, server, and gaming.

I'm tired of supporting AMD and holding hope for them. Don't see that they are ever going to achieve meaningful market gains again as they are. Time for a rebirth under new ownership/direction.

Don't think there is a point for three players, one strong chip company leveraged another strong chip company. It would just have to stay as the perennial budget option in GPU's.

Better let Apple, Softbank, Tesla or Samsung buy them.
 
Neo_East said:
EPYC not getting any meaningful server wins. Ryzen finding a little success after years of Intel market exploitation. GPU badly behind NVIDIA. ARM rising in Mac, Windows, server, and gaming.

I'm tired of supporting AMD and holding hope for them. Don't see that they are ever going to achieve meaningful market gains again as they are. Time for a rebirth under new ownership/direction.

Don't think there is a point for three players, one strong chip company leveraged another strong chip company. It would just have to stay as the perennial budget option in GPU's.

Better let Apple, Softbank, Tesla or Samsung buy them.
Click to expand...

AMD can easily switch gears to ARM chips if they need to. They have designed a few of them now. In fact they designed the ARM based K12 along side Ryzen and never released it. Their GPUs are not at all behind NVs despite the spin NV pays the press and OEMS for. Vega was a first gen design and the biggest knock you could level against it would be its power use, which considering how much compute work it can do while under volted still isn't that big a deal... its why some segments of the mining market have been snapping them up driving up their street price. A die shrunk Vega is just around the corner and if the miners don't snap them all up as they leave the factory NV should be forced to drop some new product to keep up.

If the ARM architecture continues to gain ground, imo AMD is actually better positioned then Intel to capitalize. AMD can easily build ARM SOC with Vega tech... or more customized compute units. They have already designed a couple of those, giving them a base to build off. Intel doesn't even own enough GPU tech themselves to build a one supplier SOC part. (which is why they are using AMD GPUs in their own current integrated chips after their NV patent licence deal ran out)

For Intel I would argue that building their own GPU as fast as they possibly can is a requirement at this point.
 
Neo_East said:
Speaking of market cap.. AMD has no hope to remain a viable direct competitor to NVIDIA and Intel's GPU's, time to sell RTG to somebody that can properly fund them.
Click to expand...

Well, honestly, if AMD can get their gpu die stacking to market in 2020 at 7nm (+), they will again be a viable player in the gpu revolution. For the meantime, everything is looking good for AMD on all fronts. Aggressive CPU pricing and technology advancements, domination of the mainstream gpu market (sub 300$), and cpu refreshes coming at an accellerated pace, they are making some bold and effective moves right now.
 
I understand, you gave up on them. Don't let me catch you putting any forbidden hardware in your box. :)
 
ChadD said:
AMD can easily switch gears to ARM chips if they need to. They have designed a few of them now. In fact they designed the ARM based K12 along side Ryzen and never released it. Their GPUs are not at all behind NVs despite the spin NV pays the press and OEMS for. Vega was a first gen design and the biggest knock you could level against it would be its power use, which considering how much compute work it can do while under volted still isn't that big a deal... its why some segments of the mining market have been snapping them up driving up their street price. A die shrunk Vega is just around the corner and if the miners don't snap them all up as they leave the factory NV should be forced to drop some new product to keep up.

If the ARM architecture continues to gain ground, imo AMD is actually better positioned then Intel to capitalize. AMD can easily build ARM SOC with Vega tech... or more customized compute units. They have already designed a couple of those, giving them a base to build off. Intel doesn't even own enough GPU tech themselves to build a one supplier SOC part. (which is why they are using AMD GPUs in their own current integrated chips after their NV patent licence deal ran out)

For Intel I would argue that building their own GPU as fast as they possibly can is a requirement at this point.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with AMD ARM chip switch. 100%. This is exactly why I want AMD to be acquired by one of the ARM players, i.e., Apple, Qualcomm, Samsung, or Softbank and be turned into an ARM CPU and GPU building powerhouse. Can you imagine what AMD could do with the proper resources and funding? All it has to do is leave the dying x86 business behind. AMD needs to disrupt itself by going with ARM. K12 was the right idea, but too early. AMD in its current form is not going to achieve anything but an irreversible slide into irrelevance as NVIDIA and Intel get more powerful.

ARM's Austin R&D center is like 20 minutes walking distance from AMD's. It's like fate is sync with the opportunity. They should call their next-gen ARM x86-killer core 'Destiny'.

The next-gen XBOX and PlayStation should be ARM custom SoC's with next-gen AMD GPU tech. That would be absolutely beautiful console engineering.
 
Neo_East said:
Totally agree with AMD ARM chip switch. 100%. This is exactly why I want AMD to be acquired by one of the ARM players, i.e., Apple, Qualcomm, Samsung, or Softbank and be turned into an ARM CPU and GPU building powerhouse. Can you imagine what AMD could do with the proper resources and funding? All it has to do is leave the dying x86 business behind. AMD needs to disrupt itself by going with ARM. K12 was the right idea, but too early. AMD in its current form is not going to achieve anything but an irreversible slide into irrelevance as NVIDIA and Intel get more powerful.

ARM's Austin R&D center is like 20 minutes walking distance from AMD's. It's like fate is sync with the opportunity. They should call their next-gen ARM x86-killer core 'Destiny'.

The next-gen XBOX and PlayStation should be ARM custom SoC's with next-gen AMD GPU tech. That would be absolutely beautiful console engineering.
Click to expand...

An interesting take for sure. I would prefer for AMD to remain independent and simply become the Intel of the ARM world. Apple and Samsung would likely do what they do and treat the AMD-ARM/Vega SOC they produce as value adds for their own brand only. AMD selling their Arm+vega cores for everything from phones to desktops to consoles sounds pretty fantastic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blkt
like this
oldmanbal said:
Well, honestly, if AMD can get their gpu die stacking to market in 2020 at 7nm (+), they will again be a viable player in the gpu revolution. For the meantime, everything is looking good for AMD on all fronts. Aggressive CPU pricing and technology advancements, domination of the mainstream gpu market (sub 300$), and cpu refreshes coming at an accellerated pace, they are making some bold and effective moves right now.
Click to expand...

GPU die-stacking tech sounds like some media invention to pump shares of AMD, which reeks of desperation and futility. AMD's smart market positioning is going to position themselves out of the market as a 3rd rate has been. AMD s going for being K-mart, Compaq, or Ford Taurus as some goal. CPU roadmap 'acceleration' is more desperate make-believe reeking of near panic. Major executives leaving.. All the signs are there of the end.

I'm happy that the signs are there that the old AMD will die soon.
 
Wishfull thinking, What is truly happening at AMD >? Restructuring and more innovation. I mentioned it in this forum that intel will enter GPU market the minute Kuduri left for intel. Some of you guys keep pissing on the VEGA. I think you need to get to know the beast.
It has that not so great and very old type of memory called HBM2 :D The least expensive offering with HBM2 is a Titan V at $3000. Sounds like Huang is shoving old tech down your throats in those wanna be the shiz 1080 Ti's :D
 
Neo_East said:
GPU die-stacking tech sounds like some media invention to pump shares of AMD, which reeks of desperation and futility. AMD's smart market positioning is going to position themselves out of the market as a 3rd rate has been. AMD s going for being K-mart, Compaq, or Ford Taurus as some goal. CPU roadmap 'acceleration' is more desperate make-believe reeking of near panic. Major executives leaving.. All the signs are there of the end.

I'm happy that the signs are there that the old AMD will die soon.
Click to expand...

We're all entitled to opinion :)
 
At some point we have to move to multi GPU on a single board. The same way CPU tech did. I would not be surprised if intel is first with such a design to the gaming market. Who knows maybe it will be AMD. We already have DX12 ready and waiting. ;)
 
AMDs use of Infinity Fabric has been refreshing and innovative - what a Coup!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top