Yea but both AMD and nVidia were using TSMC but Intel has it's own fabs which just happen to be the best in the world lol.
Yea but both AMD and nVidia were using TSMC but Intel has it's own fabs which just happen to be the best in the world lol.Sure, but at least one expects improvement out of a new node and that didn't exactly happen this round for AMD.
And NVIDIA was beating AMD even with process disadvantage if I'm not mistaken (GF8 90nm vs HD 2900 80nm).
Does not compute.
in high density server blade systems (8/16 module blade chassis) the trend is to move towards high quantities of cheaper/lower end stuff. It's more cost effective and easier to repair too.
yeaaaahhhh!!!!! back to pay $800+ for a pentium III like processor, best news ever bro!
If their prices tripled tomorrow i won't give them a dime for my build in a few days.
Choice between a $650 2500k and a $170 1090t will be easy LOL.
hans007 said:mobile is already 60% of the market. they shoudl have been going mobile a long time ago. desktop.
i can't even think of a reason to get a desktop if you are non gamer at this point when laptops are so cheap.
VH: What do you think of the upcoming battle between RenderScript, CUDA and OpenCL?
TL: Developers will drive this and our goal is to put the core technologies into their hands so that they can make the right decision for them, given that we will be focusing on Renderscript and OpenCL.
LONDON Processor licensor ARM Holdings plc is trying to persuade Advanced Micro Devices Inc., the long-time rival to global chip leader Intel Corp. to license ARM processors and use them instead of the x86 architecture.
East also said: "AMD has signaled they are going through a rethink of their strategy, and that must provide a heightened opportunity for ARM. They might use ARM microprocessors in the future and you've got to expect that we would be trying to persuade them of that."
Well i'm sure it was fun while it lasted, for the shills. What a pathetic state of affairs the internet has become. A statement is released, twisted and distorted by some, then propagated across the internet as truth. It took about 24 hours for this story:
http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/29/2596978/amd-committed-to-x86?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=txt
to develop into AMD's obituary. It's no wonder why tech forums have turned into such rabid, controversial cesspools. From viral marketing to nano trading, credibility has been erroded to zero.
Now, I think AMD is in the position to push for OpenCL/X86 and OpenCL/ARM for the desktop market. They have GPU and CPU capability for this.
Interestingly, on the mobile processing front of Intel vs ARM, this guy predicts that in the long-term, ARM will have the momentum. The reason is because if you have a grasp of tech history, you will know that it is a much better proposition for companies to develop UP (as ARM will be doing) then to develop DOWN (as Intel will have to do in the mobile market).
The way I see things, once Intel develops a dockable smartphone running another OS (capable of keyboard apps).....it would be only a matter of time before the larger, more expensive x86 CPUs could move over to the new software.
That's a good point.
I think Intel is beginning to realize MS is not the most optimal software partner.
A good example: Look at the run times of an older 45nm Apple Laptop (with a discrete GPU sucking extra power nonetheless) compared to a Windows 7 Intel laptop (running only an IGP). IIRC, the Apple Notebooks do much better (even with the same size battery as a Windows Laptop).
I'm sure if you give Microsoft just a 4-5 specific hardware platforms to develop for, they can have that level of battery life too.
It will be interesting to compare the Windows ARM laptops (due middle of 2013) to Apple's (likely) ARMv8 laptop.
How much will having to accommodate different hardware vendors (Qualcomm, TI, Nvidia, etc) impact battery?
It would seem to me that as things currently stand MS doesn't have to try its hardest (simply due to the fact they have a near monopoly on x86). However, the situation with ARM laptop will likely be reversed and we may see them put out a near max effort until they achieve whatever metric they set out to achieve.
Im a big fan of Nvidia and Intel, and at first glance I thought "Oh good, let AMD burn!", but then I realize how handing a monopoly to nvidia and intel wont be for anybody's benifit but their own.
If amd goes into arm it's going to be ugly. So many competitors, low margins and requiring cash for development which they don't have at the moment.
Analysis: Why ARM-AMD makes sense
Peter Clarke
4/27/2011 8:44 AM EDT
LONDON Warren East, CEO of processor licensor ARM, says there is no story here.
East says that he and his CFO Tim Score were asked about AMD during analyst discussions over ARM's record first quarter financial results and that he had simply said that ARM has been trying to sell to AMD for long time as ARM's shareholders would expect. And as AMD is rethinking its strategic options there is clearly a "heightened opportunity" to make that sale.
That AMD might abandon or at least augment with licensed-in ARM processors the x86 processor architecture that has defined the company for 20 years, is to think the unthinkable. But it clearly makes sense. Such a move could not happen overnight. It may take years with x86 processors from AMD hanging on in some applications but the general arguments seem compelling.
And such a move supports ARM's increasing rivalry with Intel and its position in the IBM/Globalfoundries Common Platform Architecture camp.
Since AMD made providing x86 cores its primary business, it has always been in the shadow of Intel. This is partly because as Intel is the definer of the architecture, AMD is always playing catch-up; trying to provide a code-compatible processor at a better price. And Intel, as market leader with phenomenally deep pockets, has been able to use a mixture of pricing and manufacturing leadership to keep AMD under pressure.
Indeed, AMD was forced to divest itself of in-house manufacturing two years ago as it could no longer afford to keep developing manufacturing technology and putting down billions of dollars to build wafer fabs in which to run them at the same time as developing microprocessors. That divestiture was the seed for the creation of Globalfoundries Inc., now one of its foundry partners.
Intel follower or ARM-based leader?
But clearly the transition from simple multicore to many-core processing also represents a fundamental shift in battleground for a company like AMD. Software becomes much more important and to a degree it resets the competition. Intel has as little idea as anyone else, possibly less idea, about how to make efficient use of many-core processor chips. This would therefore be the right time for AMD to jump ship.
While AMD is focused solely on the x86 architecture its primary requirement is to make ICs perform like Intel's. And with multicore developments Intel is becoming harder to track it is quite probably too expensive for a fabless company that is only in the PC market, such as AMD, to do the work continually playing catch-up with Intel.
The only prize that AMD gets for that strategy is lot of expense and always being second to Intel, which may not itself be making all the right moves.
But if AMD joins the extended ARM ecosystem, in return for a few million dollars and a few percent royalty per chip it gets ready-made architectures that it can bolt together leaving it time to focus on performance at the system-level. And with full versions of Windows becoming available on ARM processors, this gives AMD the possibility to address not only the PC market but the broader consumer platform-style requirements of many OEMs.
This can get AMD out from under the thin-margin PC business into a broader landscape that roams from mobile phones to tablets to PCs. It does introduce AMD to competition from the likes of Samsung and others, but AMD has to be willing to back itself as creating value at doing something.
Now the choice between Windows running on x86 and Windows running on ARM becomes one of which is more power-efficient and which is a customers' preference.
Fusion goes ARM?
It thus becomes possible to read some significance into the presence of Microsoft and ARM executives as keynoters at an upcoming Fusion development conference. The event will run June 13 to 16 in Bellevue, Washington, which is Microsoft's backyard, and include more than 50 technical sessions spanning areas including multimedia, user interfaces, business and high-performance computing and security.
The event might provide a good opportunity to announce the extension of Fusion to accommodate licensed cores such as Cortex-A series cores or Mali graphics along-side x86 cores.
A board-level strategic decision to go with ARM might also fit with the departure of AMD's CEO. When Dirk Meyer quit as AMD CEO in January 2011, reports suggested he was forced out by a board of directors dissatisfied with AMD's lack of chips for the tablet computer and mobile market.
Now it may be that a hard-pressed AMD was simply unable to create designs for all the different sectors and performance profiles in a proliferating PC landscape. But that alone is reason to get off the x86 treadmill and let ARM do some of the heavy lifting. And having missed the tablet computer boom ARM licensing would provide the fastest way for AMD to get a chip to market and make up lost ground.
A licensing move by AMD would, of course, exactly fit with ARM's commercial battle with Intel. Indeed, it would recognize ARM taking over from AMD as Intel competitor-in-chief as well as pushing back on the global chip leader painting the company into a tighter corner.
If it came to the point where the x86 architecture is not worth second-sourcing what does that say about the value of the first-source chips?
ARM takeover of AMD unlikely
The one thing that might confuse this picture is if, as part of its strategic thinking, the AMD board favors selling off the company to some cash-rich company that fancies picking up a ready-made product line, IC engineering team and customer list.
Is it possible that ARM could bid for AMD? I doubt it.
Even though ARM is now piling up cash at a phenomenal rate and could probably leverage borrowings to make a bid for AMD such a move into becoming a fabless chip company itself would run alien to the business model that Warren East as inherited and nurtured.
There was a time at the microcontroller end of the market when ARM had a dalliance there. In January 2004 ARM announced plans to acquire Triscend Corp., a developer of configurable system-on-chip devices and customizable microcontrollers. By February the deal had broken down, it is believed after some plain speaking by ARM's licensee community and in March 2004 it was announced that FPGA firm Xilinx Inc. would pick up Triscend.
Similarly an eagerness to compete with Intel by buying AMD would likely create howls of protest amongst ARM licensees that would see a newly ARM-ed AMD as competition. And why spend money buying AMD when AMD would be prepared to pay ARM to join the club?
For these reasons AMD as an independent fabless chip company working on multicore ICs made using the ARM architecture seems the most cost-effective and likely outcome. And that, in turn, might prompt some strategic rethinking at the world's largest semiconductor company.