- Joined
- Jun 13, 2016
For the Prosecution:
AMD haven't made a truly competitive CPU in pretty much a decade, which is an eternity in hardware world. Okay, the Phenom II X4 and X6 matched, sort of, the later Core 2s and very early Core i3/5/7s but Intel's Sandy Bridge fucked them like a whore on payday and its successors repeated the feat again, and again, and again.
They don't have the same size or resources of Intel and can't possibly hope to achieve anything other than another disappointment in the same way that the FX series has been. The A series hasn't been bad but isn't really competitive outside of laptops and even there Intel's reduced power offerings are trouncing them.
When was the last time you saw anyone brag about having an AMD?
AMD's finances are in the toilet and Ryzen will be built down to a price and full of traps, hangs, and bugs. They'll send "golden samples" out to reviewers and unload the huge mass of shit tier parts on end users.
For the Defence:
So AMD haven't had a success in years. May I remind you that back in the 2000s, Intel were plagued by shit tier parts and moreover, shit tier parts that nobody could get their hands on. From 1999 when the AMD K6-III 450 defeated the vastly overpriced and badge-engineered Pentium III Katmai, then in 2000 when the original Athlon humiliated the vastly overpriced and only slightly less badge-engineered Pentium III Coppermine, and then from 2001-3 when the Thunderbird made the Pentium 4 look utterly ridiculous (I remember being inordinately proud of having a P4 1500MHz and then inordinately salty watching it struggle as an 1100MHz Thunderbird at half the price and owned by my mate Alex outperform it without even trying), and then as the Athlon XP and 64 demolished the later Pentium 4s and Pentium Ms and even Pentium Ds, the 2000s was all AMD's dominance across most market sectors while Intel survived solely with FUD and PR, until the Core 2 appeared.
Moreover the boot was on the other foot in 1999 as Intel were selling like hot cakes and before that, AMD had NEVER had a truly successful or ground breaking processor since the 386 DX-40. So why can't the same happen again? They came out of nowhere with the original Athlon and then followed it up with Thunderbird shortly afterwards. This was after a similar string of disappointments throughout the 1990s.
The leaks are pretty convincing from the looks of them.
Intel are complacent. They could be selling hexa-core i5s, octa-core i7s, and similar at three quarters of the price if they wanted, not to mention the could probably sell the LGA 2011 platform at half its current price and still have enough cash to bathe in as a result. Their profit margins are higher than Apple's and people still pay them because they know that if they want a desktop PC that can do heavyweight video editing or a server there is no alternative. At the low end they can get away with selling underpowered parts that are basically the same as last year's model but with an extra 100 MHz on the clock and an extra £50 on the price because there is no alternative.
I think the Ryzen will be a good part myself. At the very lease it'll force Intel to want to flog me their stuff for fewer Good Boy Points, assuming it's competitive. Also, the idea of a hexa-core hyper-threaded processor which can trade blows with a £500 LGA 2011 part isn't bad.
I just hope there's an ITX board for it as well...
AMD haven't made a truly competitive CPU in pretty much a decade, which is an eternity in hardware world. Okay, the Phenom II X4 and X6 matched, sort of, the later Core 2s and very early Core i3/5/7s but Intel's Sandy Bridge fucked them like a whore on payday and its successors repeated the feat again, and again, and again.
They don't have the same size or resources of Intel and can't possibly hope to achieve anything other than another disappointment in the same way that the FX series has been. The A series hasn't been bad but isn't really competitive outside of laptops and even there Intel's reduced power offerings are trouncing them.
When was the last time you saw anyone brag about having an AMD?
AMD's finances are in the toilet and Ryzen will be built down to a price and full of traps, hangs, and bugs. They'll send "golden samples" out to reviewers and unload the huge mass of shit tier parts on end users.
For the Defence:
So AMD haven't had a success in years. May I remind you that back in the 2000s, Intel were plagued by shit tier parts and moreover, shit tier parts that nobody could get their hands on. From 1999 when the AMD K6-III 450 defeated the vastly overpriced and badge-engineered Pentium III Katmai, then in 2000 when the original Athlon humiliated the vastly overpriced and only slightly less badge-engineered Pentium III Coppermine, and then from 2001-3 when the Thunderbird made the Pentium 4 look utterly ridiculous (I remember being inordinately proud of having a P4 1500MHz and then inordinately salty watching it struggle as an 1100MHz Thunderbird at half the price and owned by my mate Alex outperform it without even trying), and then as the Athlon XP and 64 demolished the later Pentium 4s and Pentium Ms and even Pentium Ds, the 2000s was all AMD's dominance across most market sectors while Intel survived solely with FUD and PR, until the Core 2 appeared.
Moreover the boot was on the other foot in 1999 as Intel were selling like hot cakes and before that, AMD had NEVER had a truly successful or ground breaking processor since the 386 DX-40. So why can't the same happen again? They came out of nowhere with the original Athlon and then followed it up with Thunderbird shortly afterwards. This was after a similar string of disappointments throughout the 1990s.
The leaks are pretty convincing from the looks of them.
Intel are complacent. They could be selling hexa-core i5s, octa-core i7s, and similar at three quarters of the price if they wanted, not to mention the could probably sell the LGA 2011 platform at half its current price and still have enough cash to bathe in as a result. Their profit margins are higher than Apple's and people still pay them because they know that if they want a desktop PC that can do heavyweight video editing or a server there is no alternative. At the low end they can get away with selling underpowered parts that are basically the same as last year's model but with an extra 100 MHz on the clock and an extra £50 on the price because there is no alternative.
I think the Ryzen will be a good part myself. At the very lease it'll force Intel to want to flog me their stuff for fewer Good Boy Points, assuming it's competitive. Also, the idea of a hexa-core hyper-threaded processor which can trade blows with a £500 LGA 2011 part isn't bad.
I just hope there's an ITX board for it as well...
