R600 Delayed AGAIN!

[Matt2]

I loved AMD, but this whole fiasco has left a real sour taste in my mouth.

Looks like I'll be migrating to Intel after all.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Matt2
I loved AMD, but this whole fiasco has left a real sour taste in my mouth.

Looks like I'll be migrating to Intel after all.

i never loved AMD ... but i always cheered for them ... and i really liked ATi as a *real underdog* to the perceived 'bully' nvidia

but their [amd-ati's] marketing has always *sucked* compared to intel and nvidia ...
--i understood this and even made *excuses* for them and also 'defended' them

this time i am just *disgusted*
:disgust:

this marketing*excuse* is just stupid ... thinking we are even more retarded then they actually are --


*of course* r600 "exists" ... it has evidently existed thru THIRTEEN [13!] versions if we are to believe the "latest" ... certainly there are SOME r600s that will work behind *closed doors* at CeBit

but OBVIOUSLY something is WRONG as PROVEN by their RIDICULOUS response

the more they try to *hide* the issue, the more *obvious* it is to any analyst with at least 1/2 a brain - that they are totally lost

i think they are now *hoping* for a May launch ... at least of their "lesser" and functional mid-range chips to provide a competitive platform

with "luck" we will see r600 then also

don't hold your breath

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Matt2
I loved AMD, but this whole fiasco has left a real sour taste in my mouth.

Looks like I'll be migrating to Intel after all.

Well I went to Intel simply because the C2D is awesome. But I still consider myself an AMD fan. They made CPUs affordable and brought us dual core and 64bit.

This is mostly leftovers from previous ATI management and growing pains from the merger.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Matt2
I loved AMD, but this whole fiasco has left a real sour taste in my mouth.

Looks like I'll be migrating to Intel after all.

Well I went to Intel simply because the C2D is awesome. But I still consider myself an AMD fan. They made CPUs affordable and brought us dual core and 64bit.

This is mostly leftovers from previous ATI management and growing pains from the merger.

we can only *hope* ... but the more i see from their silly attempts to *cover up* the issue ... the less confident i become. They lost their "plausible deniability" with their latest lame attempt

if they really screw the pooch this time, they won't have any money for r700 ... or to fix their marketing.

it's call the Downward Spiral
-NiN

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Matt2
I loved AMD, but this whole fiasco has left a real sour taste in my mouth.

Looks like I'll be migrating to Intel after all.

Well I went to Intel simply because the C2D is awesome. But I still consider myself an AMD fan. They made CPUs affordable and brought us dual core and 64bit.

This is mostly leftovers from previous ATI management and growing pains from the merger.

I agree with your post. AMD was simply awesome to me from my AXP 1700+ TBred-B @ 2.2GHZ ($50) to my A64 3000+ Venice @ 2.7GHZ to my current Opty 170 @ 2.8GHZ.

I planned on waiting to upgrade my mobo + CPU + RAM until AMD came out with something worth while, but I dont want to give AMD any more of my money when they are allowing crap like this to happen under their flag.

Purposely withholding the R600 for "marketing reasons" is BS and I'm not going to support R600 or AMD as a whole until they prove to me that this type of BS is not their standard business practice.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Purposely withholding the R600 for "marketing reasons" is BS and I'm not going to support R600 or AMD as a whole until they prove to me that this type of BS is not their standard business practice.

Well I think most of us assumed the marketing reasons were they didn't have any to sell or the damn things didn't work right. :wine:

 

[DeathReborn]

Originally posted by: Matt2
I loved AMD, but this whole fiasco has left a real sour taste in my mouth.

Looks like I'll be migrating to Intel after all.

Don't count your chickens until they've hatched there.

Barcelona is looking like a C2Q killer.

Intel for GPU's is like sticking a 50cc engine in a pickup.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: ronnn

Originally posted by: Matt2

Purposely withholding the R600 for "marketing reasons" is BS and I'm not going to support R600 or AMD as a whole until they prove to me that this type of BS is not their standard business practice.

Well I think most of us assumed the marketing reasons were they didn't have any to sell or the damn things didn't work right. :wine:

Yeah I know that there is an underlying problem that is delaying the launch, even if they wont admit it.

But to *PROMISE* a Q1 release and then say it's delayed till Q2 "Just cause". BS my friend... BS.

 

[Bill Brasky]

I completely agree that this is BS. However I do feel a little sympathy for AMD's marketing, since they've been hung out to dry by ati's development team. From a business perspective, I don't think it makes sense to tell customers that your flagship product is "broken." Realistically, I don't expect the exact truth because that just doesn't happen, but this does seem like crap.

Like someone said earlier, I look forward to seeing how AMD operates once they are managing the graphics sector.

On side note, when might AMD begin manufacturing gpu's in their own fabs?

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Say whatever you want about Ati and their R600 debacle, but go read AT's latest article on the upcoming Barcelona series. AMD is putting a hell of a lot into these processors, should easily close the gap on Intel.

 

[Gstanfor]

Frankly, AMD deserves a lot of the pain that will be coming their way because of the terrible way they left simply left Socket 939 users high and dry.

There are plenty of S939 owners out there who would like the option to upgrade their CPU to dual core without having to unnecessarily invest in a whole "new" architecture, but AMD has made sure they can't do this.

I was and still am deeply disappointed in AMD for pursuing such a cheap, nasty and downright intel-at-their-worst tactic. I'm certain I am far from alone in my disappointment.

 

[TheRealMrGrey]

Originally posted by: DeathReborn

Don't count your chickens until they've hatched there.

Barcelona is looking like a C2Q killer.

Intel for GPU's is like sticking a 50cc engine in a pickup.

Er? If this is true, why have the C2D/C2Q series chips beaten out the AMD chips in almost every review? Is the tech site industry bought by Intel? Is it all just a media conspiracy against AMD?

For the record, I have no preference for either company. I bought a new system a few months ago, spent many hours reading reviews, and everything I read pointed to a C2D chipset and a x1900 series graphics card (this was before 8800s got released, and I wouldn't have had the $500 to get one anyway). And while the x1950xt card I have is a killer in Oblivion - and thus I am quite happy with it overall - it causes odd shadow rendering artifacts in other games such as NWN2 which don't occur on NVIDA cards. AMD/ATI doesn't seem to be in a hurry to correct problems like this.

If Barcelona turns out to be fantastic, then good show for AMD. But at the moment, they are losing big time in both the CPU and graphics markets, and this can't be denied no matter how loyal their fan-base is. They need to step it up, and soon.

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Frankly, AMD deserves a lot of the pain that will be coming their way because of the terrible way they left simply left Socket 939 users high and dry.

There are plenty of S939 owners out there who would like the option to upgrade their CPU to dual core without having to unnecessarily invest in a whole "new" architecture, but AMD has made sure they can't do this.

I was and still am deeply disappointed in AMD for pursuing such a cheap, nasty and downright intel-at-their-worst tactic. I'm certain I am far from alone in my disappointment.

It's not so easy when you have an integrated memory controller in the CPU.. They had to do this otherwise they would have left the DDR2 market out for themselves..

@DeathReborn ..

You cannot call someone "C2Q Killer" especially when the competitor has released a quad core at least 6-8 months prior to you..What will happen between the new Intel-AMD chipsets is another story.. Besides that Barcelona is a server based system(not that it matters much many Opterons find their home at desktop systems)

 

[Creig]

AMD now owns ATI and their main business is still selling CPUs. With Barcelona/Agena due out before too long and AMD getting back in the chipset business, it's just possible that they want to be able to debut an entire motherboard, CPU and video card package that all sport the AMD logo. AMD is well aware that if the R600 were to be released today, most reviewers would be using a Core 2 system to benchmark it. And I'm certain that fact wouldn't sit too well with the AMD execs.

Would I be happy if it were confirmed that the R600 was finished yet being deliberately withheld? No, of course not. But I'm also not going to discount that it's possible, either. At least not without any proof to the contrary.

 

[Gstanfor]

AMD could easily have waited for Barcelona et-al to introduce DDR-II support. They could also have manufactured small amounts of the older cpu's along side the new for upgraders, but I guess doing that would show up the pointlessness of AM2 performance-wise a little more starkly than they would like...

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
AMD could easily have waited for Barcelona et-al to introduce DDR-II support. They could also have manufactured small amounts of the older cpu's along side the new for upgraders, but I guess doing that would show up the pointlessness of AM2 performance-wise a little more starkly than they would like...

With the DDR-3 coming up in the Q2-Q3 2k7 do you honestly believe that it would be a good idea to have delayed their DDR-II support that much? It's like they would have left the DDR-2 market out of the picture for themselves.. I don't think so.. What AMD did wrong was the stupid and premature move from S754 to S939.. They could have kept the S754 until DDR-2 imho..But then again there was the move from AGP->PCIx as wel so..It was not about the performance, it was about the ram support..

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: ronnn

Originally posted by: Matt2

Purposely withholding the R600 for "marketing reasons" is BS and I'm not going to support R600 or AMD as a whole until they prove to me that this type of BS is not their standard business practice.

Well I think most of us assumed the marketing reasons were they didn't have any to sell or the damn things didn't work right. :wine:

Yeah I know that there is an underlying problem that is delaying the launch, even if they wont admit it.

But to *PROMISE* a Q1 release and then say it's delayed till Q2 "Just cause". BS my friend... BS.

i got to sleep on it and i am "less disgusted" than i was last night ...

AMD's marketing plainly sucks right now as they have nothing to say ... so they just spin and make up FUD to "cover" their ass.

it's "marketspeak" and from the Devil
:evil:


they are desperate
:Q

and i 'feel' their pain
:roll:




[nervous laugh]

 

[DeathReborn]

Originally posted by: TheRealMrGrey

Originally posted by: DeathReborn

Don't count your chickens until they've hatched there.

Barcelona is looking like a C2Q killer.

Intel for GPU's is like sticking a 50cc engine in a pickup.

Er? If this is true, why have the C2D/C2Q series chips beaten out the AMD chips in almost every review? Is the tech site industry bought by Intel? Is it all just a media conspiracy against AMD?

For the record, I have no preference for either company. I bought a new system a few months ago, spent many hours reading reviews, and everything I read pointed to a C2D chipset and a x1900 series graphics card (this was before 8800s got released, and I wouldn't have had the $500 to get one anyway). And while the x1950xt card I have is a killer in Oblivion - and thus I am quite happy with it overall - it causes odd shadow rendering artifacts in other games such as NWN2 which don't occur on NVIDA cards. AMD/ATI doesn't seem to be in a hurry to correct problems like this.

If Barcelona turns out to be fantastic, then good show for AMD. But at the moment, they are losing big time in both the CPU and graphics markets, and this can't be denied no matter how loyal their fan-base is. They need to step it up, and soon.

Considering they are saying 42% FP performance increase & a double digit increase in INT performance over Clovertown (Quad Core Xeon). If you read the article on AT you will see the architectural improvements and if you look on XS (XtremeSystems) you'll see a lot of discussions on it.

@TheRealMrGrey i'm talking about K10 (Barcelona) not Brisbane etc (K8).


As far as the GPU's go, ATI & nVidia have problems they need to fix as i'd particularly like to have DX10 SLI support & there are people that want Flat Panel Scaling in Vista. It's all swings and roundabouts but nVidia are getting a lot more Vista DX10 driver experience than ATI are.

I'd like to see R600/610/630 & G84/86 released asap so I can get to work on upgrading the other PC's in the house.

 

[apoppin]

while we're wishing and dreaming can i make a personal plea for world peace

perhaps we should also pray for AMD

 

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: jim1976

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
AMD could easily have waited for Barcelona et-al to introduce DDR-II support. They could also have manufactured small amounts of the older cpu's along side the new for upgraders, but I guess doing that would show up the pointlessness of AM2 performance-wise a little more starkly than they would like...

With the DDR-3 coming up in the Q2-Q3 2k7 do you honestly believe that it would be a good idea to have delayed their DDR-II support that much? It's like they would have left the DDR-2 market out of the picture for themselves.. I don't think so.. What AMD did wrong was the stupid and premature move from S754 to S939.. They could have kept the S754 until DDR-2 imho..But then again there was the move from AGP->PCIx as wel so..It was not about the performance, it was about the ram support..

If DDR-II support doesn't offer performance worth a damn ( :evil: a DAAMIT? :evil: ), then yes, they should have skipped right over DDR-II support, particuarly in light of how strong DDR support still was and is.

And yes, Athlon64 has been one huge socket fiasco from start to finish. You can't tell me AMD couldn't have anticipated the number of pins Athlon64 would eventually require and simply have designed the socket accordingly from the outset... Having said that most were fairly forgiving of the 754 -- 939 transition because it coincided with the phasing in of PCI-e and out of AGP, socket AM2 on the other hand is completely and utterly pointless.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: jim1976

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
AMD could easily have waited for Barcelona et-al to introduce DDR-II support. They could also have manufactured small amounts of the older cpu's along side the new for upgraders, but I guess doing that would show up the pointlessness of AM2 performance-wise a little more starkly than they would like...

With the DDR-3 coming up in the Q2-Q3 2k7 do you honestly believe that it would be a good idea to have delayed their DDR-II support that much? It's like they would have left the DDR-2 market out of the picture for themselves.. I don't think so.. What AMD did wrong was the stupid and premature move from S754 to S939.. They could have kept the S754 until DDR-2 imho..But then again there was the move from AGP->PCIx as wel so..It was not about the performance, it was about the ram support..

If DDR-II support doesn't offer performance worth a damn ( :evil: a DAAMIT? :evil: ), then yes, they should have skipped right over DDR-II support, particuarly in light of how strong DDR support still was and is.

And yes, Athlon64 has been one huge socket fiasco from start to finish. You can't tell me AMD couldn't have anticipated the number of pins Athlon64 would eventually require and simply have designed the socket accordingly from the outset... Having said that most were fairly forgiving of the 754 -- 939 transition because it coincided with the phasing in of PCI-e and out of AGP, socket AM2 on the other hand is completely and utterly pointless.

Agreed. S939 made sense. AM2 was just plain dumb.

 

[CrystalBay]

Awesome GDC GoW R600 shots...

 

[Dainas]

Originally posted by: Matt2
Agreed. S939 made sense. AM2 was just plain dumb.

Not to mention atleast 70% of AMDs potential upgrade market still uses 939.

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: jim1976

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
AMD could easily have waited for Barcelona et-al to introduce DDR-II support. They could also have manufactured small amounts of the older cpu's along side the new for upgraders, but I guess doing that would show up the pointlessness of AM2 performance-wise a little more starkly than they would like...

With the DDR-3 coming up in the Q2-Q3 2k7 do you honestly believe that it would be a good idea to have delayed their DDR-II support that much? It's like they would have left the DDR-2 market out of the picture for themselves.. I don't think so.. What AMD did wrong was the stupid and premature move from S754 to S939.. They could have kept the S754 until DDR-2 imho..But then again there was the move from AGP->PCIx as wel so..It was not about the performance, it was about the ram support..

If DDR-II support doesn't offer performance worth a damn ( :evil: a DAAMIT? :evil: ), then yes, they should have skipped right over DDR-II support, particuarly in light of how strong DDR support still was and is.

And yes, Athlon64 has been one huge socket fiasco from start to finish. You can't tell me AMD couldn't have anticipated the number of pins Athlon64 would eventually require and simply have designed the socket accordingly from the outset... Having said that most were fairly forgiving of the 754 -- 939 transition because it coincided with the phasing in of PCI-e and out of AGP, socket AM2 on the other hand is completely and utterly pointless.

It's called marketing and support Gstanfor.. You can't eliminate DDR-II support from your plans in this oligopoly market.. Even if that makes no sense for a significant portion of users that will not adopt it..

 

[Gstanfor]

Of course you can. Customers don't want lame duck solutions or to be treated poorly. When you do that to them they embrace your competitor (and thats precisely what happened here)