Caporegime
Um, what? That's when they usually happen.
No, but you can bring them to court for abusing their position once they are there.
AMD no longer competing with Intel, goes Mobile
- Thread starter ATIorNvidia
- Start date
Um, what? That's when they usually happen.
No, but you can bring them to court for abusing their position once they are there.
Didn't AMD look at getting into Mobile a few years ago and decided against it? Think the guy who made that decision got sacked...
This is bad news for us. Intel CPUs are great, but we NEED competition. It just seems amazing that AMD can't produce something that competes with Sandybridge. I know CPUs are very complicated, but that's the business of things. Intel's designs can't be that great.
This is bad news for us. Intel CPUs are great, but we NEED competition. It just seems amazing that AMD can't produce something that competes with Sandybridge. I know CPUs are very complicated, but that's the business of things. Intel's designs can't be that great.
Soldato
Good look buying your next processor when its 5* the current price, this is very bad news for consumers!
That point aside, if anything this is a nail in the coffin for desktop PC's as we know it. Soon your desktop will be little more than something the size of your phone with everything being streamed.
All the big corporations are moving in this direction.
Soldato
Such a change in strategy should have been decided a long time ago. Its too late now, AMD don't have the money to invest a the same rate as ARMs partners currently are.
Bye bye AMD
Bye bye AMD
Soldato
I hope not.
I don't want to be paying £0,000's for a CPU & neither will most of us on here either.If Intel do increase prices It'll kill the PC desktop market stone dead & everyone will be switching over to tablets.
Man of Honour
I was never a fan of AMD, but this is the free ticket intel needs to raise prices across the board.
It's a very dark day for enthusiasts. You only have to look at the prices of the new Sandy Bridge-E's to see where we are heading.
And people like this don't realise yet how a monopoly affects the prices.
On the far right other hand though, perhaps this will allow them to invest more in the GPU side, and give nvidia a kick up the jacksy.
It's a very dark day for enthusiasts. You only have to look at the prices of the new Sandy Bridge-E's to see where we are heading.
And people like this don't realise yet how a monopoly affects the prices.
On the far right other hand though, perhaps this will allow them to invest more in the GPU side, and give nvidia a kick up the jacksy.
Last edited:
Soldato
I wonder if this also gonna affect the graphics side of things? Sure do hope not and I can't see it really happening tbh, as their graphics range is doing really well, but.....you never know.
And how in god's name, can anyone complain about AMD cpus being pathetic? They're not as good but a fair bit cheaper, not everyone can affor an i5/ i7 system, and it gave a nice alternative. Now Intel can do what they want.
And how in god's name, can anyone complain about AMD cpus being pathetic? They're not as good but a fair bit cheaper, not everyone can affor an i5/ i7 system, and it gave a nice alternative. Now Intel can do what they want.
Last edited:
Soldato
I was quite hopeful for their APUs. I hope they arent throwing in the towel entirely.
They will be when Intels fingering you in your eye and your wallet for every nickel and dime they can get.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Such uneducated drivel in this thread, firstly its a god damned softpedia thread.......... I've had a go at people posting links to theres because EVERYTHING they've published and everything linked for months has been utterly incorrect.
Secondly, focus more on the mobile market........... does not equal leaving the PC market, anyone who thinks a company with several billion a year in turnover in pc sales will leave it overnight for mobile, is deluded.
Not least because Laptops "are" mobile, and laptop sales have over the past 5-6 years grown to make desktop sales not a significant part already.
Llano is a successful mobile part, Trinity will be faster, have lower power options and higher power options on top of being faster overall anyway, that will be another successful mobile chip. Bobcat has been a huge volume and very successful mobile chip.
They will likely want to push out a bobcat that can handle tablet level power usage, why wouldn't they.
Expansion is the key to success for many many businesses.
As for Pottsey, another ridiculous statement, AMD compete FAR better with Intel on mobile, low power and APU performance, all key for the sector AMD want to focus on, and compete less well at the extreme high end...... so they want to fight in an area they are stronger in, shocking.
Bhavv, same old moronic drivel.
Question why is the 2500k £155....... answer, because the X6 was £150. AMD chips are awful........ then why can a Bulldozer beat a 2500k, why can it beat a 2600k, do you know how good those two chips are, they are the product of the best cpu producer on the planet, and Bulldozer can beat both on occasion, all the time, no, so what?
As always, Bulldozer was a server chip, its got server level huge cache, power consumption and design, which is why its size, power usage and cache are FAR more comparable to SB-E than SB, which was obvious to anyone with half a brain.
The only people who thought an 8 core Bulldozer was going to beat a 8 thread 2600k by massive margins, were the people who believe Raven when he said a 6970 would smash a 580gtx. Believe the impossible, get disappointed, but be disappointed with the right person, yourself, not the company or chip that couldn't match the impossible expectations of a few idiots.
Secondly, focus more on the mobile market........... does not equal leaving the PC market, anyone who thinks a company with several billion a year in turnover in pc sales will leave it overnight for mobile, is deluded.
Not least because Laptops "are" mobile, and laptop sales have over the past 5-6 years grown to make desktop sales not a significant part already.
Llano is a successful mobile part, Trinity will be faster, have lower power options and higher power options on top of being faster overall anyway, that will be another successful mobile chip. Bobcat has been a huge volume and very successful mobile chip.
They will likely want to push out a bobcat that can handle tablet level power usage, why wouldn't they.
Expansion is the key to success for many many businesses.
As for Pottsey, another ridiculous statement, AMD compete FAR better with Intel on mobile, low power and APU performance, all key for the sector AMD want to focus on, and compete less well at the extreme high end...... so they want to fight in an area they are stronger in, shocking.
Bhavv, same old moronic drivel.
Question why is the 2500k £155....... answer, because the X6 was £150. AMD chips are awful........ then why can a Bulldozer beat a 2500k, why can it beat a 2600k, do you know how good those two chips are, they are the product of the best cpu producer on the planet, and Bulldozer can beat both on occasion, all the time, no, so what?
As always, Bulldozer was a server chip, its got server level huge cache, power consumption and design, which is why its size, power usage and cache are FAR more comparable to SB-E than SB, which was obvious to anyone with half a brain.
The only people who thought an 8 core Bulldozer was going to beat a 8 thread 2600k by massive margins, were the people who believe Raven when he said a 6970 would smash a 580gtx. Believe the impossible, get disappointed, but be disappointed with the right person, yourself, not the company or chip that couldn't match the impossible expectations of a few idiots.
Man of Honour
If AMD does pull out of the performance market completely, I'm sure US commerce and competition regulations would take care of the whole "they can charge whatever they want" thing. The US has a ** please fully star out swearies*** legal system, but I don't think they take kindly to monopolies.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 4,120
Finally a sensible post.
I think you mistook my name for yours. Another ridiculous statement from you again. Sometimes I wonder if you even read posts or just assume something’s written and go off on a tangent.
Also I would like to see some evidence that outside the laptop market AMD compete against Intel in the mobile market. As far as I can see AMD are behind Intel in most mobile markets and both are way behind ARM.
Last edited:
Soldato
Pretty pathetic comment, again. Do you undertand the basics of what is known as competition? I can tell you now if this is true, you will be missing them when Intel have absolutely zero competition and they can choose their own price point. No competition means inflated prices and no competition to improve.
Fanboys of PC components need to go outside more and get a life.
Caporegime
+1
You do realise that all of the marketshare gains AMD has actually achieved this year are in the mobile market??
Being behind in sales is irrelevant since Intel simply can produce more CPUs than AMD can get from its partners. Even during the time of the Athlon 64 AMD struggled to keep up with producing enough CPUs. Intel OTH does not usually have that problem. However,AMD has basically sold out production of its newer mobile CPU lines and this is in contrast to its desktop marketshare which has declined IIRC. As long as AMD can carve out a niche for itself and can sell all what it makes with a decent profit margin the company will fine.
I can see future desktop lines as being higher clocked derivatives of their mobile CPUs. You can see this with the Zacate and Llano CPUs.
Last edited:
Soldato
Well if they can make an ultra low power mobile chip that is comparable to an 'average' x86 CPU then it could turn out to be a very good move. Otherwise, definite mistake.
Soldato
Tell that to Microsoft.
I wouldn't read too much into this, just wait and see what happens. As drunkenmaster said, AMD are hardly 'likely' to pull out of an industry in which they turn over billions each year. Sounds to me like they just want to refocus a little bit in areas they are stronger. I would also be very surprised if AMD's server chip market went anywhere, this has been very lucrative for AMD for a long time now and is really what the Bulldozer was/is aimed at after all.
What it 'might' mean though is that high end desktop cpu's go up a bit in price and the R&D cycle slows a touch in the next 4-5 years or so ...if AMD reduce their focus in this area, but Intel already have this segment tied up pretty well anyway. Fact is though all Intel's cheaper cpu's use technology trickled down and cut down a bit from the high end chips, so to keep pace there they will need to keep innovating. Just look at how fast the I3's are now, even the Pentiums using the SB architecture yet AMD still sell plenty in those sub 100 pound price brackets.
What it 'might' mean though is that high end desktop cpu's go up a bit in price and the R&D cycle slows a touch in the next 4-5 years or so ...if AMD reduce their focus in this area, but Intel already have this segment tied up pretty well anyway. Fact is though all Intel's cheaper cpu's use technology trickled down and cut down a bit from the high end chips, so to keep pace there they will need to keep innovating. Just look at how fast the I3's are now, even the Pentiums using the SB architecture yet AMD still sell plenty in those sub 100 pound price brackets.
Soldato
Wish they mentioned this pre bulldozer so none of us wasted our time waiting.