Thats the heart of the problem. AMD is neither here nor there. Overpowered igp for light duty pc's for non-gamers and htpc's and too weak even for semi-serious gamers when even old mid-range discrete cards(now considered low end) are significantly faster than the Kaveri. There was one AMD rep who tried to drum up interest for the APU gaming and his lone thread just died without having much response.No offense, but how can you really be expected to join into this conversation at the same level as the other posters when you don't know the difference between a chromebook and a cheap laptop?
If your knowledge about an area isn't up to par just say so. I regularly come here asking about something or just read so I know more about something. Posting as if you have knowledge that you clearly don't really just hurts users who are coming here wanting serious information. Spreading misinformation on here really is hurtful for the many users who come to anandtech forums trying to learn more.
Intel HD Graphics by the way are good enough for the VAST majority of users.
The problem with AMD APUs is that it improved on graphics performance when people didn't NEED that level of graphics performance. APU sits in the most awkward spot. Too much graphics performance for the average user, not enough graphics performance for anyone who wants to seriously game at resolutions above 720p
.........
No offense, but how can you really be expected to join into this conversation at the same level as the other posters when you don't know the difference between a chromebook and a cheap laptop?
If your knowledge about an area isn't up to par just say so. I regularly come here asking about something or just read so I know more about something. Posting as if you have knowledge that you clearly don't really just hurts users who are coming here wanting serious information. Spreading misinformation on here really is hurtful for the many users who come to anandtech forums trying to learn more.
Intel HD Graphics by the way are good enough for the VAST majority of users.
The problem with AMD APUs is that it improved on graphics performance when people didn't NEED that level of graphics performance. APU sits in the most awkward spot. Too much graphics performance for the average user, not enough graphics performance for anyone who wants to seriously game at resolutions above 720p
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7677/amd-kaveri-review-a8-7600-a10-7850k/12
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7677/amd-kaveri-review-a8-7600-a10-7850k/13
I think Mantle is a step in the right direction for AMD as it significantly helps their APUs. Making a BETTER APU though would actually help more.
If AMD could just get that drastic performance jump intel was capable of then we'd be in business with them. AMD APU's could make for GREAT cheap gaming laptops for back to school and for great small HTPCs IF THEY COULD GET MORE PERFORMANCE. Right now though, I think below Xbox One performance is unacceptable. Xbox One isn't even a 1080p console really either. If AMD can break 30 FPS minimum (30 FPS+ is really all they need) at 1680x1050 it'd be viable and easily marketable. Right now though, AMD APU offers too much graphics performance for the casual user and too little for even the vast majority of gamers.
From my understanding, wasn't the move towards Iris Pro and better graphics performance so that intel could appease Apple?
I thought Iris Pro was the replacement so Apple could stop having to put Nvidia graphics in their PCs and just use a single chip approach and save on the extra power consumption. That way they could make slimmer profile designs, etc.
Getting back to how AMD is a more responsive and smoother experience, it's been noted by more than one reviewer. Even on this very website by either Ian or Ryan, not going to look for the link. People don't need a number to realize that, they just feel it. Benchmarks/numbers can be manipulated in many ways, as the tech community has seen time and time again. So, the most obvious proof is from the person sitting in front of the computer and there have been blind tests done that favor AMD systems as well as first hand accounts from reviewers. Benchmarks don't tell the whole story.
This is so unbelievably ridiculous. What product by AMD is smoother than what product by Intel? And in what applications?Getting back to how AMD is a more responsive and smoother experience, it's been noted by more than one reviewer. Even on this very website by either Ian or Ryan, not going to look for the link.
Yes, it's called confirmation bias.Exactly, it has nothing to do with benchmarks or faster/slower. There is something that makes AMD processors feel "smoother",
Getting back to how AMD is a more responsive and smoother experience, it's been noted by more than one reviewer. Even on this very website by either Ian or Ryan, not going to look for the link. People don't need a number to realize that, they just feel it. Benchmarks/numbers can be manipulated in many ways, as the tech community has seen time and time again. So, the most obvious proof is from the person sitting in front of the computer and there have been blind tests done that favor AMD systems as well as first hand accounts from reviewers. Benchmarks don't tell the whole story.
This is so unbelievably ridiculous. What product by AMD is smoother than what product by Intel? And in what applications?
[Citation needed].It's actually not 'unbelievably ridiculous'. In general terms, the difference is felt in everyday usage, from browsing to exploring windows, opening/closing applications and windows, scrolling, etc. In general, with the systems i've used, intel systems are less responsive. Microstutter if you will.
Just to reinforce this a bit, here's a picture.
The Orange line is an Intel Atom.
The green line is a Via Nano.
The red line is a Via Nano that identifies itself as an AMD processor (same Nano as green line).
The Purple line is a Via Nano that identifies itself as an Intel processor (again, same Nano..)
And here's an FTC ruling regarding Intel coercing Cinebench to favor Intel in benchmarks (part of anti-trust lawsuits) :
http://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cases/091216intelcmpt.pdf
And of course now we have Samsung, LG, and Asus cheating on phone benchmarks (notably Motorola, Apple and Google branded phones *do not and have not* cheated) :
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7384/state-of-cheating-in-android-benchmarks
All that said I do think you can look at multiple benchmarks and get a general sense of performance. However, it's obvious that many benchmarks are in fact "borked" and the integrity of the industry surrounding those benchmarks \ review sites \ enthusiast sites is essentially non existent.
[Citation needed].
Less responsive despite being faster. Damn, trolls were more creative back in the day.
Cut the insults and derogatory remarks would ya?
I do not understand this "Smoothness" non-sense. I have owned AMD PC's since a K6-2. I have also had probably almost as many intel ones.
The only time I have ever thought AMD felt "Smooth" was when I was waiting for it to complete the same task intel would have finished 50% sooner, and sitting there tapping my foot. Nice, smooth desktop. Such smooth. Much fast.
Intel takes the fun out off all of their lower their processors because THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU. Intel doesn't need gamers, and they know that, so they locked all their low end processors. I think it's funny that you're so all about intel when it's apparent they're laughing all the way to the bank.
Intel has shot itself in the foot because it's become an elitist product that isn't made for enthusiasts who are unwilling to fork over thousands of dollars. Intel even goes out of it's way to STOP enthusiasts from over clocking their processors, the older Xeons were unlocked until intel realized that people could get hexacore speed without paying exorbitant prices for sandy bridge E.
It's actually not 'unbelievably ridiculous'. In general terms, the difference is felt in everyday usage, from browsing to exploring windows, opening/closing applications and windows, scrolling, etc. In general, with the systems i've used, intel systems are less responsive. Microstutter if you will.
Indeed. If Intel owners are supposed to be "AMD hating fanboys", where does that leave Intel owners with AMD GFX cards? "Self haters"?... :biggrin:"BTW, I have managed to be Nvidia free all this time, despite not hating Nvidia".
Yes several over the years, going way back to the heatsink-less 386/486 clones with 1MB RAM, a 40MB HDD + floppy drive, old flickery CRT monitors and MS-DOS 2.0...Have you ever owned one? I own both.
Both are improving much slower mainly as a result of hitting the GHz wall:-"Now, after intel has unequivocally taken the performance crown, they are improving MUCH slower. Intel is nothing without AMD."
"AMD APUs make intels HD Graphics look ridiculous."
Indeed. There are many many examples, BAPCO is another. intel can't even defend itself in these examples, they're busted. Yet they go on with impunity and a certain group flood the forums to make as much noise as possible to drown out any questions raised.
AMD said:http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=74093&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1576608&highlight=
AMD (NYSE: AMD) today announced that it will not endorse the SYSmark 2012 Benchmark (SM2012), which is published by BAPCo (Business Applications Performance Corporation). Along with the withdrawal of support, AMD has resigned from the BAPCo organization.
"Technology is evolving at an incredible pace, and customers need clear and reliable measurements to understand the expected performance and value of their systems," said Nigel Dessau, senior vice president and Chief Marketing Officer at AMD. "AMD does not believe SM2012 achieves this objective. Hence AMD cannot endorse or support SM2012 or remain part of the BAPCo consortium."
AMD will only endorse benchmarks based on real-world computing models and software applications, and which provide useful and relevant information. AMD believes benchmarks should be constructed to provide unbiased results and be transparent to customers making decisions based on those results. Currently, AMD is evaluating other benchmarking alternatives, including encouraging the creation of an industry consortium to establish an open benchmark to measure overall system performance
Citation needed for what? Our personal experiences? If you want the results of the blind tests, search for them yourself. There's enough people around that remember the results that I don't need to prove anything. As for reviewers opinions, search Anandtech. There's enough people that remember that also.