AMD: You'll be pleasantly surprised

I am glad to here this but i have a question, So this wont be a 5870? So that means the high end model doesn't come out till gt300?

Hahah I can't see me being signatured, as I am nowhere near A-List Xtreme Forums celebrity to be signatured on here....but what we all need to realise is that all the ATi and nVidia hype is taking the attention away from the Blue Giant.... beware those who awake the sleeping Giant, as I hear that Larrabee is going to bring something different to the table...

nVidia WILL provide the fastest SINGLE GPU solution, however I can see ATi having the fastest MULTI GPU solution (however as we all know MultiGPU = praying to the driver Gods and serving penance with Microstutter..)
John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnZS

Back on topic, nVidia will have the performance crown for DirectX11, however ATi MIGHT be first out the door with DirectX11 products, as I sense nVidia will follow in November, yet ATi will lead the way in Late September.

(Anyone who thinks nVidia will not have the fastest single GPU solution only has to read about DirectX compute and other computational functions of DirectX11....and then realise that the current crop of nVidia hardware already does this.....and VERY well)

John

---

Sure, Nvidia will probably hold the fastest single-gpu solution once more. By looking at die size (rumors) that should be quite obvious otherwise Nvidia really has failed. But AMD will be performance leader with their X2 and have best bang for buck at most price segments (or at least be the once cashing in with their smaller die strategy).

Exactly, perhaps ATi should (if they really wanted to get the ball rolling), ditch their failing CPU arm and concentrate solely on Graphics Cards. The HD48xx series are fantastic GPU's... especially for the price, I am not too impressed with the HD4890 though as in the UK it is more expensive than a HD4870X2 (which I might be mistaken is still the fastest card out there? albeit a few games the GTX295 has a slight edge?)
Actually I am slightly wrong, the price of the HD4890 has fallen in the UK quite a bit since I last looked, HD4870X2 = £240 and the HD4890 = £232 for the Atomic Sapphire card and £180 for a standard card. :)
Now... are they going to do a HD4890X2 4GB card?
John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnZS

Exactly, perhaps ATi should (if they really wanted to get the ball rolling), ditch their failing CPU arm and concentrate solely on Graphics Cards. The HD48xx series are fantastic GPU's... especially for the price, I am not too impressed with the HD4890 though as in the UK it is more expensive than a HD4870X2 (which I might be mistaken is still the fastest card out there? albeit a few games the GTX295 has a slight edge?)
John

---

Thank god your not in charge of AMD or they really would be finished and we would all be paying more for CPUs let alone what the prices of enthusiasts CPUs would then cost .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Final8ty

Thank god your not in charge of AMD or they really would be finished and we would all be paying more for CPUs let alone what the prices of enthusiasts CPUs would then cost .

---

Shhhh...you'll blow my cover

Hector

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnZS

Exactly, perhaps ATi should (if they really wanted to get the ball rolling), ditch their failing CPU arm and concentrate solely on Graphics Cards. The HD48xx series are fantastic GPU's... especially for the price, I am not too impressed with the HD4890 though as in the UK it is more expensive than a HD4870X2 (which I might be mistaken is still the fastest card out there? albeit a few games the GTX295 has a slight edge?)
Actually I am slightly wrong, the price of the HD4890 has fallen in the UK quite a bit since I last looked, HD4870X2 = £240 and the HD4890 = £232 for the Atomic Sapphire card and £180 for a standard card. :)
Now... are they going to do a HD4890X2 4GB card?
John

---

Yes, of course.
For the sake of last year's graphics division success, AMD should quit producing an entire x86 platform and scratch their long-term plans of creating CPU+GPU chips (which was the reason they bought ATI in the first place).
This way, Intel may get a 99.9% share of consumer CPUs and we can all live happily ever after with a 3GHz Core i7 for 1000$ each for the next 10 years.


Makes perfect sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marten_larsson

Sure, Nvidia will probably hold the fastest single-gpu solution once more. By looking at die size (rumors) that should be quite obvious otherwise Nvidia really has failed. But AMD will be performance leader with their X2 and have best bang for buck at most price segments (or at least be the once cashing in with their smaller die strategy).

---

Not sure why you think things are going to happen in the exact same way they did last generation. RV770 definitely smacked Nvidia in the face but the surprise factor is gone. The same trick won't work twice. Right now they know/think ATI is going small and fast again. The surprise would be if ATI reverses direction and goes big die again.

Also, while there is a correlation between cost and die size it isn't a linear correlation. There are other variables at play - Nvidia and AMD don't pay TSMC the same price per wafer. So that could explain why Nvidia can afford to counter-slash prices even with larger chips. Still they can't enjoy having to do so. But they pretty much have no choice but to go with a larger die given their GPGPU centric architecture. And this talk of MIMD like functionality is just going to make it worse - unless game engines start to make heavy use of more general computing algorithms where stuff like that matters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ILikeCosmosS

I am glad to here this but i have a question, So this wont be a 5870? So that means the high end model doesn't come out till gt300?

---

Not really, more like AMD is renaming their lineup, supposedly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordEC911

Not really, more like AMD is renaming their lineup, supposedly.

---

maybe they'll skip ahead to a hd9870 :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bill_d

maybe they'll skip ahead to a hd9870 :D

---

Maybe they'll name it Radeon GTX480



Just for the fun of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Not sure why you think things are going to happen in the exact same way they did last generation. RV770 definitely smacked Nvidia in the face but the surprise factor is gone. The same trick won't work twice. Right now they know/think ATI is going small and fast again. The surprise would be if ATI reverses direction and goes big die again.

Also, while there is a correlation between cost and die size it isn't a linear correlation. There are other variables at play - Nvidia and AMD don't pay TSMC the same price per wafer. So that could explain why Nvidia can afford to counter-slash prices even with larger chips. Still they can't enjoy having to do so. But they pretty much have no choice but to go with a larger die given their GPGPU centric architecture. And this talk of MIMD like functionality is just going to make it worse - unless game engines start to make heavy use of more general computing algorithms where stuff like that matters.

---

That would be a bad surprise.

But ATI seems to be on a roll, and I'm expecting the similar situation to occur once more. If both companies enter the next round (e.g. dx11) with no fundamental shift in strategy, what else of an outcome will you predict?

For the record, nvidia will probably still hold the performance crown as well as consumer recognition. But I have a feeling that reviewers are shifting their perspectives from high end to what dominates the value segment, which is reflecting most consumers desire. So I think ATI will come out on top in the end, building on their previous 4xxx success. Of course, they will probably lose due to really insufficient marketing and not pushing enough to position their products (they need to send ads to tvs, magazines, whatever).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Not sure why you think things are going to happen in the exact same way they did last generation. RV770 definitely smacked Nvidia in the face but the surprise factor is gone. The same trick won't work twice. Right now they know/think ATI is going small and fast again. The surprise would be if ATI reverses direction and goes big die again.

Also, while there is a correlation between cost and die size it isn't a linear correlation. There are other variables at play - Nvidia and AMD don't pay TSMC the same price per wafer. So that could explain why Nvidia can afford to counter-slash prices even with larger chips. Still they can't enjoy having to do so. But they pretty much have no choice but to go with a larger die given their GPGPU centric architecture. And this talk of MIMD like functionality is just going to make it worse - unless game engines start to make heavy use of more general computing algorithms where stuff like that matters.

---

Well, for starters it was what they have been touting for the last year or so. Secondly they did great with RV770 and why not continuing a winning concept? AMD is clearly going for bang for buck in CPUs and GPUs and aiming more on mainstream than ultra high end. With GPUs they can reach high end with the X2s but with CPUs that's simply not possible.

Even though the prices on wafers may quite different it's still safe to say that ATI/AMD has the edge in ability to cut costs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cegras

That would be a bad surprise.

---

I wouldn't say that. Why wouldn't we want a bigger RV770? There's nothing inherently good about a small die (note that power consumption of RV770 is pretty much equivalent to the much bigger GT200b).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marten_larsson

Well, for starters it was what they have been touting for the last year or so. Secondly they did great with RV770 and why not continuing a winning concept?

---

Sure I expect them to follow the same strategy as well but AMD doesn't operate in a vacuum. Each company's success is contingent on what the competition is doing. So while RV770 looked like a bang/$ winner vs Nvidia's ridiculous GT200 pricing it won't look that way again unless Nvidia makes the same mistake. That would be hard to do considering AMD is shooting first this round. So unless AMD pulls another R300 and totally knocks it out of the park we shouldn't see the gross mispricing on Nvidia's side that made RV770 look so good at launch.

ATi's strategy to create smaller dies instead of large, monolithic ones seems to be working; as such I see no reason for them to change their strategy.

As for power consumption, their load figures (pulled from a survey of TR and hardwarecanucks) shows that they consume less while providing 'similar' performance. This is due to their tauted increased efficiency due to design.

Quote:

---

The Evergreen card with a dual slot cooling solution is, according to Huddy, neither an entry level nor a high-end product - it is supposed to be part of the product array above 100 USD.

---

Quite ambiguous. Does this mean that it will occupy the same spot as the 4870/4890, I thought that was considered highend, besides the x2? When I first read this line the first thing that popped into my mind was evergreen x1<x2<x4. But after reading it again it could mean anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

I wouldn't say that. Why wouldn't we want a bigger RV770? There's nothing inherently good about a small die (note that power consumption of RV770 is pretty much equivalent to the much bigger GT200b).



Sure I expect them to follow the same strategy as well but AMD doesn't operate in a vacuum. Each company's success is contingent on what the competition is doing. So while RV770 looked like a bang/$ winner vs Nvidia's ridiculous GT200 pricing it won't look that way again unless Nvidia makes the same mistake. That would be hard to do considering AMD is shooting first this round. So unless AMD pulls another R300 and totally knocks it out of the park we shouldn't see the gross mispricing on Nvidia's side that made RV770 look so good at launch.

---

Of course Nvidia won't price their cards as badly as they did with GT200 but what if they have no other choice? They can't keep losing money. AMD have kept the prices on 4*** below those of Nvidia at all times making sure they were the most beneficial bang for buck even though it's been a very close race. Still they've managed to make money meanwhile Nvidia lost $100M wasn't it?

The main key for AMD should still be to win over some OEMs, that's where the cash is. Will be nice to see Q2 results and what impact PhII has.

There is no point to make large chips atm since TSMC 40nm tech process is so screwed, and even for a small chip like RV770 yields are just way too low. On the other hand, CF / SLI scaling for 2 cards is nearly perfect, so making dual GPU cards makes perfect sense to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zalbard

CF / SLI
scaling
perfect

---

... words you should never put in one sentence. :ROTF:

I want to wait for this if this is not rv840(i cant remember the codenames) and its the high end rv870 and not the x2 solution

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Quite ambiguous. Does this mean that it will occupy the same spot as the 4870/4890, I thought that was considered highend, besides the x2? When I first read this line the first thing that popped into my mind was evergreen x1<x2<x4. But after reading it again it could mean anything.

---

My interpretation is that it is meant to replace where the 4850 was introduced.
The different market segments/price points/TDP targets AMD/ATi is trying to hit is, by their definitions;
+$500 enthuiast 250w
$300 performance 150w
$150-$200 mainstream 110w
<$100 value (no TDP defined ~ <80w)
then IGP

My thoughts on a 40nm lineup-
RV830 replaces RV770/RV790 in the under $150 range.
Lower RV870 takes the $200-$250 range.
RV870 takes the $300-$400 range.
RV740 keeps the under $100 while RV810 replaces RV730 in the under $70 range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordEC911

My interpretation is that it is meant to replace where the 4850 was introduced.
The different market segments/price points/TDP targets AMD/ATi is trying to hit is, by their definitions;
+$500 enthuiast 250w
$300 performance 150w
$150-$200 mainstream 110w
<$100 value (no TDP defined ~ <80w)
then IGP

My thoughts on a 40nm lineup-
RV830 replaces RV770/RV790 in the under $150 range.
Lower RV870 takes the $200-$250 range.
RV870 takes the $300-$400 range.
RV740 keeps the under $100 while RV810 replaces RV730 in the under $70 range.

---

is the enthuiast segement the x2?
any thoughts on what is releasing this October 22nd?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnZS

Exactly, perhaps ATi should (if they really wanted to get the ball rolling), ditch their failing CPU arm and concentrate solely on Graphics Cards. The HD48xx series are fantastic GPU's... especially for the price, I am not too impressed with the HD4890 though as in the UK it is more expensive than a HD4870X2 (which I might be mistaken is still the fastest card out there? albeit a few games the GTX295 has a slight edge?)
Actually I am slightly wrong, the price of the HD4890 has fallen in the UK quite a bit since I last looked, HD4870X2 = £240 and the HD4890 = £232 for the Atomic Sapphire card and £180 for a standard card. :)
Now... are they going to do a HD4890X2 4GB card?
John

---

Lol, UK prizes are a bit crazy... here in Spain you can find HD4890 from 180€ (reference models) to 200€ (Saphire Toxic). Asus Atomic is a bit more, but not much... 4870X2 is between 300-350€.

it would be sick if this gave about 4870 performance, and used 1/5th the power to idle, and a little over half the power load, and cost 150$ (sure for dx10.1 it may not be the best perf/dollar, but it will sure kill it in dx11, when we have a way to benchmark it)

im gonna be happy with my 4850 until i see a dx11 game i like, and just get whatever 200$ buys

Isn't the 4870 already < $150?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marten_larsson

Of course Nvidia won't price their cards as badly as they did with GT200 but what if they have no other choice? They can't keep losing money.

---

Sure that can happen if you assume best case for AMD and worst case for Nvidia.

Quote:

---

The main key for AMD should still be to win over some OEMs, that's where the cash is. Will be nice to see Q2 results and what impact PhII has.

---

Yeah it looks like Phenon II is making a run so they can definitely capitalize on that to get AMD GPUs into those systems as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Isn't the 4870 already < $150?

Sure that can happen if you assume best case for AMD and worst case for Nvidia.

Yeah it looks like Phenon II is making a run so they can definitely capitalize on that to get AMD GPUs into those systems as well.

---

Wishful thinking!

Then they need to work a little harder and nothing will be thrown in their laps. Again, Apple is a good barometer of the rest of the market, they just dumped AMD. I'm not sure if you guys think they are Fanboys or not.

Before I get jumped for saying that, all 4 of the computers in my home have ATI video cards:up: Had 5 with ATI cards but sold the old AMD rig.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Wishful thinking!

Then they need to work a little harder and nothing will be thrown in their laps. Again, Apple is a good barometer of the rest of the market, they just dumped AMD. I'm not sure if you guys think they are Fanboys or not.

Before I get jumped for saying that, all 4 of the computers in my home have ATI video cards:up: Had 5 with ATI cards but sold the old AMD rig.

---

Why wouldn't they get some OEMs? The 4000-series are truly great bang for buck and the 780G and 790G/GX are good IGPs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Wishful thinking!

Then they need to work a little harder and nothing will be thrown in their laps. Again, Apple is a good barometer of the rest of the market, they just dumped AMD. I'm not sure if you guys think they are Fanboys or not.

Before I get jumped for saying that, all 4 of the computers in my home have ATI video cards:up: Had 5 with ATI cards but sold the old AMD rig.

---

Apple only seeks max profits.

Why did they shift to samsung audio dsp's in their ipods??

Because samsung chips are lower price

Why did they shift from ATi to Nvidia??

Nvidia offered mobo's for intel processors and gpus this means a full package cost cheaper to apple than ATi+Intel processor and mobo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by prava

Lol, UK prizes are a bit crazy... here in Spain you can find HD4890 from 180€ (reference models) to 200€ (Saphire Toxic). Asus Atomic is a bit more, but not much... 4870X2 is between 300-350€.

---

UK prices are always bad, have you seen the prices for the ASUS 295 4GB version of the GTX 295? (MARS) it's £1030 to £13xx

The Spanish prices you quoted make more sense as the HD4890 card is good but not 4870X2 good ;)
The only thing I do not like about ATi cards at the moment (and this is coming from an intel and nVidia fanboy) is that their coolers are REALLY LOUD!! I was disappointed with the loudness of my GTX 280 OCX cooler, but the HD4890 in a friend's PC IS LOUDER!!!

I just wish HIS and Sapphire put their custom cool quiet coolers on cards throughout their entire range.

Also I think MultiGPU as it stands is a flawed solution, unless it can be more "transparent" and rely less on drivers and developers adding specific support. If I had to pick between SLI and Crossfire I would say that Crossfire scales better and performs better than SLI, but SLI has more developer support :(

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Wishful thinking!

---

I'm not projecting anything into the future. But based on several market analysis reports and stuff like the steam survey AMD has been clawing back CPU marketshare in the last few quarters. Nothing to do with wishing, just facts on the ground.

AuthenticAMD
34.22% 33.84% 33.51% 32.80%

GenuineIntel
65.77% 66.16% 66.48% 67.19%

Yeah not sure why I remembered seeing gains for AMD on steam.... On an optimistic note their mainstream offerings are currently stronger than they've been in a while so hopefully we see an increase in competition going forward.

Quote:

---

AMD: You'll be pleasantly surprised

---

...at how many BMWs our Marketing Guys own for doing absolute nothing :stick:

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

...at how many BMWs our Marketing Guys own for doing absolute nothing :stick:

Perkam

---

QFT..

Well AMD's marketing budget is like $5 so I never understood how people thought they would outdo Intel in marketing (not that they have not made mistakes).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Star_Hunter

Well AMD's marketing budget is like $5 so I never understood how people thought they would outdo Intel in marketing (not that they have not made mistakes).

---

AMD can do a million things with its product line.

Apple keeps the entire industry guessing and it's marketing budget is less than a tenth of Microsoft's.

The key words are: Disruptive Innovation.

What AMD does is: Predictable Innovation :stick:

Perkam

i still remember from when i did sales at compusa, people coming in asking, does it have centrino, as if thats all that maters, cause thats all they knew existed thanks to tv.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

AMD can do a million things with its product line.

Apple keeps the entire industry guessing and it's marketing budget is less than a tenth of Microsoft's.

The key words are: Disruptive Innovation.

What AMD does is: Predictable Innovation :stick:

Perkam

---

I'm gonna give you a 10/10 for this post. AMD's marketing is woeful and that is not down to budget.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

AMD can do a million things with its product line.

Apple keeps the entire industry guessing and it's marketing budget is less than a tenth of Microsoft's.

---

And what is Apple's profit compared to Microsoft's?

Anyway, comparing AMD to Apple is silly.

Apple have the massive advantage in any such misaligned comparison by being able to exploit Industrial Design aspects/advantages and software aspects/innovations.

A much more apt comparison between marketing departments would have been ATI vs Nvidia before ATI was bought by AMD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chad Boga

And what is Apple's profit compared to Microsoft's?

Anyway, comparing AMD to Apple is silly.

Apple have the massive advantage in any such misaligned comparison by being able to exploit Industrial Design aspects/advantages and software aspects/innovations.

A much more apt comparison between marketing departments would have been ATI vs Nvidia before ATI was bought by AMD.

---

You do have a point.

People still walk into stores asking for Radeons by name, irrespective of the specs.

The problem is, Radeon was an entire platform from notebooks to desktop to high end. AMD has diluted its product line so much into Athlon and Phenom and Neo that no one knows what AMD is about anymore.

What's next AMD? Teflon X4 ? :stick:

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Apple keeps the entire industry guessing and it's marketing budget is less than a tenth of Microsoft's.

---

You sure about that? I know that Apple spent something like $486 million to advertise, which is moe than MS spent on Vista advertising

And Apple's business model is very different... it involves advertising to fanatics who are beyond reason!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

You do have a point.

People still walk into stores asking for Radeons by name, irrespective of the specs.

The problem is, Radeon was an entire platform from notebooks to desktop to high end. AMD has diluted its product line so much into Athlon and Phenom and Neo that no one knows what AMD is about anymore.

What's next AMD? Teflon X4 ? :stick:

Perkam

---

lol, teflon :rofl:

I still think AMD should have kept the Athlon name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

What's next AMD? Teflon X4 ? :stick:
Perkam

---

Introducing the new Teflon X4! You can fry eggs on it while you game, and it won't stick! :D

So is AMD prommising that it will have a full hard launch of Evergreen gpus by Q4 2009?

Paper launches do not count in my book :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

You do have a point.

People still walk into stores asking for Radeons by name, irrespective of the specs.

The problem is, Radeon was an entire platform from notebooks to desktop to high end. AMD has diluted its product line so much into Athlon and Phenom and Neo that no one knows what AMD is about anymore.

What's next AMD? Teflon X4 ? :stick:

Perkam

---

hah

apple is very different.. amd is just semiconductor while apple sells some fake bling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LiquidReactor

So is AMD prommising that it will have a full hard launch of Evergreen gpus by Q4 2009?

Paper launches do not count in my book :D

---

yes thats what they said. evergreen is a single gpu. dont expect a full range of cards. the whole "hd 5xxx" series will probably be launched by q4 2010

I wonder if the X2 will come out in q4 2009

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ILikeCosmosS

I wonder if the X4 will come out in q4 2009

---

Fixed. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajaidev

Apple only seeks max profits.

Why did they shift to samsung audio dsp's in their ipods??

Because samsung chips are lower price

Why did they shift from ATi to Nvidia??

Nvidia offered mobo's for intel processors and gpus this means a full package cost cheaper to apple than ATi+Intel processor and mobo.

---

AMD could have done the same for Apple even if they didn't in the general market. That's with Laptops though Hell, I could see Apple paying for AMD's license if that were the case. As we know, the Nehalem Desktops and Workstations use Intel boards last time I checked. When the 32 nm Arrandale processors ship, they out as far as a chip is concerned. Good news though, one of my Apple Fanatic friends (does work for them) said Apple sales of AMD Video cards very good.

The other stuff is true but so what?

I really hope AMD surprises us :D The HD-4870 was a great card. It even took over place #1 from the 6800 GT as the graphic card I liked the most.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

AMD could have done the same for Apple even if they didn't in the general market.

---

That would mean Apple need to use AMD's processors as well. Seeing most of Apple's products use mobile chips this would be a dumb choice. AMD imho is not an option for mobile devices.

Plus I don't think AMD could be as good as a partner as Intel is. Me thinks Intel gives Apple more than one helping hand... Remember the C2Ds with the small package that Apple used for their MacBook Air? (I don't think Intel solely did this for Apple, but it surely shows that Apple has some weight on Intel's decisions.) Do you think AMD would or even could have done something like that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FischOderAal

I really hope AMD surprises us :D The HD-4870 was a great card. It even took over place #1 from the 6800 GT as the graphic card I liked the most.



That would mean Apple need to use AMD's processors as well. Seeing most of Apple's products use mobile chips this would be a dumb choice. AMD imho is not an option for mobile devices.

Plus I don't think AMD could be as good as a partner as Intel is. Me thinks Intel gives Apple more than one helping hand... Remember the C2Ds with the small package that Apple used for their MacBook Air? (I don't think Intel solely did this for Apple, but it surely shows that Apple has some weight on Intel's decisions.) Do you think AMD would or even could have done something like that?

---

Yes, it would be very dumb and that's NOT what I or we were talking about. We were talking about AMD Motherboards with integrated AMD Graphics. Remember, ATI was supplying Intel with both.

Second point. What Really would be dumb, counter productive, bad business and etc.. is for AMD to miss out on shipping AMD platforms that supported Intel Processors if they were asked. So what they lost out on the processors and JUST Intel compat limited AMD platforms for Apple is better than NOTHING or just video cards. NO, I don't think Apple or Intel sees AMD (Processors) as a threat any time soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

I'm not projecting anything into the future. But based on several market analysis reports and stuff like the steam survey AMD has been clawing back CPU marketshare in the last few quarters. Nothing to do with wishing, just facts on the ground.

---

Quote:

---

JohnZS AuthenticAMD
34.22% 33.84% 33.51% 32.80%

GenuineIntel
65.77% 66.16% 66.48% 67.19%

---

Both of these are misleading. If the computer processor market drops from 260 million to 235 million per year, it will hurt High Volume Intel more than very low Volume AMD. A 10% drop for both means AMD gains market share. Do I need to explain why? 10% drop at Intel is over 33% of AMD's inventory.
The economy warps any view of AMD gaining market share. When the markets pick back up, AMD share will drop again.

its a ratio, if amd has 10, and intel has 100, and they both lose 10%, then amd has 9 and intel has 90, its the same ratio. i fail to see how market share changes if both are feeling a decline of the same percent. the only way amd would gain market share, is if one company takes a bigger % hit than the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manicdan

its a ratio, if amd has 10, and intel has 100, and they both lose 10%, then amd has 9 and intel has 90, its the same ratio. i fail to see how market share changes if both are feeling a decline of the same percent. the only way amd would gain market share, is if one company takes a bigger % hit than the other.

---

Yeah I don't get Donnie's math. But he's probably right that the higher margin products that Intel is pushing will suffer more in a downturn where price is king. But it's pure guesswork without actual numbers.

I wonder how much heat dump the next generation of ATI cards will produce? I can already heat my apartment in the winter with a watercooled 4870x2 :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manicdan

its a ratio, if amd has 10, and intel has 100, and they both lose 10%, then amd has 9 and intel has 90, its the same ratio. i fail to see how market share changes if both are feeling a decline of the same percent. the only way amd would gain market share, is if one company takes a bigger % hit than the other.

---

Not quite! But AMD sales haven't fallen 10% I made two different assuptions, not just one. If AMD stays flat for slightly lower and Intel ships lower volume, it looks like AMD is gaining market share when they're still flat to slightly lower. .19 (19%) X 260 processors = 49.4 million. .25 (25%) X 189 = 47.25. Tell me, which market share % you think AMD would rather have?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Yeah I don't get Donnie's math. But he's probably right that the higher margin products that Intel is pushing will suffer more in a downturn where price is king. But it's pure guesswork without actual numbers.

---

You don't get anything you take out of context:rofl::ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Both of these are misleading. If the computer processor market drops from 260 million to 235 million per year, it will hurt High Volume Intel more than very low Volume AMD. A 10% drop for both means AMD gains market share. Do I need to explain why? 10% drop at Intel is over 33% of AMD's inventory.
The economy warps any view of AMD gaining market share. When the markets pick back up, AMD share will drop again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Not quite! But AMD sales haven't fallen 10% I made two different assuptions, not just one. If AMD stays flat for slightly lower and Intel ships lower volume, it looks like AMD is gaining market share when they're still flat to slightly lower.

---

i bolded the part where you contradicted yourself and confused many of us. glad we could clear that up peacefully.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manicdan

i bolded the part where you contradicted yourself and confused many of us. glad we could clear that up peacefully.

---

OK!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

You don't get anything you take out of context:rofl::ROTF:

---

Wow, I didn't know the laws of math were based on context. What new age school did you go to? :ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Wow, I didn't know the laws of math were based on context. What new age school did you go to? :ROTF:

---

But there are a lot of things you don't know, your posts pretty much proves that. Answer the simple question I asked?

Tell me, which market share % you think AMD would rather have?

Intel's profits don't always jive with the Products shiped. 10% fall in products doesn't always mean 10% of Profits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

But there are a lot of things you don't know, your posts pretty much proves that. Answer the simple question I asked?

Tell me, which market share % you think AMD would rather have?

Intel's profits don't always jive with the Products shiped. 10% fall in products doesn't always mean 10% of Profits.

---

Speculating about market share and spamming incomprehensible posts is just pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by halo112358

Speculating about market share and spamming incomprehensible posts is just pointless.

---

Oh geesh!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Tell me, which market share % you think AMD would rather have?

---

No company has control over the total market size so obviously they want the biggest % share possible regardless. So is it really a serious question to ask if a company would prefer a bigger slice of a smaller market especially when those allocations are based on arbitrary assumptions that you made? Just trying to understand the point of your fictitious scenario.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Ok, let's put aside your incomprehensible algebra for a second. No company has control over the total market size so obviously they want the biggest % share possible regardless. So is it really a serious question to ask if a company would prefer a bigger slice of a smaller market especially when those allocations are based on arbitrary assumptions that you made? Just trying to understand the point of your fictitious scenario.....

---

Nice side step:up:

There you go trying to use a word you don't understand.:ROTF: The last time AMD was in the black, meaning they weren't in the hole, is when they only had 15% of the market. No fiction at all. That's not funny math and not incomprehensible except for someone like you. A larger share of a smaller market or due to lower ASP's is why they're in the red, sheesh guys. You're talking about funny math and algebra, you need to learn how to simply add and subtract:rolleyes:

Please, continue to dig a deeper has hole just as AMD is when they're sacrificing profits for market share.:rofl: I'll be pleasantly surprised if they turn a profit:D

Heh, you're amusing. Is it that hard to just get over your little math mistake?

Turning back to your economics theory there - you've taken one empirical data point and extrapolated it into a causation effect. No my friend, just because AMD was making money when they had a smaller market share it doesn't mean that a smaller market share would lead to a return to profitability. Your analysis (if it can be called that) is so naive it's not even funny.

their future chip designs show AMD are aiming to make better profit margins by trying to stick with a simple chip that scales to fit the needs from low power to high performance depending on how many cores they use. not only that, they offer their own IGP to help put them into the fusion market for HTPCs which are becoming ever more popular, next they need to really get into the laptop industry again, as we saw how much that is booming compared to the decline (death, lol) of desktops.

AMD does not need to have the best chip to gain market share. if they can put out the best product from 20$-200$ cpus, they can easily take up 80+% of the marketshare without ever being competitive above 200$, cause as we all know, i7 make up a jokingly 1% of intels sales.

Regardless of market share, AMD has done much better lately then in the recent past. Neither of their product lines (CPU, GPU) may be the absolute fastest. But they have a solid price/performance ratio. They have been interfacing with the enthusiast community better, garnering quite a bit of good will and positive press. And they have been better at keeping a lid on the unrealistic rumors that only serve to let people down. They will need significant architectural changes before they can reclaim the absolute performance crown, but at least they have moved in the right direction on the business side of things.

As for market share, it's kinda pointless to argue about. Even if AMD had the totally superior platform in every respect Intel would still have more market share.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Regardless of market share, AMD has done much better lately then in the recent past. Neither of their product lines (CPU, GPU) may be the absolute fastest. But they have a solid price/performance ratio. They have been interfacing with the enthusiast community better, garnering quite a bit of good will and positive press. And they have been better at keeping a lid on the unrealistic rumors that only serve to let people down. They will need significant architectural changes before they can reclaim the absolute performance crown, but at least they have moved in the right direction on the business side of things.

---

Yeah precisely, AMD is attacking this exactly how they should. Shedding the manufacturing arm was probably a good move as that's one less headache to worry about. Their gross margins aren't that bad but their operating expenses are out of control and then they have the significant interest burden as a result of the ATI acquisition. So they have a ways to go before they're out of the woods.

But IMO the biggest problem facing AMD is that they have absolutely no pricing power. Intel's chips are clocked very conservatively and they still have a significant advantage in manufacturing. So while Phenom II is putting on a good show vs Penryn I fear that will be all for nought once Nehalem makes its way into lower price brackets.

Phenom II is barely scaring intel and hardly making a dent in the market. The proof, intel barely let any price drops go in the duo chip market. The e8400 has been priced the same for the longest time as with much of the duo core market. For the money AMD is better for the dollar in this market, but the intel name is beating AMD to the punch. The scary thing is much of AMD chip cost more to make than intel's, but will always have to sell for a lower price because the AMD name still means junk to the public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by W1zzard

yes thats what they said. evergreen is a single gpu. dont expect a full range of cards. the whole "hd 5xxx" series will probably be launched by q4 2010

---

Hoping to see the "value" high-end come out first... I want an upgrade from my GTX 280 already! Hoping nVidia has a top-end card at least if ATI won't.

P.S. Is DirectX 11 coming to Vista still or just Windows 7?

DX11 is coming to Vista and Windows 7

Here's Huddy talking a bit more about DX11 and the compute shader in particular for use in post processing effects such as SSAO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqLVmiFO2LA

It's funny that he's gushing over the LDS considering that's what gives Nvidia its edge in the first place (LDS = Shared Memory).

Thanks for the video, and the Nvidia trivia. ;)