AMD Throws in the Towel: No More CPUs (APUs and GPUs Only)
192 replies, posted
Greeaaaatt. This means budget PC gaming is shot to hell within 2-3 years. I'm hoping it's bullshit, because if it isn't I'm not going to be able to upgrade my CPU for a LONG time. [QUOTE=deadoon;43062794]Only if they abuse their status as a monopoly.[/QUOTE]
Which, if this is true, they're already planning. They will push as far as they can and only just stay within the law. There'd be nothing keeping them from doing so at that point, they'd have no reason to spend so much on R&D anymore. They already charge exorbitant prices for their chips as it is, with absolutely no incentive to even try to make things affordable they'll charge as much as the government will let them. Expect budget quads to cost $300.
Why is everyone so scared that Intel is going to have a monopoly?
Intel makes great chips, but if they decide to abuse the fact that they run virtually unopposed, they will eventually fall out of touch with what their customers want and someone else will do what they do better/cheaper than them. It's how capitalism works.
Dang. And here I was planning for my next build to be an FX-8350. I do like AMD chips; Intel tends to be above my budget.
Ah well, it'll be interesting to see what their APUs can do with a full-time focus. I'm fascinated by the possibilities of those things.
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;43065379]Ending the entire AMD FX line and the old Phenom II line is effectively withdrawing from CPU production because that's a HUGE market to be lost.[/QUOTE]
I think you're overestimating the importance of the AMD FX line to AMD's business. Traditional CPU's have been reduced almost entirely to usage by PC gaming enthusiasts, workstations and servers. Workstations almost always use high-end Intel CPU's and I don't think AMD markets more than a handful of server CPU's. That leaves pretty much just the PC gamer market for them to market the FX line to.
With that in mind, consider this - virtually all low-medium price pre-built computers now use APU's(whether it's Intel CPU's with Intel HD graphics or the AMD A-series) and AMD APU's power both the PS4 and XBox One. Not to mention all the notebooks and netbooks that now use APU's.
I just really don't see the incentive for them to spend time and resources focusing on a relatively small market for them when they could be instead improving the things that are making them piles of cash - APU's.
Edit: I should make it clear that I don't think I'm a hardware expert by any means. These are observations I've made with my limited grasp on the CPU market.
I'm waiting for Kaveri results and final benchmarks to come in before I make an opinion. If it fails, then I'm going to Intel for processors.
[QUOTE=glitchvid;43063790]They're physical cores, not logical ones. It gets more complicated than that, but they are all basically cores.
[t]http://cdn2.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Bulldozer-Architecture.png[/t]
If you understand that, you'll understand what I mean.[/QUOTE]
Those are just integer units being advertised as cores though. They're not actually cores themselves. That specific architecture only really has 4 real cores out of the supposed 8.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;43062779]Intel are better anyway..[/QUOTE]
Yeah but not "pay twice as much for the same thing they were selling" better
[QUOTE=RichyZ;43066298]its not like people just randomly start up cpu development businesses[/QUOTE]
I'm on it.
do they have a "starting a CPU manufacturing business for dummies"?
Monopoly doesn't always mean raised prices. In fact, it can mean lowered prices. Consider that they no longer have an opponent in the industry, it means they'll sell a whole lot more than previously. They can lower the prices, and earn just as much as before.
Besides, lowering prices means more people will be wanting to get an upgrade.
And lowering prices means it'll be harder for a competitor to join in, because they have to compete with the low prices Intel gives.
In the long run, lowering prices during a monopoly could easily get Intel more money, and more popularity.
And the more money they have, the more they can invest in making even better CPUs.
It's pretty basic Business strategy. Raising their prices would be a pretty dumb idea.
[QUOTE=Glitchman;43066311]I'm on it.
do they have a "starting a CPU manufacturing business for dummies"?[/QUOTE]
Just paint over intel chips and sell them.
Time for me to take amd's place in the cpu market.
Last intel CPU I had was a pentium 4.
AMD has always been quite solid, and decent for the price, which is why I picked them because Intel is pretty pricey.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;43062779]Intel are better anyway..[/QUOTE]
That's not the point. AMD and Intel had a competition. Intel will now be able to have a monopoly.
[QUOTE=Rusty100;43063893]Man are AMD lucky they bought ATI.[/QUOTE]
Not so lucky for ATI tho. Ever since they bought them it's been nothing but hard times for ATI and they lost the crown of the GPU market.
so i was planning on buying a AMD-fx-8350 8-core, up from a phenom II x4 something.
going to have to switch out motherboard whatever i do, but should i consider an intel instead?
What i want is a cheap 8 core for rendering, and amd had the best option for me.
I feel like all of you are very misinformed. All of Intel's new CPUs are classed as APUs, they just don't market them as such. This doesn't change [B]anything[/B]. APUs are just CPUs with an integrated GPU, pretty much.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;43066256]Yeah but not "pay twice as much for the same thing they were selling" better[/QUOTE]
Besides, competition is competition and that's always a good thing for the consumers.
[QUOTE=voltlight;43067387]I feel like all of you are very misinformed. All of Intel's new CPUs are classed as APUs, they just don't market them as such. This doesn't change [B]anything[/B]. APUs are just CPUs with an integrated GPU, pretty much.[/QUOTE]
This guy gets it.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;43066298]its not like people just randomly start up cpu development businesses[/QUOTE]
It's not like there are no established cpu development businesses that just haven't really made the foray into x86 or anything
Well I guess I better buy their best CPU they offer to keep my motherboard useful for as long as possible whenever their last flagship comes out
[QUOTE=voltlight;43067387]I feel like all of you are very misinformed. All of Intel's new CPUs are classed as APUs, they just don't market them as such. This doesn't change [B]anything[/B]. APUs are just CPUs with an integrated GPU, pretty much.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. Intel won't have monopoly status until AMD flat out says they are going to stop making x86(-64) CPU's. Period.
[QUOTE=Jeep-Eep;43062874]Never underestimate corporate stupidity.[/QUOTE]
Except that Intel is in a market where the buyers don't usually make uninformed purchases.
As the people buying are either big companies, smaller computing enterprises and people building or upgrading their own PC's.
I been thinking, maybe have an APU+GPU build, well, once the APUs aren't shit, and hopefully you can make the APU use 100% for CPU processes.
Can someone explain what an APU is and how it has potential to replace CPUs? I'm very ignorant when it comes to computer tech :v:
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;43068299]Can someone explain what an APU is and how it has potential to replace CPUs? I'm very ignorant when it comes to computer tech :v:[/QUOTE]
A somewhat decent GPU and a CPU in one "package"
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;43065379]
Ending the entire AMD FX line and the old Phenom II line is effectively withdrawing from CPU production because that's a HUGE market to be lost.
[/QUOTE]
I still love my AMD Phenom II x6 1090t.
oh not intel please no.
Intel: Underpowered and Overpriced.
AMD have a 5ghz processor for a quater of the price of a TOTR i7
fuck.
I hate APU's, i know they are the future but the performance we get from the integrated graphics is shit, Intel should make a version of.. for instance the i5-4670k without the graphics, it would run cooler use less power and actually improve the oc ability. since that's what people buying K series want.
Otherwise we have to buy the ridiculous R socket cpu's for 4 times the price..
Hell on earth is what this is, the piledriver cpu's are going to get more expensive as well, retailers take note!
[editline]4th December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=godinthehouse;43068885]oh not intel please no.
Intel: Underpowered and Overpriced.
AMD have a 5ghz processor for a quater of the price of a TOTR i7
fuck.[/QUOTE]
As impressive as 5GHz sounds, it's all marketing
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;43068299]Can someone explain what an APU is and how it has potential to replace CPUs? I'm very ignorant when it comes to computer tech :v:[/QUOTE]
Works like Intel. The newest CPU's have Intel HD Graphics on them. If i am correct then they have HD Graphics 4000 right now.
This means you won't need to have a on-board gpu or PCIe GPU to get your monitor working. And HD4000 can run some games pretty good but not as good as a dedicated GPU ofcourse.
TL;DR: APU = CPU and GPU combined but not with the horse power from a dedicated GPU like Radeon or GTX graphics cards. But enough too get a image on your screen and play games that aren't demanding.
[QUOTE=Xmeagol;43069368]I hate APU's, i know they are the future but the performance we get from the integrated graphics is shit, Intel should make a version of.. for instance the i5-4670k without the graphics, it would run cooler use less power and actually improve the oc ability. since that's what people buying K series want.
Otherwise we have to buy the ridiculous R socket cpu's for 4 times the price..
Hell on earth is what this is, the piledriver cpu's are going to get more expensive as well, retailers take note!
[editline]4th December 2013[/editline]
As impressive as 5GHz sounds, it's all marketing[/QUOTE]
I was under the impression that unless the integrated graphics are being used, they are doing literally nothing. I don't know how that would reduce heat.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.