>>52541018 No doubt the jews at Apple have already worked it all out.
Most likely scenario is AMD cut a near-zero-profit deal with Apple, making their chips dirt cheap to buy in, and then offered to help with the optimisations (Which they did EA and Mantle integration) I'm willing to bet that Apple have almost no money going into this partnership.
>>52541062 It wouldn't be so much the problem of performance, which is not a major one in properly developed software.
But the problem instead lies in cooling. Even now on 16nm Haswell chips Macbooks overheat and throttle, can you imagine just how quicky this would occur with 32nm Excavator? Trying to passively cool that with the body the same way they do their current products would be a nightmare to say the least.
But putting a powerful APU in a Macbook would be really good for both Apple and AMD. They would finally have the graphical performance, and it would make other laptop manufacturers start using higher end APUs in properly engineered chassis.
>>52541213 There's also reputation at stake. Before apple can buy the chip company with the bad reputation, and this take on that bad reputation in it's own products, AMD needs to release a promising product. If Zen lives up or exceeds the hooplah, there's a potential for strong negotiations: AMD will have prospects of it's own, and won't have to take a deal from apple, or qualcomm, or whomever, but also, Apple may very well want to buy AMD so it can have full control of the hardware. I can see either scenario playing out in the favor of consumers.
1) If apple gets full control of the hardware, their products get even better (inb4 shills) 2) If AMD doesn't get bought, competition between intel and AMD rises, and we're back in the early 2000's when amd released the athlon 64
>>52541244 Waiting for Zen is the only thing anyone can do. The only CPU out of AMD worth buying right now as a consumer would the the 8320-E.
Their GPUs are top notch. And Apple using them in the MacPro trashca- I mean -Workstations - is certainly giving developers some pause to focus a little more on FirePro Optimisation rather than pushing CUDA and PhysX to their boundaries for the last inklings of performance there.
The Income, and attention that brings for AMD is really good for the market. Gives them some money to start innovating heavily again.
>>52541252 >They did venture into their own arm chips for a while, and they were competitive against the Intel CPUs being used at the time. Still are, the 2W A9 used in the iPhone 6S performs neck to neck with Intel's Broadwell Core M turbo-boosted at 17W.
>>52541307 never implied they have top notch design (but i personally feel that they are of a certain benchmark in ergonomic/visual/functional design, but i am withholding those feelings from my judgement)
if apple acquires AMD and the two teams of R&D boffins collaborate even closer, then who really knows what can happen?
>>52541573 I see your point, but then again. >8320E >Consumer Chip >Server room Sort of a loose string being drawn out here, don't you agree?
Opterons have their place. The physical core count is certainly something some companies look for.
AMD are doing what they can to a 5 year old process, and an equally aged Architecture.
The fact that Intel exceed the performance of such chips by 3-fold (In synthetic benchmarks, yet to see it in an actual workload) is no surprise. Infact, considering the technological advancements made in such time, it's quite insulting to Intel that they are only that far ahead, even more so considering their income.
People always comment on how AMD was mismanaged under Rory Reed, but look at Intel in these past 3 years.
>>52540829 I doubt it. Most projections expect the IPC of Zen to not even match Haswell, never mind Skylake. People buy iMacs to run Photoshop and other professional tools, they won't buy them if they're slow.
>>52543799 Geekbench 3 on the first run scores comparatively with any other Core M laptop, but on the second run, the thermals cause it to score around 1/3 of the first score. Shit doesn't look good for Intel if they're advertising it as a fanless chip with "4.5W SDP". An Atom X5 would be better for sustained tasks on fanless computers.
>>52543179 Intel's core arch is relatively huge. Haswell cores in 22nm were 14.5mm2 each. In comparison a 28nm Excavator module is 14.48mm2.
A Zen core is most definitely bigger than a core from any of the Bulldozer derivatives, but probably won't be quite as large as intel's. Smaller die size in implementation might mean they clock slightly higher at a given power level which would offset the lower IPC.
>>52541612 I still sort of question the idea that Rory Reed mismanaged AMD.
If anything, he made a bold play that has yet to really pay dividends, and might not ever pay dividends (APU compute). At least part of the reason it hasn't paid dividends is due to Intel's unfair shenanigans with OEMs and retailers, because I just recently bought my sister an A8-based laptop and it is probably the most well-balanced laptop I've ever had the pleasure of using.
So yeah, it sucks that it didn't work out, but when you're AMD you have to make bold plays. I'm glad they did that. I'm not so glad they abandoned HPC under Reed, but it looks like that damage was temporary, and really (unless you're an autismo), they did so at a time when HPC was just fine for most of the software out there. Shit, they got trashed all over for their octocores just because they were overkill. Now those same chips are coming into their own. AMD basically made a chip that allowed it to rest on its laurels for a while. It's the fault of the consumers in the market that they didn't realize that.
>>52544670 Rory was nothing but an interim head overseeing AMD's finances while vetting a long term replacement. The issue was that he dropped AMD's stock value every time he opened his mouth, the man is a vacuum for investor confidence. He did spear head a couple projects which never got off the ground though.
>>52544873 >cheapest octocore you can get from AMD >95W TDP instead of 125W means better cooling and power consumption >better cooling means better overclocking >turbo mode brings its speed up to non-E levels perfectly anyway, so no real loss
It's basically a lot better. When I build for customers though I usually end up going non-E, because it's impossible to convince people that turbo mode is for real.
>>52544873 All of the E designated parts are the latest and highest binnings they've produced. They'll reach clocks with less voltage than others, and the 8320E in particular is only $140-$150. You can overclock it and still get lower power consumption than a stock 8350.
>>52544903 The FUSION initiative at AMD started well before 2010, and Read was in charge starting sometime in 2011.
>>52544919 >better cooling means better overclocking No, you idiot The 8320e and 8370e regulates the voltage so that it can never run above 95W TDP, like with the Nano. It's shit for overclocking because you'd end up with a 125W TDP CPU by undoing the voltage magic doohonkey
>>52544994 They aren't throttling, the chips aren't any different from any other Vishera die. They're just better binnings. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,3929.html
This is an FX 8370E over clocked to stable 4ghz with turbo core turned off. They're supplying it with less than 1.2v. Stock vcore for an FX 8350 is 1.35v, and 1.375v for turbo. There is no throttling "magic" going on here. Just GloFo finally ironing out issues with their 32nm PD-SOI trainwreck.
>>52545397 >overclocking causes increases in voltage >some children still don't know this in the year of our lord 2016
at stock it uses less than half the TDP of the 9590, what point do you think you're making?
In any case the reason any AMD user would care about the TDP is not efficiency; for that they'd go intel anyway. TDP is only important for AMD insofar as it provides a rough estimate of the kind of cooling solution you'll need for the chip.
take that BTFO and shove it right back up your ass.
>>52545610 >what point do you think you're making The whole point that the "better cooling" (aka lies) makes them overclock better when they behave almost exactly the same as the FX-9590 in that arena. Not only does the 8320e use more voltage as the ridiculous 9590 for lower clock speeds, but it runs equally as hot.
>2017.6 >Zen is here and in full swing >renewed public interest in AMD >$5 stock price again >polaris is super efficient >Zen+Polaris FirePro APUs used in tons of Apple stuff >Zen+Polaris APUs used in PS5 and Xbox Infinity, they're still 30FPS shit but it drives revenue all the same >Google buys AMD >Intel gets sweaty >Google posts global wanted ads for Jim Keller >Jim sipping Intel tears frappuchino in France >sees his face on the TV appear >his eyes go serious >he drops his cup, it shatters >"It's time for Zen 2" >he teleports to Google HQ and hands them an already-completed blueprint for Zen 2, which he lovingly designed for AMD after silently leaving in 2015 >"There's one final piece" >his body desintegrates into stardust and floats into the blueprint, connecting never-before-connected points, completing the Zen 2 design >his soul floats up into space >Keller the Stellar has saved us all >Google begins fabbing the next day >it was designed in such a way that it can even be printed on 32nm silicon, and it still shrinks down to 10nm >beats Intel CPUs by 100x >Polaris on-die GPU deletes all Nvidia GPUs in the same machine, gets 10,000FPS on Star Citizen maxed at 16k >Intel commits sudoku and overheats because their chips can't crunch the numbers anymore, their fabs had to go back to using dirt for their fabs since GAMD took all the good sand >a star shimmers in the night sky, almost looking like an eye blinking through tears
>>52546534 >>52546583 Wrong. It's a cross licensing deal. Intel uses AMD's patents and IP just as much as AMD is using Intel's. Intel could not sell any processors unless the renegotiate the deal with AMD. Probably part of the reason they wanted Itanium to succeed.
Apparently apple already wanted Llano inside macbook airs in the past but it (obviously) did not happen: http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/105989-amd-powered-macbook-air-a-tantalizing-might-have-been
Personally I don't think it is too far from reality...
Apple was always about custom designed hardware: Designing custom ARM chip for way longer then anyone else. Only dropped ARM on desktop because their was no eco-system Used AMD custom designs in the past (380X) Never had a good relationship with intel
On AMDs side: Semicustom is their only profit-producing sector They are good at making custom chips -> why all consoles use them Has had a decent relationship with AMD (Might be due to Jim Keller) Zen is all about customization -> same chip can scale from notebooks to server Next-gen APUs come with HBM so they will probably btfo intels iGPUs
>>52547061 Stop regurgitating this, its wrong. Intel's X86 license is defunct, and any company who purchases either AMD or VIA will be able to produce X86 chips. The FTC ruled that intel must negotiate "in good faith" and the FTC reserved the right to define what that term meant. The bottom line is that intel can never stop anyone from using the portfolio of X86 IP that AMD and VIA possess. All intel can withhold is their modern instructions like AVX, and that would end up going to court.
>>52547244 >The FTC ruled that intel must negotiate "in good faith" and the FTC reserved the right to define what that term meant.
If true, that would still mean going to court to get your x86, which would mean not getting to legally make x86 for YEARS after you bought AMD. So no, you would NOT buy AMD for the x86 lic under any circumstances.
>>52547341 > that would still mean going to court to get your x86,
Why do people like you always insist on talking out of your ass and pretending to be experts on topics they literally just learned about? Please tell me what goes through the mind of a subhuman cretin such as yourself. They would not go to court, you retarded fuck. Business negotiations do not require any arbitration unless both parties refuse to concede and reach an agreement. Representatives from each company would meet in a board room and sit down with someone from the FTC and it would be done with. Intel has no reason to change the nature of their cross licensing, and anyone who acquired AMD wouldn't waste their time on pointless corporate bickering.
>>52547412 Well, I'm surely not a lawyer, but the reason I'm disagreeing with you is because based on the parts of the law that I DO understand, and based on my understanding of human nature, everything you're saying seem to miss a fundamental point:
Arbitration WOULD occur, because it is extremely unlikely, in my view, that both parties would agree to maintain the same cross licensing extant between AMD and Intel. Representative from each company would sit in a board room with an FTC dude, the FTC dude would remind Intel it must "negotiate in good faith" - a mushy directive if I ever heard of one - and Intel would tell the other company the terms it wanted for the licensing, which would be draconian, because Intel doesn't want to compete on x86 for realsies against the likes of Samsung. Samsung, or whoever, would sue under the exact pretext that Intel did not negotiate in good faith, and it would go to court.
Also, FWIW, I'm not as much of a mouth breather as you think I am; I'm just recalling what I've read in the past about the issue - I might be misinformed, but I've been following this for at least a few years. The last I heard of it, this was what AMD stated:
"Actually, the agreement is pretty clear – if there is a change of control for either company the agreement is terminated,” said Mr. Prairie. “That does not mean a new agreement could not be reached, but in a change of control the agreement is terminated.”
>Experiencing problem with Diablo 3. >Open up AMD Gaming Evolved utility aka "Raptr " >Raptr states there's a new driver version: AMD Crimson 16.1 >Click to go to website & download file >Run file & finishes installing >Restart computer > Load Raptr >Raptr states there's a new driver version: AMD Crimson 16.1 >Okay wtf >Remove all AMD Drivers from PC >Restart Computer >Install latest driver according to AMD Auto-detect software (AMD Crimson 15.12) >Restart Computer >Turn on Raptr >Raptr states there's a new driver version: AMD Crimson 16.1 >Download file again & run for install >Restart Computer when it finishes >Load Raptr again >Raptr states there's a new driver version: AMD Crimson 16.1
I go to: >http://support.amd.com/en-us/download/desktop?os=Windows%207%20-%2064
Scroll down to: Radeon Software 315 MB Crimson Edition 16.1 Hotfix 1/7/2016 Then click download. Then I run the file. The installation is over in under 60 seconds. No screen blips No default color screen (rainbow bars) Nothing.
Is there another website I should be downloading from?
>>52540829 I will always buy Intel™ because I only play games with Intel Inside™. Intel also pioneers innovative new technologies like Hyper Threading Technology™, Intel Rapid Start Technology™ and the highest quality chipsets to ever grace motherboards. When I boot up with a brand new Intel™ i7™ with the latest Z chipset, I can enjoy the games the way they where meant to be with Intel Inside™. Intel™ also delivers a far more silkysmooth experience with its Hyper Threading Technology™. Intel i5™ is also very power efficient. A processor is the most power hungry device in your house. Air conditioners, water heaters, lights, etc all use less power than a processor. Which is why Intel™ puts gamers first by ensuring that their gaming experience is of the highest quality while looking out for gamers by giving them the most value in their electrical bill. At this point in time, there's really no reasons to consider an AMD processor at all. I tried once, it caused so much heat that it exploded and nearly burnt down my house. It also consumed so much power that it produced an EMP and destroyed not only the rest of my computer but my entire neighborhood. Intel™ also pioneered how useless MORE CORES is with the i™ series processors. Years ago, everyone thought MORE CORES were the future. Now, Intel™ has debunked that myth entirely and increased efficiency. Now you can save thousands a year in electricity thanks to Intel™ with its powerful IPC. MORE CORES will never be part of Intel's™ line up. It's quite clear that OPs an AMD shill trying to convince you to settle on something less than the optimal experience with Intel Inside™. Intel™ is the only real way to play games. We have seen recently that they offer incredible libraries for software developers like Intel C++ Compiler. He is probably too poor to afford the Intel Inside™ experience and can not afford to play any games. Don't be a poor gamer with bad chipsets and a huge power bills. Play games with Intel Inside™
>>52540829 Not going to happen because AMD margins are lower. Marking up 130% from $100 nets you less than marking up 130% from $150 Simple math really. Intel is more expensive so they can justify charging more for premium hardware. You think Apple sticks Retinas in everything because their 'users' demand it?
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.