AMD is giving up?

[d_stilgar]

Yeah, it doesn't sound like they are going out of business, but it looks like they are changing direction. Maybe this will help them to get into some businesses where they can succeed without worrying about just "keeping up." They also do really well in the video card market. AMD's eyefinity is way beyond what Nvidia is doing right now. It has much better options as far as configurations of monitors go. They are also much better about idle power draw.

[x88x]

I don't see anything in there about them cutting desktop/server chips, just that they're branching out into the ARM market.

Personally I've never really seen AMD to be hurting as much as a lot of people will make it out to be. Granted I haven't been paying attention the last couple months, but last I checked, AMD still dominated the cost-effective desktop CPU market and the high-performance server market. An odd combination, I grant you, but it works. Even the new Bulldozer architecture; yes, it's not as great per core as Intel's stuff or even the previous generation AMD chips, but it scale like nobody's business...and when I can get 64 cores in a 1U system at the same cost as a 6-8 core Intel based system, I really don't care that the individual cores aren't comparable...because if I'm buying a system like that I'm going to be running massively multi-threaded applications anyway.

[Twigsoffury]

You know if people quit constantly talking s@#t about AMD processors like they aren't worth the silicon they're printed on they probably wouldn't necessarily be in the situation they are now.


AMD Phenom II's aren't very far behind i7 series processors, and with some overclocking they'll even hang with them.

But you know, When your already getting over 60 frames a second at the highest details... whats the difference between 63fps on the AMD and 67fps on the i7 series?

I'll tell you... it's about 89$ for each additional frame that you can't see anyways because your probably using a 60hz monitor on that intel i7 series based computer aren't you?

[Twigsoffury]

I know AMD has been doing well with Cell phones for a while now. Aren't they in PS3's and Xbox's too?

Graphics on the Xbox are indeed by AMD/ATi

The ATi Xenos R520 (about the same as a Radeon X1900/X1950) but with some Core instruction sets and capabilities of the R600 series like the Unified shader models and crap (like shader model 4.0)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenos_(graphics_chip)



Nvidias actually at the sticks with the playstation 3 with a N78 based chip which is about the same as the 7800/7900GT series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_%27...Synthesizer%27


Both which are extremely hilarious from my piller of 2011 hardware PC elitism.

[AmEv]

I got a 75Hz set of monitors....


And (I believe) a 120Hz 40"er.

[DemonDragonJ]

I sincerely hope, with every fiber of my being, that AMD does not declare bankruptcy or cease to compete with Intel; I am a great AMD fan, and I prefer their processors over Intel's because they deliver acceptable performance for a reasonable price. Plus, they are the underdog, the Rebel Alliance to Intel's Galactic Empire, in the processor market, and that competition prevents Intel from establishing a monopoly on the processor market, which is the reason for which I currently support them and intend to continue supporting them. My current computer has both and AMD processor and an AMD video card, and I am very satisfied with the performance that both are delivering, so I intend to continue to use such products for as long as it is reasonable to do so.

I am no expert in the realm of business and economics, but if AMD once before was able to compete in a serious manner with Intel, surely, they can do so again. Plus, I have been reading reviews of AMD's GPU's/video cards, and those seem to be performing very well in competition with NVidia, so I myself am remaining cautiously optimistic that, given time to sort through its difficulties, AMD shall be able to recover from its current situation and again offer high-performance processors in competition with Intel.

[Twigsoffury]

And (I believe) a 120Hz 40"er.

if its a television its 60hz with a 120hz drive.

Does that by displaying the same frame twice, so its cheating, your not really seeing 120 separate images, your seeing the same 60 frames at twice the rate.

[AmEv]

idk.


But 75Hz monitors? I suppose that's the only thing CRT monitors trump over LCDs.

[Twigsoffury]

idk.


But 75Hz monitors? I suppose that's the only thing CRT monitors trump over LCDs.

Well they have true 120hz LCD panels now.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824016168


So they'll display 120fps in 2D because they need 60-60 to properly display 3D in stereo.

[AmEv]

But DANG expensive currently......

I'd LOVE to have LCDs; WAY out of budget ATM.