horrorshow
Lakewood Original
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2007
- Messages
- 9,909
I tried to read it but stopped myself....
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
AMD's Computing and Graphics division down 54.2%
- Thread starter PRIME1
- Start date
crusty_juggler
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,241
Something about 10 bears and Amiga DOS.
It honestly seemed more coherent than the "Steam Machines and Linux will save AMD" posts.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2005
- Messages
- 7,367
Well I think most of us wish AMD well and very much hope to see them bounce back next year with 16nm and 8gb hbm2 cards. IF they can hold out that long and produce enough product to meet demand it should be an interesting year for PC enthusiast next year and i for one believe they can and will bounce back to profitability in the next 24 months. Right now is proof that they don't need to be the best to sell products..I just hope they get their factories in gear to produce enough for everyone next year.
Bottom line there's enough people like me that will buy there products, especially 16nm, HBM2 weather there a little bit slower than nvidia or not. people like me don't buy 700 dollar video cards anyway...Id sooner spend that on 4 hookers for the night
Bottom line there's enough people like me that will buy there products, especially 16nm, HBM2 weather there a little bit slower than nvidia or not. people like me don't buy 700 dollar video cards anyway...Id sooner spend that on 4 hookers for the night
You read the facts as they are, what questians do u have abaut it. I been a gamer, i been a pc builder, do i know it all, no i dont, but i do know the facts and economics.
very hard to understand, its not the information its the way its written and the typos.
A correction about CPU marketshare and sales.
AMD did very well when they were in the lead with the Athlon XP to the X2, they gained considerable marketshare and almost evened it with Intel with 50% of the market even without any of the major OEM support AKA Dell, HP two top computer companies that at the time.
So most of your comments don't seem to make much sense, since that point AMD hasn't been competitive, their Phenom processors and Bulldozer just went in the wrong direction then what software went.
A correction about CPU marketshare and sales.
AMD did very well when they were in the lead with the Athlon XP to the X2, they gained considerable marketshare and almost evened it with Intel with 50% of the market even without any of the major OEM support AKA Dell, HP two top computer companies that at the time.
So most of your comments don't seem to make much sense, since that point AMD hasn't been competitive, their Phenom processors and Bulldozer just went in the wrong direction then what software went.
Last edited:
Thats fair, its just a simpel fact, if u go back i posted links to the r&d, am i a fan boy, well maybe, u dont know abaut amiga, u dont know abaut barton and so on, well thats a fact, i dont build pcs anymore, becouse intel is better, i cant build a high end with all amd inside, but im honest enogh to not lie, intel beat amd , right down, and well in 2-5 years amd will loose against nvida, same reason it lost agaisnt intel, well thatsa not all true, intel have better fabs, amd an nvida have the same, but well with 20% markedchare, it no way they can win.
Dayaks
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 10,310
Bottom line there's enough people like me that will buy there products, especially 16nm, HBM2 weather there a little bit slower than nvidia or not. people like me don't buy 700 dollar video cards anyway...Id sooner spend that on 4 hookers for the night
You can get four hookers for a night for $700!? I've been missing out my whole life. Damn.
If AMD told us Fury specs months ago many would have waited, including myself. Now I am concerned that even if there is demand they can't fulfill them and revenue will suffer more.
I have no problem with their GPUs and find them competitive, but GPUs are a very small part of AMD computings revenue, and PC component sales in general are down considerably for everyone.
If anything, the GPUs/consoles are the one successful product that has been trying to prop up the rest.
Seems that the way forward really needs to be a cash infusion from a big player, perhaps with a company like Apple buying them up since they seem to have more cash reserves than they know what to do with. It would make sense, since Apple has tons of cash but ZERO credibility in the gaming sphere, whereas AMD video cards and consoles bring that to the table. The only problem I see with it is that Apple isn't big on selling components, but rather only proprietary fixed solutions with an emphasis on aesthetics over performance, which doesn't quite fit with AMD.
Microsoft might be another way to go, but I think they are too worried about anti-trust lawsuits as it is to expand into the processor/GPU market. After all, if they start designing windows to run better on AMD products, that would certainly get them into legal troubles.
Go back where i posted the grafs of R&D
then u understand
Well english is not my first lauguge, im Norweagian, so appoligesxe for some typos of that, but the fact is the fact.
They have weakness in the GPU market too, when the GPU does fine, AMD's revenue tends to be flat, they can cover and did cover this in 2014 where their GPU's where able to prop up the rest of AMD, but the delay of the 300 series and Fury hurt them by losing too much marketshare because of OEM deals and pos customers.
Microsoft doesn't need to buy AMD because AMD will loose their x86 license which MS will need. Added to this because of Microsoft's virtual monopoly in the PC market because of software, there will be inquires done, just check out what happened with IE.
Np, its understandable, and I just edited my post to reflect some points based on your post.
I think at the most AMD was up at round 35% of the the cpu marked share.
It was the good years.
They got up to mid 40s% when Intel started their kickbacks from OEM's. Then once AMD found out what was going on, and Intel stopped, AMD got close to 50%.
I dont know if u know what amiga was, they was supioror in all ways, but they failed, amd have been neck on neck, somtimes better than Intel, well if u go 90, an half of 20 they had the best cpus, but max up to 35%, they owend glofo, and so on, but well its sad that they also loose against nvida, ecouse it is the same as it was with intel vs amd , when it comed to cpu.
and i will never build a pc with an Intel inside, but that said, i can never build an high end gamer rig as it is today.
crusty_juggler
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,241
I made fun of someone's grammar who, unbeknownst to me, wasn't a native English speaker and now I feel like a douche.
The snark I wrote regarding the Linux crowd believing that Steam Machines will save AMD still stands though.
The snark I wrote regarding the Linux crowd believing that Steam Machines will save AMD still stands though.
They got up to mid 40s% when Intel started their kickbacks from OEM's. Then once AMD found out what was going on, and Intel stopped, AMD got close to 50%.
I rember thouse days, i was an active gamer back then, i builed gamer pcs for others, and i was sure i always could build the best.
Today, u cant build a top notch amd rig,.
well you still can but Intel is not pushing performance much any more, its like 15% every gen which just stinks, but their power consumption has been going down, the CPUs now from them can over clock like crazy. Hopefully Zen will change the landscape a bit.
But u shoud also see what % of the income AMD used to compete, its kinda sick, amd used all of it profits to compite against intel, but they lost, couse well money talks, and back then even if amd performed better, intel had the hardwaresites in their pocket.
Im not saying it is like that now, becouse intel vs amd , is very diffrent nvidia vs amd.
But we can agree and sadly , if nothing magicl change, all we do in 2018, is to discuss, wich intel cpu to buy, wiith, what nvida gpu.
thats the [H] facts
Im not saying it is like that now, becouse intel vs amd , is very diffrent nvidia vs amd.
But we can agree and sadly , if nothing magicl change, all we do in 2018, is to discuss, wich intel cpu to buy, wiith, what nvida gpu.
thats the [H] facts
Oh yeah, I'm an old timer, my first pc was an 8088 and my first graphics accelerator was ATi for it.
Well Amiga, had competition with pc's and Apple, PC's of course Microsoft, pushed everyone out because of the software available to them.
In a budget game rig , its all oki, we can build amd, but if we go high end, sadly , we have to use intel. Well .........today intel is the best cpu for high end gaming, therefore , i will not build a high end gaming rig.
Do i hate Intel, no i dont, but i hate how they got there, bye cheating, do u like someone , that cheat to go to the top. ?
You never experient amiga 500, apel and well apel had some competion, but pc hey, pc was in green black, while amiga had 16 bit color, , but i cant fault u for not remeber that
Back thouse days i , well amiga was a gamers choice, mac was a designers schoce, i earned my living with beeing an acconter, so i had to choose pc, but god amiga was superior to all
And well , i know kyle read forum, so he canconfirm, how they evaluteted cpu. A cpu evulatiantion, set all to minimum, lowest resulution, After that test, conclude .
The fun thing back then evry test showed that intel lost in real gaming.
But hardwaresites, well they are just hardwaresides, we have to read them all to see it.
But money talk.
The fun thing back then evry test showed that intel lost in real gaming.
But hardwaresites, well they are just hardwaresides, we have to read them all to see it.
But money talk.
I remember, but Amiga just didn't have enough software and future games to keep me interested. the 8088 was able to do color after ATi released their graphics accelerators. Think it was 16 bit at the time too but that came out in 1986 I think, I was a kid so don't remember exactly.
I played frogger, paratrooper, many games by bauderbund on the 8088. Test Drive was one of favorites. Also loved some RPG's like Wizardry series, King Quest, Space Quest, Star Flight series, there were many good games for the 8088.
Right now I build my own dev systems and home systems usually use Intel Xeon's I don't skimp on the CPU always get the best CPU's which I can keep for 5+ years. Its a one time investment that lasts a long time.
Show me a working performance driver for a 980... I rest my case
Dayaks
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 10,310
If you look at this article from 2002 they said some tests were GPU bottlenecked and there was not as much of a difference. http://m.hardocp.com/article/2002/04/02/intel_pentium_4_24ghz/3#.Vamwmdm9Kc0
But honestly that article was pretty extensive. It's all there if you look. Anything GPU bottlenecked it didn't matter which CPU. The Athlon won here and there. Like they say, hind sight is 20/20 but I don't see how you could say a review like that is biased. It was a mix of everything, GPU bottleneck, CPU bottleneck, canned benchmarks, ect.
I even thought the conclusion was fair. Brent said they were neck and neck and the AMD held the price advantage. This is just a random article I grabbed from 2002.
Here's one from 2006 where they DID use real world FPS settings (~60fps) on a multitude of games and showed there was no real difference AMD to Intel.
http://www.novausa.com/article/2006/07/14/intel_core_2_gaming_performance/3
If you're going to accuse a review site of being biased (and bought out) at least link a few articles. It was around a month ago people were accusing pcper of being shills for nVidia but they just put out a very positive Fury X scaling review...
Last edited:
Buying ATI killed AMD... It was the dumbest move they ever made trying to combine the two, rather than keeping them separate. Every dollar resource went in to trying to organize ATI, which never happened.
I bought AMD stock in mid 1998-99 and made a killing when the Athlon launched... For several years my ROI was impressive... Once the roadmap to bulldozer was introduced, I cashed in... AMD is going to be a dead company in the not so distant future. All that will remain is a legacy of 64 bit computing and a few GPU enhancements.
Nvidia has failed at competing with ARM and entering embedded devices like phones and tablets... The difference is, they didn't go out and buy a company on the brink of failure that was producing ARM competitors... They did so inhouse and had control of it from day one. AMD bought a company that was already collapsing and that, is why AMD is in its predicament today.
All and all, it's pretty sad... As consumers were going to pay the ultimate price.
I agree buy ATi was a mistake (the debt they took on), but its AMD's CPU's which failed them. The GPU segement actually was doing fine till Q1 2015. And of course the other time the GPU side didn't do so well was the r600 series.
nVidia didn't fail per say they still have the automarket which their ARM processors are doing well in, but they couldn't compete with Qualcomm and the aggressive release cycles. nV going for maximum performance/mm and with thermal restriction takes them too long to make these kind of processors. Tegra was better then its competitors when it came to gaming, just that they were late and OEM's aren't going to wait for them, cell phones have a much smaller time table for upgrading than PC's.
The pc could do color after IBM made the original cga, ega and vga cards.
ati's first graphics card was a register compatibile clone of the few years old at the time plantronics 16 color card (an enhanced cga card made before ega). If you want to add some ati brag, mention the ega wonder. It had tv out and could be enhanced using a feature connector. I know because I still have an ega wonder and had a plantronics graphics card way back when.no, it's not. AMD has never even claimed to have that high of market share share, never had a high percentage of mobile and never had capacity to fill half of the world's demand for desktop plus mobile processors. Link the seekingalpha article if it supports your claim.
(Removed graph of irrelevant US desktop sales.)
I think the server market is the one they never had more then 25% in. Not desktop PC sales.
The seekingalpha article from 2005 is no longer available that image is from that article.
Ok found something
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20051027223811.html
I think you are right its retail us sales.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2000
- Messages
- 9,509
Is that just retail sales of chips? I would have no problem believing that AMD got up to 50% retail for just chips but OEM desktop shipments were never close to 50:50. That's why AMD won their lawsuit against Intel, after all.no that was world wide sales without servers,
Yes, AMD got around 24% in total server share world-wide, but got 50% of the 4S+ server. AMD bragged loudly about that and it's very easy to find on google.
However, AMD never had 50% of the desktop + mobile market world-wide, and claiming so is just wrong.
edit: i'm looking through historical mercury research x86 marketshare numbers and AMD was in the mid-20s percent range during at the beginning to middle of 2006, in both worldwide market share and desktop/mobile. Unsurprisingly, it aligns with what AMD claimed at the time.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,152
Man, that stock is looking like it might be a good buy. Hard to believe that their IP, engineering staff, and gaming console business would be worth less than a few dollars a share...
Reminds me (sort of) when Apple got so weak at one point even MS pitched in a bit to keep them (Apple) afloat. Now look at Apple (not that AMD will repeat that kinds of success... )
Reminds me (sort of) when Apple got so weak at one point even MS pitched in a bit to keep them (Apple) afloat. Now look at Apple (not that AMD will repeat that kinds of success... )
Deacon_Jones1988
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2012
- Messages
- 159
Thats insane. I figured Intel had alot of cash into R&D but not in the billions lol. I knew that AMD was lacking in this department simply by the products that they release. I have been using AMD for about 10 years. But based on their product lineup now and for the past couple years I'm going NV/Intel next build. (which will be next year)
Sun Microsystems looked like a good buy at one time too.
It's obvious that there's been a major brain drain at AMD over the past few years, despite picking up some key high-level people. Or it could have the sort of institutional dysfunction that paralyzes a company from performing. Technology is an industry where you have to move rapidly.
It was the best move... for ATI. At the time ATI financials were troubled to say the least. AMD payed way too much for it. Even worse they did it even though they couldn't afford it. They had to take a huge debt and they still can't recover after all this years.
Rumor at the time indicated nvidia was the first choice, but the deal came off after Jen HSun wanted to be CEO of "AMnviDia".