• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD quits the high-end CPU market

i have a six core bulldoze for about 2 days and not matter what i did clock wise it would not run over 3hgz at max, at that point i got intel..... i have always had amd in the past and the bulldoze fail was the last good bye for me
 
Dave0w said:
i have a six core bulldoze for about 2 days and not matter what i did clock wise it would not run over 3hgz at max, at that point i got intel..... i have always had amd in the past and the bulldoze fail was the last good bye for me
Click to expand...

Aren't all the 6 core bulldozers faster than 3ghz at stock?
 
Do we really need another one of these ******** threads? Nowhere in anything that AMD has said or suggested even hints at a withdrawal.

If anything, they've been continually reiterating that they intend to speed up high end refreshes (ideally with a 9-12 month cycle) ... Piledriver will debut less than 9 months after Bulldozer did. Steamroller, though strangely absent from the 2013 slides this time, is intended to launch 9-12 months after Piledriver, same again for Excavator.
 
mmj_uk said:
Indeed, if each Bulldozer core was about 25%-50% faster with the same 1ghz+ overclocking headroom it would be a very popular chip, even if there were only 6 cores in total.
Click to expand...

You do realise that a chip this fast would massacre Intel's $1000 SKUs in most workloads, right?

If it was that fast, it sure as hell wouldn't be much cheaper than the 3930K.
 
I think some of you need to take a step back and look around a bit. Why do we even need super power desktop CPU's any more? The market for these types of chips is niche and for 99% of users a 5 year old C2D/C2Q chips still offer more then enough performance. Just read the sigs on this page, 2 people are still using C2Q chips, 4 people have 1st gen Core i5's and I'm using a Q6700 and this is meant to be an enthusiasts forum, I might get an Ivy Bridge CPU but that's only because my current system is being converted to a high end HTPC and not because it's no good, we simply don't require high end general purpose CPU's any more and the only demand there is being focused towards video cards.

Desktops will make a come back at some point, IMO the biggest dampener effecting desktop CPU demand is just how far behind software is in comparison to hardware. Once software catches up and consumers demand faster (maybe 3D printers for the home?) and better CPU's things will go full circle.
 
Last edited:
pmc25 said:
Do we really need another one of these ******** threads? Nowhere in anything that AMD has said or suggested even hints at a withdrawal.

If anything, they've been continually reiterating that they intend to speed up high end refreshes (ideally with a 9-12 month cycle) ... Piledriver will debut less than 9 months after Bulldozer did. Steamroller, though strangely absent from the 2013 slides this time, is intended to launch 9-12 months after Piledriver, same again for Excavator.
Click to expand...


Meh, the fact that Intel is focusing entirely, and spending billions on, and creating an entire new market, and going after sub 35W chips for Ultrabooks seems beyond people.

Intel have spent more and talked more about APU's and sub 35W chips than AMD has, officially, publically for over a year, AMD say it a little bit, twice and AMD are out of the high end while Intel....... nothing.

People see whatever they want to, same with bulldozer.

The fact that Bulldozer frequently beats a 2500k is beyond some people, the fact that it beats the 2600k in quite a few things and beats the 990x and comes fairly close to a Ivybridge hex core in some things seems beyond some people.

This is an entirely new architecture that should realistically have a LOT of room for improvement as any first outing in architecture does. People also seem absolutely blind this is a base of an architecture to last 5+ years again and it was entirely built with APU's in mind.


People also seem completely oblivious that a range of benchmarks that AMD is behind in windows 7 by 20% ish at stock, matchs and beats 2600k EASILY in the same benchmarks compiled on Linux.

It's the same situation to a degree, with the 7970. Games are compiled and optimised for AMD hardware, but most of those current paths are optimised for VLIW 5 and to a lesser degree VLIW 4, and basically non for GCN. AMD found Battlefield 3 ran faster when forced to the Nvidia optimised path(fairly sure it was BF3).

In the same way Intel has a massive monopoly in Windows 7 and a MASSIVE advantage in compiler's being tuned perfectly for Intel performance and a crapload of software simply not being remotely optimised for Bulldozer yet. Hence an open source OS with a benchmark compiled properly gained a huge amount of performance.
 
as everyone knocking bulldozzer chip at moment i have the 8 core one clocked at at 4.5 had it running at a 5.0 stable but had to drop memorry speeds off i,i conna fault it ive owened i7, i5 systems and as a compare to everyday computer use and gaming i conna tell the diffence,if anything this amd pc seams to be faster, i dont care what the benchmarks say about the chip its realy good value for the cash its cost to build this pc everything amd based is cheaper last year it probley cost me to build and i7 system about 2k all in all with this bulldozzer got the same sort of spec pc for about 1k, granted at moment a lot of pc parts are pennies eg mem,but if amd do stop making chips i feal same as most peps on here intel prices will go sky high and there will be no controll over it.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Meh, the fact that Intel is focusing entirely, and spending billions on, and creating an entire new market, and going after sub 35W chips for Ultrabooks seems beyond people.

Intel have spent more and talked more about APU's and sub 35W chips than AMD has, officially, publically for over a year, AMD say it a little bit, twice and AMD are out of the high end while Intel....... nothing.

People see whatever they want to, same with bulldozer.

The fact that Bulldozer frequently beats a 2500k is beyond some people, the fact that it beats the 2600k in quite a few things and beats the 990x and comes fairly close to a Ivybridge hex core in some things seems beyond some people.

This is an entirely new architecture that should realistically have a LOT of room for improvement as any first outing in architecture does. People also seem absolutely blind this is a base of an architecture to last 5+ years again and it was entirely built with APU's in mind.


People also seem completely oblivious that a range of benchmarks that AMD is behind in windows 7 by 20% ish at stock, matchs and beats 2600k EASILY in the same benchmarks compiled on Linux.

It's the same situation to a degree, with the 7970. Games are compiled and optimised for AMD hardware, but most of those current paths are optimised for VLIW 5 and to a lesser degree VLIW 4, and basically non for GCN. AMD found Battlefield 3 ran faster when forced to the Nvidia optimised path(fairly sure it was BF3).

In the same way Intel has a massive monopoly in Windows 7 and a MASSIVE advantage in compiler's being tuned perfectly for Intel performance and a crapload of software simply not being remotely optimised for Bulldozer yet. Hence an open source OS with a benchmark compiled properly gained a huge amount of performance.
Click to expand...


Sometimes I really wonder wtf are you smoking
 
Alkalinepro5 said:
But when it comes to best bang for buck they have certainly been well in the game with the Phenom II, which has sold very well for a lot of us gamers!
Click to expand...

+1

When i was looking to do my build last year, it was on a budget and guess what i've got? A very workable PC which games well. Once my bonus comes in this year the only thing i'm upgrading is my GPU!
 
f00f1ght0r said:
^ this.

Isn't there some major issues with holding the monopoly on products like these? Didn't Microsoft get sued to bits for taking advantage of the market?
Click to expand...

If you're one of basically two companies producing a particular product and the other company stops producing that product, leaving you as the sole company in that field, then while you are a monopoly, it's not of your own doing, it's because the other company pulled out.
 
f00f1ght0r said:
^ this.

Isn't there some major issues with holding the monopoly on products like these? Didn't Microsoft get sued to bits for taking advantage of the market?
Click to expand...

If it is what I am thinking then that was to do with the Internet Explorer thing was it not?

In which case yes, they were given a bit of a slap on the wrists and hence now when you have a new machine you get the Web Browser chooser thingamajig.

If it was something completely different then I don't know :o.

With regards to the OP, as has been said AMD have been most prolific in recent years for providing very good mid-range CPUs, so seeing this article doesn't really surprise me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom