| Pemalite said: "Experiment" is a bit far-fetched. It was the foundations of what would come after... And like you, believe that Zen+ should make up for allot of Ryzens inherant shortcomings. |
Before Zen came along it was just AMD's dead last attempt to maintain any sort of relevance ...
For the longest time AMD used to a distant second but they came closest with Zen in comparison to the rest of their last decade ...
I also don't believe Zen+ will rectify much of Zen's issues. AMD needs a new microachitecture (Zen 2) and possibly a new socket if needed to be competitive ... (AMD shouldn't just stay on one socket if it means they can be more opportunistic about microachitectural optimizations)
| Pemalite said: Indeed. AMD's marketshare was at it's zenith when it was soundly beating Intel for years. |
The 'anti-competitive practices' excuse is played too much, there's a reason why AMD decided to settle the case outside of court instead of pushing Intel for paying even further damages ...
It's not Intel's fault that AMD floundered in their hardware design for a decade ...
| Pemalite said: Price is always a factor. Always. To what degree really depends on the market segment. |
Sure it is but expecting that your technically superior competitor won't compete in price in that segment that your targetting is foolish ...
