I have been pointing a lot of this stuff out as I notice it and I just get called a powerpc pleb. So, if it has to be him (ATV) to point it out and get everyone to shut up and think about it, so be it.
Does this break some kind of anti-trust laws or laws competition? The two basic competitors basically have common interests would that be a kind of monopoly on the market?
1 Like
Only if the monopoly is either the goal or the consequence of their agreement, and if the consequences had negative effects on the market.
This is a gross oversimplification. At any rate, I don't think this deal would qualify as monopolistic.
Againtst the Nvidia Tegra CPU's that are going in netbooks now? At that the ARM servers that are FASTER than the current Intel chips that can offer little bi and big endian? No Intel is super fucked right now if they don't have a Director change soon and come up with something fast. The AMD pull is NOT something they want to do, but they also can't waste money on their iGPU bullshit anymore, especially since apple and similar companies are the ones really pulling profit on it en masse.
tech antitrust is a joke. has been since the 80's
60's actually.
1 Like
Ths actually must make some AMD fan boys sick as helping out the enemy in a sense is what AMD is doing. :S
Nah. They can give Intel OK processors and use the money from that to pump into awesome APU's and purely fuel the division off of that.
Well here is the thing...
Apple have sued Samsung multiple times over bulshit and Samsung still sells chips to Apple. Money is money. Amd will basically sell graphics cards to Intel. Something, Intel is nowhere near any enemy of AMD. And the money can help battle the actual enemy, that is Nvidia.
3 Likes
AMD will help out the enemy. But at the end of the day they end up helping themselves.
2 Likes
This whole "Enemise" thing is stupid. Neither of them are enemies to the other because they need each other to build new processors. If AMD were to pull their license from intel right now we would have 64 bit itanium to look forward to from them. Seeing as how theres inwars over there right now and the CEO is about to get thrown out I see this as a good thing.
Now if they could make some big endian chips for me that would be great.
2 Likes
This is more so architectural issue in my opinion. The current tech has hit the wall... The 5nm impending wall.
Heterogeneous systems will be a thing in the next 2yrs. The HSA consortium is growing, Software implementation has to get better.
Software Dev's are to blame in part for slow adoption of multiprocess applications and heterogeneous systems. But this is slowly changing as we see DX12 and Vulcan on games with asynchronous calls and Video Rendering applications being used in server clusters for faster performance. Mainstream adoption to come.
2 Likes
IDK if you can say that. If a dev is trying to get their game to run as well as possible and optimizing more of the game for the videocard is more effective with their time management than to optimize for the CPU, is it the Devs fault things aren't better optimized for the CPU?
1 Like
I keep hearing this "sandy bridge is just as fast/almost as fast as the new intel cpus".
It is simply not true. Compare the i7 7700k to a i7 2600k. The latter is slower at everything by a significant amount. If you use any of the new instruction sets like FMA3, AVX2 etc, Kaby is about twice as fast if not faster. Plain old games have at least 20% better perf on Kaby on identical clocks, add to this that Kaby has significantly higher clocks out of the box and overclocks just as good if not better. I use a Sandy bridge system almost every day, the motherboards of that era is kinda crap compared to what you can get today.
Back on topic: It does not look like we'll see any Intel chips with "radeon" gpus on them, either integrated or mcm. Rumours and conjecture. All points to that Intel will continue as before when they had a licensing deal with Nvidia, to make their own iGPUs. Iris Pro and what not. You know, when Intel had the license deal with NV you didn't see any Geforce GPUs at Intel did you? This will be more fo the same, nothing to get excited about at all. It means AMD gets the license money from Intel instead of Nvidia. It won't even be in the margin of error for NV or Intel, but it will help AMD as they are close to dead.
If they were close to dead they wouldn't have a new processor series coming out nor would they have an RX480.
Well if Ryzen does badly, it will probably be bad. They might survive it, but who knows. Look att their finances the last three-four years. It is not pretty, plenty of red. They can't keep up losing money forever.
Well they have been selling stupidly well in the server market over the last few months and releasing chips that have 32c 64t and 64c 128t will be stupid enough that lots of companies who need that ridiculous shit will look at it. Could be used for AI maybe.
Plus with an 8 core chip at 5-600 bucks intel is already scrambling shit together according to a lot of sources on Reddit, 3 of which I have seen that work at intel.
No I think that AMD will be slapping the market back to shape pretty soon.
If Ryzen does bad the cpu division will be dead. They did a smart thing some time ago by basically separating cpu and gpu companies. This way if the cpu part goes under, the gpus will still be here. Keep in mind, the gpu half is actually profitable. The cpu half is a black hole atm...
If memory serves, last quarter (q3 16) amd was actually profitable.
If Ryzen is a success it would be stupid to not buy stock.
1 Like