ITS HAPPENING 2: The Electric Boogaloo

>wccftech
Remember how the 480 was going to be amazing?

>>57382607
And it is?

>>57382607
>>57382629
this
technology stopped leaping and started getting cheaper
great age we live in
soon the programs will begin getting optimized too

>>57382556
>2.8 GHz 4 core new AMD processor performs the same as a 2.6 GHz 10 core Intel processor from 2013
Intel is finished and bankrupt

Or

>2.8 GHz 8 core new AMD processor performs the same as a 2.6 GHz 10 core Intel processor from 2013
It's meh

Or

>2.8ghz 16 core new AMD processor performs the same as a 2.6 GHz 10 core Intel processor from 2013
AMD is finished and bankrupt

It's most likely meh

File: 1467986951540.gif (33KB, 420x413px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 420x413px

I just hope ZEN will lower CPU prices in general

>>57382678
Except tech got only cheaper in the U.S.

>>57382556
Summit Ridge will bring Broadwell-Es back down to where they should be priced, not $600-$1100 for dies not any larger than $300 APUs.

>>57382556
>Xeon E5 2680 v2
>a shitty 10-core from the Ivy Bridge era
>2.7GHz

>Xeon E5 2630 v4
>a shitty 10-core from the Broadwell gen
>2.2GHz

>a much faster 10-core i7-6950X is somehow slower than these two
I smell bullshit

>believing in the light at the end of the tunnel
Ive been rooting for amd for the last 5 or so years but its time to face the facts. This is their last hoora. The final strike theyll ever manage to make in the desktop cpu market. It will indeed make waves throughout the tech sector, but without further support from great minds such as keller their progress is bound to stagnate.
The market is shifting anyway. Regardless of their ability to compete in emterprise markets and the like, without consumer interest and no solid ground to move forward on, amd is destined to go the way if so many other chip makers In the past.
I had the chance to buy amd stock at under 1.50 a share and i didnt take it.
As it stands no substantial amount of money can be made at current stock prices.
I advice anyone currently holding amd stock to sell as soon as zen is ready to launch.
It may go up a bit miore come lahnch time, but its the safest bet. You will earn a considerable return and walk away not only with a decent profit, but with an interesting storty to tell regarding the tech sector that was.
Even intel is desperately trying to infiltrate the mobile market with limited success. Moore's law is over and until experimental processes such as graphine take off, we wil quickly reach a stagnant period in the desktop market.
I will miss amd greatly but it is far too late to make a comeback. Maybe if things gad gone differently in the athlon64 days, they could be considered a serious competitor, but is is beyond hope at this point.
They only thing we might find hope in is the gpu market. It will faulter in a similar manner, but there is a slim chance they can recover ground in the coming years. I honestly believe the cpu and gpu portions will once again become separate entities. Merging the two was an attempt to increase familiarity, and the recent push to once again separate is in preparation for the inevitable.
Amd wont last long enough in any case. Sell. Sell. Selll.

>>57383488
$0.2 have been deposited into your Nvidia™ account.

File: 1447665104398.jpg (559KB, 1100x1002px) Image search: [Google]

559KB, 1100x1002px

>>57382629
t. amdrone pajeet

>>57383471
>A $4000 cpu is faster than a $1000 consumer shitter

ayo whoda thinked it

File: x86-zen-new-blender-benchmark-1140x617.png (174KB, 1140x617px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1140x617px

>>57383471
>>a much faster 10-core i7-6950X is somehow slower than these two
>I smell bullshit
where are you seeing that?
are you a speed reader, or is it not in article main page?

>>57383552
Nigger, there is no architectural difference between the Xeon E5 2630 v4 and the i7-6950X, just the clock speed.

>>57383714
Spotted the retard
Scroll down and find the first i7 on the list. Now look at its clockspeed compared to the Xeon E5 2630 v4, the EXACT SAME PIECE OF SILICON

>>57383747
it wasn't actually in the article itself, friend.

File: you're_a_filthy_nigger.png (68KB, 582x525px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 582x525px

>>57384026
But it is in the benchmark page, dumbass

>>57384055
i'm talking about the currynigger article from OP's page, genius

>>57384173
Why are you ignoring the fact that those filthy fucking curryniggers left out this suspicious bit of info from the benchmark to prop up their shitty Zen article? This reeks of desperation and rigged benchmarks. Explain to me how a 10-core CPU clocked at 3.0GHz is somehow slower at multi-core rendering that the same exact CPU clocked down to 2.2GHz.

>>57384207
I just asked
>>57383714
>is it not in article main page?
and you got your panties in a twist.
All you had to say was that you had to go to the http://blenchmark.com/cpu-benchmarks page and hunt it down, which neither your initial comment nor your follow-up indicated.

WCCFT is as usual probably full of shit, but you need to learn how to be snarky in a more competent manner.

>>57384265
>spoonfeeding retards