"some claim that AMD is close to the grave"

Status
Not open for further replies.
They've been saying it for about a decade now. I pay it about as much mind as I do the people saying PC gaming is close to the grave. They have been saying that since the mid 80's. Never understood why not having the majority of the market share means you're dying out.
 
They've been saying it for about a decade now. I pay it about as much mind as I do the people saying PC gaming is close to the grave. They have been saying that since the mid 80's. Never understood why not having the majority of the market share means you're dying out.

ditto
 
Considering the bitcoin craze and how AMD's cards were selling so fast the prices were lopsided for a while, I doubt it.
 
Considering the bitcoin craze and how AMD's cards were selling so fast the prices were lopsided for a while, I doubt it.
That craze actually hurt AMD in the long-run.

1. AMD couldn't produce enough cards to meet demand. They were unable to fully capitalize on the wild buying-spree that was going on.
2. This created a shortage of AMD cards among gamers. A lot of gamers ended up turning to Nvidia cards if they wanted / needed an immediate upgrade. AMD lost mind-share and market-share.
3. When the altcoin craze died down, the used market was flooded with beat-up AMD cards. Prices bottomed out, AMD had trouble selling what remained of that generation's inventory.
4. Consumer perception was impacted by the rash of over-worked and read-to-fail cards on the market that had been put through the wringer of endless mining.

NOTHING about the altcoin craze worked to AMD's favor.
 
I've been pretty much Green Team only for the last decade, and even I find that article far fetched.
 
Why would any smart consumer wish for elimination of competition that causes stagnation and overpricing?

Have run mixed AMD, Intel and Nvidia CPU/GPU and prefer AMD cause it just works. Hoping Surface Pro 4 has an AMD APU built on 14nm Samsung/Glofo option since i5/i7 has been an overheating and throttling disappointment along with subpar iGPU performance.
 
A story like this pops up every year for i dont know how long. Then usually there a flame war about green vs red.
 
AMD needs to hang around and be competitive in the GPU market.
 
Well,

I've been a long time Nvidia customer (not a fan, mind you, I don't care about brands, I buy what works best for me at the time), only occasionally straying across the aisle to ATI/AMD gpu's


If this article is true, (and I doubt it is) it would be unfortunate.

AMD is making some of its best products yet. The fact that the R9 285 (and hopefully next gen cards) even support PLP now with the Omega driver has me ready to make my next upgrade an AMD card (probably early next year when the new high end cards launch.)

I made a brief foray into AMD with dual crossfired Radeon 6970's in 2011.

I found that single cards were as stable and performed well, just like the GeForce cards I was used to. The drivers lacked some features I had become used to from the GeForce side, but it wasn't a huge deal.

Crossfire - however - was a completely different issue, and a bit of a disaster. It was rare that my two cards worked harmoniously together in the titles I wanted to play.

Then I upgraded to a 7970 which worked great, but it was a single card as above. Then I pulled a stupid and wrecked that card by slipping with a screwdriver during a cooler mod, and my replacement was a Geforce GTX 680, followed by a TITAN in early 2013, which I am still using.


If this rumor is true, it would be very unfortunate, as I keep hearing how much improved crossfire is, and how good these new cards are.

Once the 3xx series of cards launches, I hope to replace my Titan with one, and do some glorious PLP gaming.
 
Considering the bitcoin craze and how AMD's cards were selling so fast the prices were lopsided for a while, I doubt it.
Retailers certainly benefited from that. I'm not sure AMD was able to.

Troll thread by OP and we all know why. Hope this gets closed.
If you want a thread closed, report the thread. If what you want is a place to complain, then what you actually want is for the thread to remain open.

AMD needs to hang around and be competitive in the GPU market.
AMD's pretty competitive in the GPU space (in terms of product), but NVIDIA is a well-entrenched competitor.
 
That craze actually hurt AMD in the long-run.

1. AMD couldn't produce enough cards to meet demand. They were unable to fully capitalize on the wild buying-spree that was going on.
2. This created a shortage of AMD cards among gamers. A lot of gamers ended up turning to Nvidia cards if they wanted / needed an immediate upgrade. AMD lost mind-share and market-share.
3. When the altcoin craze died down, the used market was flooded with beat-up AMD cards. Prices bottomed out, AMD had trouble selling what remained of that generation's inventory.
4. Consumer perception was impacted by the rash of over-worked and read-to-fail cards on the market that had been put through the wringer of endless mining.

NOTHING about the altcoin craze worked to AMD's favor.

Nope, it definitely did not, they had so little supply in the channel and on restock that they didn't really do very well with it, and the other factors you listed such as the traditional gpu market couldn't buy them for gaming realistically, definitely has hurt them in the near term.

As for the article while nvidia is definitely rolling it right now with maxwell 2.0 (huge sales figures and market share gains) I am sure amd has quite a number of years ahead of them still, and time will tell how well they recover from having a few poorer generations and other issues. I sincerely doubt they are anywhere near having the kind of problems the article is hinting at. But as usual some seem to have latched onto people instead of the facts to talk about :p.

The last thing any of us should want as video card and computer enthusiasts is for AMD to become a second fiddle player like happened in the cpu market, it would mean slow progress and higher prices for a very long time if so which is good for no one but nvidia in that case. I know I sure as hell don't want that to happen. I'd like to see amd catch back up in general and start kicking ass so we return to more severe competition like we had fairly recently in the scheme of things.
 
lol nice trolling


I for one will most likely be buying an AMD card when they drop. I haven't had one since the ATi rage days (not the same, I know), so I figure I'm due.
 
lol nice trolling


I for one will most likely be buying an AMD card when they drop. I haven't had one since the ATi rage days (not the same, I know), so I figure I'm due.

What? No, someone posting an article by a major tech site that quotes major financial sites talking about AMD finances is not a troll just because you disagree. Attack the statements and the article, rather than the guy talking about the news, imo :p.
 
The GPU industry needs to follow the CPU industry, and get rid of AMD completely. I'm tired of these price wars and new technologies. What we need is a single manufacturer making small, insignificant gains, with a focus on low power usage and steadily increasing profit margins, price gouging and feature-locking paywalls on the high end.
 
I sure sure as heck hope they stick around, seems like every couple generations they come out with a real winner. 4870, 5870 and 7970 were awesome cards.
 
I'm sure they will be fine, at some point they will come up with something that directly competes in the consumer market. I think if they could get the APU's up to the same processing power as an i3, they would have something worth buying. Everyone in my family I build for would be getting one.

I have loved every recent AMD card I have had, nothing has been too highend but that's not the point.
 
I won't own AMD junk, but I don't want them to go under. Market competition is needed to keep prices down and quality products coming down the pipe. Intel and Nvidia would get fat and lazy if AMD went under.
 
I won't own AMD junk, but I don't want them to go under. Market competition is needed to keep prices down and quality products coming down the pipe. Intel and Nvidia would get fat and lazy if AMD went under.

What makes it "junk" though?
 
if you have a comment about the article, by all means post it, but make a comment about the OP and you can expect to get an infraction.

Its rule # 1 and we take it seriously



(1) Absolutely NO FLAMING, NAME CALLING OR PERSONAL ATTACKS. Mutual respect and civilized conversation is the required norm.
 
Imagine where we'd be if AMD had bought NVIDIA instead of ATI and put Jen-Hsun in charge. We'd probably have a serious competitor to Intel right now.

AMD better hope that OpenGL / SteamOS gaming never takes off because NVIDIA has an even larger lead on them in terms of OpenGL drivers. To the point that some developers are only half-heartedly supporting AMD for OpenGL games.
 
Until they cut R&D funding there's nothing to worry about and they haven't done that yet.
 
One way AMD could get back into the game is, make the pain worse temporarily on AMD (the usual "things are going to get worse before they got better"). For example, for arguments sake, they release 380x, which is the price of a 970 but performance of a 980, fine. But what they could do to make people shift camp is sell their flagship card, 390x, at LESS than 980's MSRP (Say $450). Yes, this till probably cause them to earn less money (or lose more money) than they originally are, but perhaps one of the ways to get back in the game is getting the market share back from nVidia, getting your customers back, then work on keeping them. I am not sure how/what people do when it comes to upgrading GPU's, but most tend to stay in the same camp.

(I personally think nVidia's price of 970 was great, but 980 was bit if a bummer, a $450 980 would have been far more reasonable asking price, considering that the perf diff between 970 and 980 is so small).
 
Until they cut R&D funding there's nothing to worry about and they haven't done that yet.

That's what they said about Sun Microsystems, and this was when they had $4B cash laying around in the bank collecting interest.
 
The GPU industry needs to follow the CPU industry, and get rid of AMD completely. I'm tired of these price wars and new technologies. What we need is a single manufacturer making small, insignificant gains, with a focus on low power usage and steadily increasing profit margins, price gouging and feature-locking paywalls on the high end.

Hahah! I was gonna comment differently, but after rereading your whole post....the sarcasm set in. :rolleyes:
 
They'll be around for a long time to come, but they have to innovate to compete. If there's something that's going to bring down a giant semiconductor like AMD, Intel or nVidia it'll be lack of innovation in growing markets. Right now the mobile market is surging and the way I see it it's not going to stop as most people these days do the majority of their computing on mobile devices. None of the companies that we've all turned to for our powerhouse PCs are leaders in that market. They simply dabble in it. The PC will always have it's place, but if they want real sales they need to create new mobile products (good mobile products) and strike deals with companies like Samsung, LG and even Google to get their chips in those devices. They've all missed the boat.
 
Just bought a $240 R9 290 (after returning a close to $400 GTX 970 Golden Edition with coil whine). Best card I've had in years - very pleased with it. I really don't know why the AMD margin has shrunk - I've had two in the past year (and HD 7850 from Black Friday 2013) and have been impressed with both. Prior to these I've been pretty much an exclusive Nvidia customer since 2006
 
The GPU industry needs to follow the CPU industry, and get rid of AMD completely. I'm tired of these price wars and new technologies. What we need is a single manufacturer making small, insignificant gains, with a focus on low power usage and steadily increasing profit margins, price gouging and feature-locking paywalls on the high end.

This. Completely.

Competition sucks. Why have two video card makers when we can have only one. No time wasted deciding on which card to buy. No flame wars over which card is best. No reason to get mad at your friend for recommending the wrong card. No need to read video card reviews because there will be only one card. Not having to get excited about what the next great card will be. No worries.

Having only one company/card would be a win for everybody.
 
Come on AMD/Ati, we need ya..

I am pretty sure that team green allready have the next card ready 980ti or whatever they might call it..

and without amd, we are going wait until they decide that we can have some more power to play with.

and what the cost for such a product might cost.. Cough *titan*

and i just want a single card solution that is something like 50% quicker than my 970GTX OC'ed, for my Gsync setup - then i think i should be able to play all titles until the PS5/XB Deux arrives.

Or give me a 390x for my eyefinity setup with diffrent screens.. i'll buy them both..
 
I'd rather see someone actually involved in the industry comment if there is actually a problem (I don't think there is). The author of the original article owns stock in nvidia, it says right at the bottom, so I'd imagine he's just slightly biased. And people are never wrong about stock market happenings (sarcasm).

Anything is possible, but I find this idea ridiculous.
 
Why would any smart consumer wish for elimination of competition that causes stagnation and overpricing?

Have run mixed AMD, Intel and Nvidia CPU/GPU and prefer AMD cause it just works. Hoping Surface Pro 4 has an AMD APU built on 14nm Samsung/Glofo option since i5/i7 has been an overheating and throttling disappointment along with subpar iGPU performance.

Really? I run intel/nvidia for the exact same reason.

intel is catching up fast on igpu and AMD has never been good with temps and powerdraw. Not to mention performance. So I don't think you'll ever see AMD on Surface.
 
Really? I run intel/nvidia for the exact same reason.

intel is catching up fast on igpu and AMD has never been good with temps and powerdraw. Not to mention performance. So I don't think you'll ever see AMD on Surface.

W.T.F.? You'll never see Nvidia on Surface either...

Also: "Not to mention performance"? :rolleyes:
 
Personally both video cards manufacturers have their share of problems. I used Nvidia cards back then and they were pretty good except they occasionally crashed my computer playing youtube videos. ATI was more of an experiment for me. I saw a chance to get them for cheap and I jumped on them. I don't regret the purchase but I only wished they did better with their driver updates.

The comment about miners destroying cards is not accurate. Many miners undervolt their cards and essentially run them with a lot more cooling with fans blowing directly on them. I wouldn't hesitate to buy more miner cards just because of this. I'm pretty sure many on [H] already have. Also many of these cards still have their warranties intact.

For cutting edge gaming, I would probably have to go back to Nvidia just for the frequent driver updates.
 
intel is catching up fast on igpu and AMD has never been good with temps and powerdraw. Not to mention performance.

LOL, are you serious? AMD Athlons were FAR better than Pentium4s in both performance and efficiency. You clearly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
 
LOL, are you serious? AMD Athlons were FAR better than Pentium4s in both performance and efficiency. You clearly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

He is referring to the igpu, as he said in his post.

However I'd argue that considering it's been a decade or so since amd had really competitive cpu performance and power, that statement could easily enough apply to both :p.
 
Just bought a $240 R9 290 (after returning a close to $400 GTX 970 Golden Edition with coil whine). Best card I've had in years - very pleased with it. I really don't know why the AMD margin has shrunk - I've had two in the past year (and HD 7850 from Black Friday 2013) and have been impressed with both. Prior to these I've been pretty much an exclusive Nvidia customer since 2006

Wow $400?! I paid 325 at launch for the same card you bought but without the fancy copper material (special gold edition). I've seen it lower before too. While the r9 290 is priced about 25 percent lower it is slower as well even in an oc'd comparison as well as the other characteristics and features that everyone already knows from reviews like noise and power/heat. If you don't need the higher performance it's great you found a cheaper card that fit your needs, but that's like saying I bought a medium french fry with coupon instead of a large at full price, and saved a little. It isn't a valid reason to say the large french fries suck since you didn't buy a good deal. Also given the coil whine defect you're mentioning, it's also like saying your hot medium fry is better also because they gave you cold fries with the large :p.

P. S. coil whine is an issue on basically every model of card from both vendors, there are bad apples, or mixtures of components with power supplies, etc that can cause it too. There isn't any widespread issue further than any other video card launch ever as far as that goes. Your card was likely defective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top