Performance Crown

[Andy7]

Will AMD ever win the performance crown back from Intel?

 

[Kelt]

Yes.

 

[sanaxe1]

Depends.

 

[Davedree]

No, they allowed intel to beat them in their last performance advantage "IGP performance".
Amd could have been competitive in the oem or custom Apu market.
They could have redefined the mitx htpc/steambox apu with either onboard gddr5 like kaveri has disabled, or used an mxm graphics board soldered onto the pcie lane of the motherboard. Amd stagnated on all metrics for too many years and failed to execute, they are almost irrelevant.

No I am not an intel fanboy, I am actually Amd biased however I've been sat on a 2600k for 5 years and AMd still have not provided a compelling competitive product.

Oh wait for bulldozer, oh wait for piledriver, oh wait for steamroller, oh wait for excavator.
Now the next hype Bristol ridge and zen.

 

[Beren]

Who knows perhaps Zen really is awesome. But I think Dave is right, they had a really awesome opportunity to redefine gaming with a one board living room PC that would really put them on the consumer map. I can only assume that in making all the console chips perhaps they signed a non compete clause around making their own console like device.

 

[jigger]

With the current thinking at Intel... I think AMD have a chance, but I think the question for AMD would have been will it pay. They don't have anything close to the money needed to make big gambles IMO.

It wouldn't make any sense for AMD to build a console.

 

[mmj_uk]

I don't think they will because even when they have the superior hardware their competitors generally get their products better optimised in games/software (eg. Intel compilers, NVidia GameWorks).

 

[joeyjojo]

Question requires crystal ball.

Note that AMD does have the "performance crown" in some circumstances, e.g. when using HSA. But overall, who knows.

http://www.extremetech.com/computin...-wait-for-the-first-true-heterogeneous-chip/5

http://wccftech.com/amd-kaveri-i54670k-benchmarks-showdown-continued-hsa-features-test/

 

[Hiijinx]

I really hope so, it was nice having a choice

Personally, I think they should take a gamble and hold off on "low end" cpus for a while and put all their (CPU) resources into a gaming chip.

 

[jigger]

I think AM4 is a win for AMD. AM4 offers everything Z170 and X99 do, but with the added bonus of longevity without having to be locked into a range of chips that are all about making a compromise in one way or another.

 

[Orcvader]

Zen won't. Zen+ maybe depending on when it's release is and how Intel reacts to the first gen Zen. Then after that maybe both will finally be on even grounds battling over CPU performance.

 

[jigger]

It depends how AMD offer Zen. If AMD offers 4-8 cores chips with i5-i7 performance from 2011 and undercut Intel they win.

Core for core AMD don't need to better everything Intel offers. If everything is on the same motherboard AMD is the better option.

 

[Jumper118]

I've been sat on a 2600k for 5 years and AMd still have not provided a compelling competitive product.

i agree, the pins spike you which is not comfy. They have lga cpu's on there server side, but not on the consumer side.

 

[Lokken86]

Once temperature control becomes a major issue and starts to stunt everyone that is when we need radical revolutions in technology. This could be the time they get a chance.

 

[Blackjack Davy]

No they don't have the resources to compete with Intel its a massive company. Its doubtful they have the inclination what with the PC market in decline. Intel has painted itself into a corner and is desperately trying to break out of its corner into the only expanding market that of low power, mobile chips. Even they've stated they're not interested in performance anymore only power efficiency the next generation of chips may actually be slower, but more energy efficient.

 

[The-Plethora]

Intel havent really offered much of an upgrade since the 2600K era either.
If AMD can obtain a similar performance level whilst being cheaper and having their usual socket longevity then I will go zen.
In my second PC I use an AMD FX4300 CPU I bought for £48, quad core overclocked to 4.5GHz at 44 degrees max that plays everything I have thrown at it fine. 110 fps or 98fps, meh I don't really care as much as I get older.

 

[aceCrasher]

Intel havent really offered much of an upgrade since the 2600K era either.

Have you ever looked up a Benchmark with a 6700k going up against a 2600k?
The improvements may be small per new gen - but all together its a decent performance jump.

 

[Martini1991]

Intel havent really offered much of an upgrade since the 2600K era either.
If AMD can obtain a similar performance level whilst being cheaper and having their usual socket longevity then I will go zen.
In my second PC I use an AMD FX4300 CPU I bought for £48, quad core overclocked to 4.5GHz at 44 degrees max that plays everything I have thrown at it fine. 110 fps or 98fps, meh I don't really care as much as I get older.

I don't really think AMD has that anymore.

AM3+ has been out a long time, but in that time it's been entirely second place, to call that longevity is a bit iffy, and their APU's have had just as many as Intel has in recent times.

 

[jigger]

I don't really think AMD has that anymore.

AM3+ has been out a long time, but in that time it's been entirely second place, to call that longevity is a bit iffy, and their APU's have had just as many as Intel has in recent times.

When was the word longevity redefined?

Define second place. AM3 has been a tempting prospect for me a few times over the years.

 

[ukxenon]

One can hope AMD can get some good cpu''s out and at least give Intel a fight