Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Aug 29, 2017.
One of the many pitfalls of being a public company...
Yes, Sandy Bridge was good, but every single CPU afterwards has been mediocre, at best (and their decision to use paste makes it even more so). Intel has indeed been milking their customers with their quad cores, plus they put their their higher-core CPUs behind a massive paywall. If Intel had a choice, they would force-feed us quad cores for the next decade while continuing to charge astronomical prices for their HEDT chips.
Exactly the problem. Something nice came out, and they went "huh, well lets just stall here indefinitely and see if our competition ever catches up" = Milking.
Yeah, It's very true Intel milks and milks a lot! I myself got a legendary Nehalem i7 875k running at 3.6Ghz witch is a mild overclock over its original 2.93Ghz. That said I would like to piont out that this processor is a classic 4c/8t with the 8MB SmartCache L3, and it is 7 years old... Yesterday I tested the new Destiny 2 in its open beta and it was running with everything on high at 60FPS rock solid paired with a 1060 6GB... I'm telling this because Sandy Bridge that is de next gen after the Nehalems are perfectly fine for 1080p gaming at 60hz, and lets not forget that we have Gulftown chips since the beginning of 2010 with 6c/12t rocking hard to the day... my point is that AMD is in one way or another repeating the same thing with VEGA witch is a bummer... A while back I was talking to friend about the whole VEGA scene and we concluded that in one day in the future AMD might be disassembled with its GPU divison going to Intel and its CPU divison going to NVIDIA, of course this is a thing about 2 guys drining beer on a bar talking about tech but I think that this scenario that I dicribed would make us have really neck to neck competition not that i dont like AMD I used AMD a lot and I am very thankful for everything that their chips always gave to me at a reasonable price. As I see for us a bipolar competition would be not that bad in terms of avancing tecnology and prevent milking.
well yeah it's just the beer talking but fyi;
AMD may or may not be bought out by someone, but it *cannot* be Intel. The U.S. gov't. would never allow that as its against the law - monopoly. AND in addition because of the sensitive technology the U.S. gov't must approve the acquisition of anyone buying AMD. (which means no Russians, Mainland Chinese, Iran, North Korea, Cuba).
same with nvidia.
I agree with you monopoly is against the law.
But have you wondered if we have this scenario:
Intel Radeon GPU's
Nvidia Ryzen CPU's
My point was Intel buying only the Graphics divison of AMD... and the CPU division going to Nvidia, can you imagine how cool will it be if Nvidia starts to make CPU's... and if Intel have the patents to produce more powerful videocards...
In the end is all about R&D money.
Its just a wonder... but as you said it probably cant happen.
This suit is 3 years old....nothing new.
Price vs Performance, Sandy Bridge was a freakin value proposition compared to Lynnfield....
That doesn't excuse Intel sticking to quad cores since though.
i7 875K was Lynnfield, not Nehalem....
No company will buy AMD's CPU division because their x86 license is non-transferable. If another company were to buy AMD's CPU division, they would have to negotiate licensing terms with Intel.
There is very little chance that Intel would ever buy AMD's GPU division. The FTC would have to approve it and Intel would have to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the purchase would not have a negative impact on competition, which isn't possible. There are currently only 3 competitors in the graphics market and removing 1 would have a negative affect on the market. Intel doesn't want federal regulators breathing down their necks.
A computer market completely dominated by Intel and NVidia would be an utter disaster. Sure, innovation would likely accelerate with NVidia being a much more innovative company than Intel. We'd see better performance gains compared to AMD, but prices would likely skyrocket. Currently AMD is the only check against Intel raising prices. NVidia is unlikely to compete with Intel on pricing, instead using their typical line of selling a "premium product" at a "premium price".
It's a case of what would be good for the market in one regard, would be damaging to the market overall.
If Intel wanted to develop dedicated graphics cards, neither AMD nor NVidia could stop them. The necessary patents are all FRAND. If a company wants to compete in the dedicated graphics market, NVidia and AMD would be required to license any patents necessary for such competition, and do so at a reasonable price. Intel has already attempted to compete in the discrete graphics market before and pulled out.
Well said sykozis^ Thanks!
Yuck, no thank you. They already tried that once, they gave up.
The entitled PC enthusiast is an interesting animal.
Thanks for the relpy sykozis! Very nice points for me to think.
About the processor don't get me wrong... But I need to correct you... You seem to be confusing Code Name with Microarchitechture. Lynnfield is the code name of the Intel processor line based in Nehalem Microarchitechture using socket 1156 and 45nm process.
So I was refering to the microarchitechture that the i7 875k is based on.
Thanks for the healthy discussion!
What amazes me is AMD has to fork over $29.5 million to settle a lawsuit where AMD's lawyers decided this was a far safer choice than to take it before a jury where they knew they'd lose probably 10x as much.... and this is the reaction to this news....
I sure hope you guys get paid for posts like this. lol. You just polished a turd that AMD's PR department had no chance of putting a shine on.
Just for fun though, what if the title of this thread was "Intel agrees to pay $29.5m to end Haswell lawsuit"? Do you honestly think there would be a single post like that? lol. The whole thread would be wall to wall Intel bashing like every single post made after these two.
Btw.. wasn't this thread about AMD settling a lawsuit? How did the mods allow it to get derailed into another 'intel is the devil' circle ****s?
You're one to speak. Did you even read what you just wrote? Sounds like a ton of Intel-sponsored BS.
There's no "turd" polishing. this was a specious lawsuit sucking time and resources.
*any* investor looking for minus five year returns is an idiot.
this was disgruntled day traders to me.
BTW... i own over 200 shares in Intel.