Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux, Open-Source Affected In AMD Cutbacks?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    You people seriously think AMD is going under? :lol: :lol: :lol:
    Surely you must be joking. either that or you're not paying any attention to sales. THE simple fact of the matter is that AMD is doing so well that they're having trouble keeping up with the shipments, FX series CPUs are only beginning to stop being sold out, and their other product lines are doing extremely well as well, and of course let's not forget that they also have the Radeon division supporting them as well. AMD is doing now the best it has done in recent history (Since the recession/depression began).

    I would expect that the firings have more to do with the new CEO restructuring things to how he sees fit than anything, I wouldn't know but that'd be my guess.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
      You people seriously think AMD is going under? :lol: :lol: :lol:
      Surely you must be joking. either that or you're not paying any attention to sales.
      They are having a hard time. Read their financials and take a look at their stock price

      THE simple fact of the matter is that AMD is doing so well that they're having trouble keeping up with the shipments, FX series CPUs are only beginning to stop being sold out, and their other product lines are doing extremely well as well,
      Global Foundries is having problems with their yields, that is why there is a shortage.

      and of course let's not forget that they also have the Radeon division supporting them as well. AMD is doing now the best it has done in recent history (Since the recession/depression began).
      That is the one area that is doing OK. In fact it has been the old ATI that has been keeping their heads barely above water the last few years.

      I would expect that the firings have more to do with the new CEO restructuring things to how he sees fit than anything, I wouldn't know but that'd be my guess.
      With the large amount being focused around marketing I wouldn't be surprised. AMD's marketing has been near non existent over the last few years and with the latest round they were over pumping a product that clearly disappointed quite a few people after all the hype build up of BD.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by deanjo View Post
        It's not only "gaming" where BD takes a beating. It gets pretty much dominated across the board.
        Have we looked at the same Benchmarks? Because the ones I have seen you notice that one very heavy CPU workloads involving many heavy threads, Bulldozers beats the i7.
        Its a server product, and people seem to forget that.

        Originally posted by deanjo View Post
        and take a look at their stock price
        Ehm, no. Stock prices are not a measurement of anything, its just a matter of raw speculation based on raw speculation.
        The way I see it, its capitalism at its finest: They fire people instead of cutting the managments and the stock holders payouts.
        Last edited by del_diablo; 11-06-2011, 07:02 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by DaemonFC View Post
          Apparently the current Linux patches floating around already cause a 10-20% gain in most places.

          Vista7 vs. the Vista8 preview looks more like a stalemate to me. Few if any optimizations so far on that side.
          While dreaming maybe. Not in real scenario: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...aliasing&num=1

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by del_diablo View Post
            Have we looked at the same Benchmarks? Because the ones I have seen you notice that one very heavy CPU workloads involving many heavy threads, Bulldozers beats the i7.
            Its a server product, and people seem to forget that.
            Except it's being marketed as a non-server product, and people seem to forget that.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by del_diablo View Post
              Have we looked at the same Benchmarks? Because the ones I have seen you notice that one very heavy CPU workloads involving many heavy threads, Bulldozers beats the i7.
              Its a server product, and people seem to forget that.



              Ehm, no. Stock prices are not a measurement of anything, its just a matter of raw speculation based on raw speculation.
              The way I see it, its capitalism at its finest: They fire people instead of cutting the managments and the stock holders payouts.
              You've nailed it, sir. Seriously, I can't believe all of the FUD that's coming out of his mouth, especially considering that he's a moderator for this website. It makes me wonder if Intel signed him up for their "The Way It's Meant To Be Benchmarked" program, it wouldn't be the first time they've tried to corrupt the media, benchmark vendors, or OEMs to unfairly skew public opinion in their favor.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by leeenux View Post
                You've nailed it, sir. Seriously, I can't believe all of the FUD that's coming out of his mouth, especially considering that he's a moderator for this website. It makes me wonder if Intel signed him up for their "The Way It's Meant To Be Benchmarked" program, it wouldn't be the first time they've tried to corrupt the media, benchmark vendors, or OEMs to unfairly skew public opinion in their favor.
                FYI, I am a stock holder if AMD stock, second of all FX is not a server processor, third the last (and only) intel processor I owned was an 8088-2 (which was swapped out for a NEC V20, then followed by a TI 486, Cyrix 150+, K6-3 450, Athlon 600/850/1700, AMD Windsor 3200, X2 4200/6400, Phenom 9850, Phenom II 955, Phenom II 1090T), fourth financial results are published pubically, look them up for yourself.
                Last edited by deanjo; 11-06-2011, 09:33 AM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by locovaca View Post
                  Except it's being marketed as a non-server product, and people seem to forget that.
                  Bingo, exactly it is marketed as an Uber desktop processor. Can anyone here actually claim that it is remotely worthy of the FX branding?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                    Can anyone here actually claim that it is remotely worthy of the FX branding?
                    I can.
                    Given the right workload, it sure does.
                    The "Bulldozer is a failed architecture" mantra from people claiming they are computer litterate is REALLY getting on my nerves. How short-sighted can one be?
                    Was the whole marketing of BD good though? Hell no. Pushing the 8 cores aspect was a major blunder.

                    Anyway, cut down on the wisecracks, dude, seriously...

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                      They are having a hard time. Read their financials and take a look at their stock price
                      Actually take a look at their P/E, It was around $4 last I checked, which is insanely low for a tech stock. You normalize it to $10 and you'll see that the company is doing well, it's just in terms of stock prices the investors just aren't believing it

                      Normalized, we should be looking at somewhere around $14 a share
                      Last edited by Luke_Wolf; 11-06-2011, 10:43 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by PsynoKhi0 View Post
                        I can.
                        Given the right workload, it sure does.
                        The "Bulldozer is a failed architecture" mantra from people claiming they are computer litterate is REALLY getting on my nerves. How short-sighted can one be?
                        Was the whole marketing of BD good though? Hell no. Pushing the 8 cores aspect was a major blunder.

                        Anyway, cut down on the wisecracks, dude, seriously...
                        How can you seriously call it an FX when it barely beats it's predecessor x6's in most loads? Sure under certain workloads it does excel with a bit of improvement but it is nowhere close to being to the original FX's where they mopped up the floor in pretty much every workload.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                          How can you seriously call it an FX when it barely beats it's predecessor x6's in most loads? Sure under certain workloads it does excel with a bit of improvement but it is nowhere close to being to the original FX's where they mopped up the floor in pretty much every workload.
                          Sandy Bridge barely beats Nehalem under plenty of circumstances. Nehalem barely beat Core2 under plenty of circumstances. Bulldozer beats Sandy Bridge under plenty of circumstances, and/or at least effectively ties it, unless you view benchmarks as a competition, where winning by 1fps is a victory, rather than being a tie within the margin of error.

                          I'm not sure why you're trolling so hard about Bulldozer being a failure when it's anything but a failure. Michael's benchmark article illustrated that under the typically well threaded Linux workload, that it's extremely competitive vs Sandy Bridge, why you insist on saying it's not is quite suspicious. This is a website about benchmarking Linux, I couldn't care less about what Tom's hardware thought of it under Windows.

                          PS: Most of the time the server CPUs and the desktop CPUs, and sometimes even the laptop CPUs all come off of the same wafer, it just doesn't make sense for AMD to create separate desktop and server chips when the desktop market is in terminal decline. So Bulldozer for desktops is a server CPU. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Otherwise, please stop spreading FUD about it, you're going to hurt your own stock prices.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Exactly, and as far as being sold s a high end desktop 8 core CPU is because it still is. This isn't '95 and it's not a 486 clone with only 16Mb of ram, I and anyone else interested in it are going to be running a good dozen apps at the same time natively in Linux and at least a dozen more in at least 1 VM.

                            I know in my case Firefox, Pidgin, Songbird, Vuze, Gimp, LibreOffice, F@H as well as VirtualBox running Haiku and ReactOS are pretty much never not running. I'm often transcoding DVDs and Blurays to WebM usually while playing a game. Having 8 cores just makes that all run that much smoother and would be much closer to how anyone looking to buy any high end desktop chip would actually be using it daily and not these unrealistic benchmarks where you're running just a single app at a time.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Frankly I agree with deanjo. He's being honest, I couldn't see any FUD there. BD's about equal to X6 in many loads, yet more expensive and using more power under load. How does that spell "good"?

                              I actually postponed my purchases a couple of months to see how BD ended up. Guess what? Now typing this on an X6.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by leeenux View Post
                                Sandy Bridge barely beats Nehalem under plenty of circumstances. Nehalem barely beat Core2 under plenty of circumstances. Bulldozer beats Sandy Bridge under plenty of circumstances, and/or at least effectively ties it, unless you view benchmarks as a competition, where winning by 1fps is a victory, rather than being a tie within the margin of error.
                                Is intel marketing their entire line EE editions? BTW I do not consider 1 or 2 fps a victory.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X