Noobie said:
Scoobes said:
Slimebeast said:
I am so sad. Is AMD done now? |
As a company I think they'll be fine. The Bulldozer is good for multi-threaded applications so should be good in the lucrative server market but the power draw is a concern. At the other end of the spectrum, the Fusion line seem to be selling well in laptops, it's only the gaming/enthusiast users they've really screwed up on and I think that's more down to poor marketing. Seriously, why hype something with the FX names, the world record overclock, the marketing slides etc. if the chip is worse then current offerings from Intel and even fails on price/performance? They had to know reviews would be brutal.
Bizzarely, I think Bulldozer is ahed of its time. AMD gambled that they'd be more multi-threaded programs by this point, but they aren't. Sadly, by the time software devs catch up with the new architecture there'll be plenty of superior alternatives (from both Intel and AMD) anyway that there's no point in getting Bulldozer now.
|
i totally disagree. they made the same blunder Intel made that reaching higher clockspeed will be piece of cake. but they failed miserable, even after knowing that such an attempt have failed earlier.
Only in very specific multithreaded benchmarks AMD is winning.
|
They did make a major mistake as you point out, but I also think they gambled big time on the multi-threaded programs (which is the Bulldozer's only strength) thinking single threaded performance would be count for nothing at this stage. Obviously, that hasn't come to pass and by the time it does the bulldozer line will be useless.
