JEMC said:
Well, given how every tech company is firing employees, it would be a good time for AMD to hire some of them to improve their staff. Mind you, they won't do it, but it would be a great time to do so. |
Absolutely, especially as how AMD's staff/engineer numbers literally imploded during the Phenom/Bulldozer era and driver update cadence slowed.
Good time to go shopping for some quality and skilled employees, especially as Ryzen has made them relevant again, so they have the funds.
Captain_Yuri said:
I am personally mixed with it comes to AMD. I don't have any particular need to support them because personally, I don't care if a company is in the underdog position or not. I will support companies that try to bring innovation into the market generally avoid companies that don't. With AMD, I bought Ryzen 1700x + X370 because while I knew that Intel was faster in gaming, they were lacking in innovation and dragging down the market. The idea of 2 generation CPUs per socket, up to quad core for consumers and anything more means going the expensive HEDT route has always rubbed me the wrong way. But with Ryzen, 4 years of cpu support (ended up being 5) while bringing good 8 core CPUs to the mainstream showed how greedy Intel really was. Hence why I bought 1700x > 3900x > 5950x. Radeon on the other hand never felt quite as innovative and that's not necessarily their fault because Nvidia unlike Intel doesn't drag their feet. Nvidia knows that if they don't continue to innovate, others will overtake them. Nvidia showed how great Variable Refresh Rate tech was with G-sync. They showed us how Ai can be used to upscale from low render resolutions with relatively minimal quality loss. They showed us how GPUs outputting the fastest frames doesn't actually mean you get the lowest input latency and instead, managing the render queue with Reflex can significantly lower input latency instead. Now they are doing things like their eye contact technology where during streaming games or in a meeting, your eyes in real life can look somewhere else but to the viewers, it will look like you are looking at them. And the list goes on with Ray Tracing and etc. While I am sure you can find plenty of examples of other companies doing those things first, Nvidia popularized them and brought them to the mainstream. So for me, it's like if I want the standard gaming experience, I would just get a $500 console. But if I am going to spend over $700 on a GPU, I don't want the standard experience... I want cutting edge features and Nvidia gives me that. While Radeon does attempt to copy those features, they are generally worse quality and sometimes a lot worse. And if they are going to charge Nvidia prices... Well at that point I don't see much of a reason to support them. |
Don't get me wrong, supporting and buying are two separate things. - I always opt for the best price/performance.
For CPU's, I abandoned AMD after the Phenom 2 x6 series as they just stagnated (Even went backwards), I went with Intel HEDT, but came back with Zen 3... As Intel did not offer anything compelling even with their HEDT platforms.
For GPU's, AMD has always had an edge in price/performance... Even if their GPU feature sets and capabilities are behind, which is why for the last 10~ or so years I have almost exclusively ran with AMD GPU's in my main system.
I am competent enough where if there is a bug/driver issue I can resolve it, but that isn't to say nVidia's drivers have been perfect either, my Q9650 system with a Geforce 1030 has had periods where Geforce drivers were absolute hot garbage.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
Essay Pro