Then what are they?
-
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.
Intel to shut down renegade Skylake overclocking with microcode update
- Thread starter Cenuij
- Start date
Then what are they?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,371
- Location
- Dormanstown.
The big one is availability.
Lets just look at buying an AMD tablet that is comparable to my Surface 3 Pro? Oh wait.
Lets try going for an AMD device that's comparable to my Brothers Asus Tablet/Netbook.
Oh wait.
Lets try buying an AMD device that's comparable to my Ultrabook.
Oh wait.
For good measure, I'll throw in AMD's self defeating projects.
We all remember Quantum don't we? Lovely concept wasn't it. Where's the follow up? Nowhere.
AMD have to find a way to get OEM's to use their chips instead of Intel, or ARM as the case maybe and even Intel are having a very hard time achieving that.
But i'm talking about Intel's Custom Desktop share, no one in this room gives a #### about Laptops and Tablets, what they care about is some of the noises Intel are making about their performance vs power consumption strategy, looking people out of overclocking if they don't pay Intel's premium K price.
How can AMD effect that and what would it take.
What would it take to get those who like to put the blame on AMD for Intel's pricing structure and lack of evolution to actually lay the blame where it is, with Intel.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,371
- Location
- Dormanstown.
AMD could release products that people want for starters.
Bulldozer was crap, and while PD's an improvement on that, it wasn't good enough for the majority of people then, and it certainly isn't 40 months on.
EDIT : If Intel did progress faster than they were, and went out of their way to make AMD irrelevant. Wouldn't Intel have a monopoly and come under scrutiny etc? That's how I've always viewed it.
Last edited:
why is that? you just said IPC has nothing to do with it, so what then? why was Bulldozer crap?
Do you even know yourself or are you just on the rhetoric wagon?
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,371
- Location
- Dormanstown.
No I didn't? I said that IPC isn't the cause of their overall marketshare problems and then gave reasons. You're just stipulating things afterwards, such as not caring about overall marketshare.
And BD was crap because of its IPC/Scaling problems/Software at that time/Heat/Price/Power usage/Platform. IPC wasn't the sole reason Bulldozer sucked, but it was a massive part of it performance wise. But IPC isn't AMD's overall problem marketshare wise etc (Which is why they're sucking at GPU's too)
EDIT : Oh. It's turning into another "bash my head against the wall" sessions.
So your saying performance is a problem but its not AMD's problem.
Its what you think is AMD's problem that i'm trying to drill out of you.
"Which is why they're sucking at GPU's too"
Which is what?
I'll tell you what it is, its brand perception.... which is exactly what i'm talking about and you know it, thats why trying to get it out of you is like pulling teeth.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,371
- Location
- Dormanstown.
I don't..... What? How you managed to get to that conclusion is beyond me.
I'm going to go back on Borderlands, you obviously have a comprehension problem. It's like I'm saying one thing, and you're reading something completely different.
And I never denied anything about brand perception lol, infact I even made a comment about it, ergo Quantum. I bet that did wonders for AMD's brand perception. But overall I wasn't talking about their brand perception, apparently you were though.
Last edited:
I'll tell you what it is, its brand perception.... thats what your talking about, its also why you use their GPU's as an example.
which is exactly what i'm talking about and you know it, thats why trying to get it out of you is like pulling teeth.
A lot of people will buy Intel because they are Intel, i don't need a crystal ball to know that.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,371
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Fury X's failures weren't down to brand perception. Except making the expectation of it overclocking well.
But I'm not going to deny AMD have brand perception problems, but that's a self made problem, it also never stopped them doing well with the 4XXX and 5XXX. True enthusiasts have less care about brand perspective.
AMD do have a self made problem but its not entirely that.....
I had Vishera for two years, it is not perfect but its problems are blown way out of proportion, even by a lot of reviewers who it seems to me like to show it at its worst with Intel at its best.
The fact is Vishera is an entirely different CPU to Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, Haswell ...< they are all the same.
Each game, even different parts of the same game treat these CPU's very differently, sometimes the i5 is faster, sometimes 'believe it or not' the FX-8### is faster (this at the same clock rates)
The only time the i5 and the i3 for that matter is consistently faster is in DX9 titles.
On the subject of the i3, its often recommended over the FX-8### while the latter is more often than not 'in reality' a skip load better in modern games, occasionally (when there is nothing going on in the game) the i3 makes the FX-8### look worse, add a bit of physics or streamed shading ecte.... into the same game just by actually doing something the FX-8#### deals with it with ease while the i3 is ground down broking and puking its guts up trying to keep up and failing miserably.
I switched from an FX-8### to what you see in my signature, after 2 years, you know what i found, the Intel runs cooler, the performance in 90% of the things i do is very similar, including gaming, sometimes the i5 is a bit faster, sometimes the FX-8### is.
AMD's biggest ever mistake in CPU's is wanting to be different.
They realised that now, so in Zen we will get an Intel clone, nice.... its a good day to be a custom PC enthusiast.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,929
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
FWIW I remember them 2 years ago banging my head against that same brick wall. Some guys on here never change even though they pertain to be a neutral, but the great exposure here is the dig at the graphics card clearly indicating a gripe with the brand that is totally off topic to the OP.
I just encoded a screencast on my useless vishera that is 2+ years old. The reality is its actually not useless and you are correct that it would eat the entry intel offerings convicingly. Feels like 2013 all over again!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,485
- Location
- Planet Earth
You can't blame people,its the way reviews are done. I realised this when in a TH review,in one of the audio encoding benchmarks from CD,they by mistake put in one of the graphs,"encoded from RAMDisk" or something to that effect. I had thought until then they had used an optical drive,but they hadn't since it was the actual bottleneck and not the CPU. Tried encoding a few CDs myself using a USB optical drive and my Core i3 2100 which should have demolished the A6 3670K in another PC,showed the same performance and the encoder was single threaded too. Also,subsequently looking on hifi forums,people were more worried about the abilities of the optical drive than the CPUs used!
The same goes with gaming when people are quick to say upgrade a CPU - it won't run that game since it's a bottleneck. Except in many cases the bigger bottleneck is the graphics card for many games.
Its why so many people have kept CPUs like the Q6600,Core i7 920 or Core i5 2500K for so long - yeah there are faster CPUs which are shown in the benchmarks with a single or even a pair of high end cards,but then most people are lucky to have anything faster than a R9 290/390 or GTX970. In fact the people owning slower cards is more in total numbers. That includes loads of gamers using bog standard laptops having something like a low clockspeed Core i3 and an IGP or a low end graphics card.
Even if you have an overclocked Core i7 6700 at 5GHZ and a Titan X overclocked to the max,you are still going to probably find a bottleneck in some game!
The same goes with gaming when people are quick to say upgrade a CPU - it won't run that game since it's a bottleneck. Except in many cases the bigger bottleneck is the graphics card for many games.
Its why so many people have kept CPUs like the Q6600,Core i7 920 or Core i5 2500K for so long - yeah there are faster CPUs which are shown in the benchmarks with a single or even a pair of high end cards,but then most people are lucky to have anything faster than a R9 290/390 or GTX970. In fact the people owning slower cards is more in total numbers. That includes loads of gamers using bog standard laptops having something like a low clockspeed Core i3 and an IGP or a low end graphics card.
Even if you have an overclocked Core i7 6700 at 5GHZ and a Titan X overclocked to the max,you are still going to probably find a bottleneck in some game!
Last edited:
you can already do that easily in services. The problem is it disables all the updates
I set up WSUS on my file server and control which updates go to my other server/client machines from there. Also useful for preventing pointless things like Silverlight getting installed on servers.
My desktop and laptop both have Windows 10 now but I can revert if needed - the backups I made have all Windows 10 related updates disabled.
My desktop and laptop both have Windows 10 now but I can revert if needed - the backups I made have all Windows 10 related updates disabled.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 May 2011
- Posts
- 6,280
- Location
- Southampton
I see that ASROCK has bypassed the microcode update that intel introduced, sort of:
http://www.pcgamer.com/asrock-gets-around-non-k-skylake-overclocking-limits-again/
It seems this isn't really 'getting around it' as they could do that to any chip at any time as it is an external clock regulator? I suspect it's more 'getting around' the legal side of it!
I wonder how intel will take it?
http://www.pcgamer.com/asrock-gets-around-non-k-skylake-overclocking-limits-again/
It seems this isn't really 'getting around it' as they could do that to any chip at any time as it is an external clock regulator? I suspect it's more 'getting around' the legal side of it!
I wonder how intel will take it?
They'll probably just hike up the cost of chipsets so they can recoup losses from CPU sales and justifiably so, if motherboard manufacturers want to go all renegade about overclocking then let them stump up the R&D to develop and manufacture their own chipsets.
Overclocking should be renegade, that is the whole entire purpose, what it was started for. Used to be called hacking .
Cheap CPU's ******* with the top end ones. Not just being permitted to get more performance if you have a deeper wallet
Pity that maufacturers have to allow it rather than some clever tweaking or modding by users
Last edited:
Overclocking should be renegade, that is the whole entire purpose, what it was started for. Used to be called hacking .
Cheap CPU's ******* with the top end ones. Not just being permitted to get more performance if you have a deeper wallet
Pity that maufacturers have to allow it rather than some clever tweaking or modding by users
I agree, stuff like unlocking a duron or thunderbird with the pencil trick is a thing of the past now. I miss it.