Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > Video Cards and Graphics

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-04-2012, 03:45 PM   #51
3DVagabond
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 8,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sontin View Post
As long as there is no artificial limitation (= missing driver optimizations)...
I'm not an expert, by any means, but I've read that there are no optimizations in the drivers. The OpenCL benchmark bares that out.
3DVagabond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 03:49 PM   #52
BenSkywalker
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 8,955
Default

Quote:
Consumer cards run OpenCL as well as the workstation equivalent. It's not something that's driver optimized. A 7970 is just as good as a W9000.
7970 doesn't have ECC, it is useless in the K20's market.
BenSkywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 03:56 PM   #53
3DVagabond
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 8,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenSkywalker View Post
7970 doesn't have ECC, it is useless in the K20's market.
It will eliminate a lot of the required support. They aren't going to charge an extra $2500 for 6gig of ECC RAM.
3DVagabond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 04:02 PM   #54
sontin
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3DVagabond View Post
I'm not an expert, by any means, but I've read that there are no optimizations in the drivers. The OpenCL benchmark bares that out.
Sure there are. nVidia is limiting the DP performance, the openGL performance in certain applications and the rasterizing throughput in their consumer products. AMD is not doing it because they have no huge market share in the workstation and HPC market. So it does not hurt them when people buying their consumer products over their FirePro and FireStream cards.
sontin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 04:15 PM   #55
3DVagabond
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 8,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sontin View Post
Sure there are. nVidia is limiting the DP performance, the openGL performance in certain applications and the rasterizing throughput in their consumer products. AMD is not doing it because they have no huge market share in the workstation and HPC market. So it does not hurt them when people buying their consumer products over their FirePro and FireStream cards.
I was just talking OpenCL. Nothing else.

As far as it not hurting AMD to not limit their consumer cards, how do you figure that? Every consumer card that's sold instead of a Firepro is lost revenue. The argument could be made that they would sell more Firepro cards if they crippled their consumer cards. Sorry, don't see the logic in your reasoning (Although I do understand what you are saying. No need to repeat it.). I think it's just a fundamental difference in how the 2 companies conduct themselves.
3DVagabond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 04:34 PM   #56
BenSkywalker
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 8,955
Default

Quote:
They aren't going to charge an extra $2500 for 6gig of ECC RAM.
I think you are correct, which is why they are headed in the direction of going out of business.
BenSkywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 04:48 PM   #57
3DVagabond
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 8,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenSkywalker View Post
I think you are correct, which is why they are headed in the direction of going out of business.
LOL Yes, it's their nonexistent pro GPU market that's killing them. Here I thought it was their CPU's not being competitive.
3DVagabond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 05:39 PM   #58
BenSkywalker
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 8,955
Default

Quote:
LOL Yes, it's their nonexistent pro GPU market that's killing them.
Profoundly inept management. You have a device you can charge $4000 for, so sell it for $1500 instead? Stupid. No nice way to say it.
BenSkywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 05:49 PM   #59
3DVagabond
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 8,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenSkywalker View Post
Profoundly inept management. You have a device you can charge $4000 for, so sell it for $1500 instead? Stupid. No nice way to say it.
Who is going to pay $4k for an AMD GPU when they can but one that runs better from nVidia for the same price? AMD has to charge less.
3DVagabond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:08 PM   #60
BenSkywalker
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 8,955
Default

Quote:
Who is going to pay $4k for an AMD GPU when they can but one that runs better from nVidia for the same price? AMD has to charge less.
Then charge $3500. AMD is heading in the direction of going out of business. This is mainly because their margins are pitiful. If you have a device set to make *really good* margins, and you don't, you are a complete and utter idiot. A moron. You shouldn't be trusted to run a maintenance crew, let alone be the executive for a multi billion dollar company.

I would rather not have an Intel/nVidia monopoly in the PC space, if the AMD fans would stop worshiping their idiocy and scream for them to do something smart for a change, maybe they would.
BenSkywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:29 PM   #61
SlowSpyder
Diamond Member
 
SlowSpyder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 8,833
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenSkywalker View Post
Then charge $3500. AMD is heading in the direction of going out of business. This is mainly because their margins are pitiful. If you have a device set to make *really good* margins, and you don't, you are a complete and utter idiot. A moron. You shouldn't be trusted to run a maintenance crew, let alone be the executive for a multi billion dollar company.

I would rather not have an Intel/nVidia monopoly in the PC space, if the AMD fans would stop worshiping their idiocy and scream for them to do something smart for a change, maybe they would.

I think the reason AMD doesn't get the margins is because they are often a follower, not a leader. Nvidia was getting booted out of the chipset business, all that R&D money being flushed down the toilet. So what do they do? They build a GPGPU market.

The computing world is going mobile with ultra lower power parts, not all out performance. Nvidia creates Tegra. AMD says, oh yea, we can make something too... only after ousting Dirk do they head that way.

Usually the smaller company should be more nimble than the giants, but it seems like Intel was able to turn on a dime with the Pentium 4 while AMD kept trucking along with the very mediocore Phenom I and Bulldozer.

To me it seems like AMD doesn't have the margins because they never have the foresight to see an upcoming opportunity. They're always following after a competitor creates the market.

As you said, you have to look towards management for that.
__________________
Steve
FX 9370 / 7970 / ASRock 990FX Extreme 9
GO PACKERS!

Last edited by SlowSpyder; 11-04-2012 at 06:32 PM.
SlowSpyder is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 08:10 PM   #62
3DVagabond
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 8,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenSkywalker View Post
Then charge $3500. AMD is heading in the direction of going out of business. This is mainly because their margins are pitiful. If you have a device set to make *really good* margins, and you don't, you are a complete and utter idiot. A moron. You shouldn't be trusted to run a maintenance crew, let alone be the executive for a multi billion dollar company.

I would rather not have an Intel/nVidia monopoly in the PC space, if the AMD fans would stop worshiping their idiocy and scream for them to do something smart for a change, maybe they would.
Listen, you can leave out the , "AMD fans worshiping their idiocy". You wouldn't pay $3500 for an AMD GPU either. Quit trying to inflame the thread. AMD's financial trouble is their CPU business getting crushed by Intel. It's not their pro GPU business. Trying to go head to head against nVidia's workstation business, which I've already sighted the difficulties with, and CUDA is a losing proposition. They are trying to manipulate it in an open source direction where they have a better chance of competing. You should stick to commenting on something you have some idea about. Throwing around insults isn't going to get this anywhere.
3DVagabond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 08:28 PM   #63
lambchops511
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 659
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3DVagabond View Post
Listen, you can leave out the , "AMD fans worshiping their idiocy". You wouldn't pay $3500 for an AMD GPU either. Quit trying to inflame the thread. AMD's financial trouble is their CPU business getting crushed by Intel. It's not their pro GPU business. Trying to go head to head against nVidia's workstation business, which I've already sighted the difficulties with, and CUDA is a losing proposition. They are trying to manipulate it in an open source direction where they have a better chance of competing. You should stick to commenting on something you have some idea about. Throwing around insults isn't going to get this anywhere.
Its not the workstation business that is worth $$, its the HPC market. Titan is buying something just under 20 000 GPUs (you can do the math on revenue), how many workstation / GeForce GPUs do you need to sell to make equivalent revenue (never mind profit).

CUDA is not a losing proposition, the technologies available on CUDA is miles ahead, especially in w. the new Dynamic Parallelism + HyperQ, this almost to many researches / scientists, immediately doubles a GPU value even if it is zero percent faster.

Finally, the customers for these large GPU purchases already invested heavily onto the CUDA codebase (because at the time there was nothing better out there, NVIDIA drove GPGPU computing). The cost of porting our applications (which may not even be possible w. the state of OpenCL) is not worth the cost of $500 per GPU. However, if AMD came up with substantially faster Compute GPUs with decent developer support, then researchers and scientists would be willing to invest their time to do the port.
lambchops511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 08:36 PM   #64
tviceman
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,938
Default

18,688 GPU's at $3000 a pop is $56 million in revenue. It's a nice chunk of change, but a drop in the bucket compared to what Intel makes on a daily basis - $150 million dollars of revenue each and every day.

ORNL needs to be merely a starting point for K20, and K20 needs to sell huge for Nvidia to be able to continue to maintain it's dominance over AMD and Intel in 2-4 years.
tviceman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 08:44 PM   #65
lambchops511
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 659
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tviceman View Post
18,688 GPU's at $3000 a pop is $56 million in revenue. It's a nice chunk of change, but a drop in the bucket compared to what Intel makes on a daily basis - $150 million dollars of revenue each and every day.

ORNL needs to be merely a starting point for K20, and K20 needs to sell huge for Nvidia to be able to continue to maintain it's dominance over AMD and Intel in 2-4 years.
Ya its chump change to Intel, maybe thats why Intel (110B) is worth >10x NVIDIA (7.5B) which is worth like 5x AMD (1.5B).
lambchops511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 09:04 PM   #66
BenSkywalker
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 8,955
Default

Quote:
You wouldn't pay $3500 for an AMD GPU either. Quit trying to inflame the thread.
I work in distribution. We have over 100 racks used to calculate trends per item spread out across the locations of my employer. These racks came online in 2008 at the cost of $350,000 each. They have half the computing power of AMD's 9000 series GPGPUs. I'm not inflaming the thread, its' just this whole thing with me knowing what I'm talking about and you not having the slightest clue. Would I put in the order for a $3500 part that was faster then the $350,000 part we currently have? Yeah, without hesitation. Would I get a bonus for pulling something like that off? Probably. Would AMD make truckloads of money on me ordering a couple hundred of them? Yep, close to three quarters of a million dollars. So I get increased performance for my job making my life easier, I'm happy, my bosses save ~$50 million dollars so they are dancing a jig, and AMD makes a ton of profit. Downside here?

Quote:
Trying to go head to head against nVidia's workstation business, which I've already sighted the difficulties with, and CUDA is a losing proposition. They are trying to manipulate it in an open source direction where they have a better chance of competing.
I'm not a brain damaged donkey, so explain how 'open source' is going to help them with anything at all in the GPGPU space. The code I need to run, like almost anyone else that is going to be in a comparable position, is proprietary as hell. We don't allow most of our employees to ever see it any way, not the code base itself, even the program running. You have to have clearance to get into the room where the machine is located(no remote access to it). The financial field and insurance industries are the same way. Open source is so much ignorant fan boy wanking.

Quote:
You should stick to commenting on something you have some idea about.
When is the next time you are going to be putting a purchase order in for a million dollars worth of computing hardware in this segment? When is the last time you got paid for the work you handled on one? Maybe you should sit back down at the little kids table while the grownups have a discussion
BenSkywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 11:20 PM   #67
3DVagabond
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 8,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lambchops511 View Post
Its not the workstation business that is worth $$, its the HPC market. Titan is buying something just under 20 000 GPUs (you can do the math on revenue), how many workstation / GeForce GPUs do you need to sell to make equivalent revenue (never mind profit).

CUDA is not a losing proposition, the technologies available on CUDA is miles ahead, especially in w. the new Dynamic Parallelism + HyperQ, this almost to many researches / scientists, immediately doubles a GPU value even if it is zero percent faster.

Finally, the customers for these large GPU purchases already invested heavily onto the CUDA codebase (because at the time there was nothing better out there, NVIDIA drove GPGPU computing). The cost of porting our applications (which may not even be possible w. the state of OpenCL) is not worth the cost of $500 per GPU. However, if AMD came up with substantially faster Compute GPUs with decent developer support, then researchers and scientists would be willing to invest their time to do the port.
You misread what I was saying. I said going against nVidia in the workstation and going against CUDA is a losing proposition for the reasons sighted. They're entrenched. Much like ORNL isn't changing from AMD CPU's to Intel, even though they could gain performance, or efficiency, or both.

You obviously know more about this. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I don't believe AMD has the resources to actually go after the HPC market internally. I believe that AMD is more wanting others to do the support for OpenCL and they'll have the hardware that's optimized for it. It might work in the same way Linux has as far as becoming the OS of choice.

I'm not saying this approach is a gimme and is guaranteed to work. I just think, at this point in time, it's AMD's only realistic option.

As far as profit for Tesla GPU's, don't underestimate the cost of the support nVidia supplies. They don't charge more just because they can. It's a very expensive product when you consider the dev costs for both the hardware and the after sale support. Highly profitable? Yes. It's not as simple as selling $500 GPU's for $4k, like some on these boards want to make it seem. The extra 10mos. of intensive development for GK110 cost nVidia a lot of money. Likely many many millions. Money that I doubt AMD has. I believe that if AMD suffered the delays that nVidia has with, first Fermi, and then Kepler, they might have bankrupted themselves. I can only imagine what all of the nVidia proponents here would have been saying about AMD if they executed in a similar fashion. I'll bet more idiocy and moron comments than we see now.
3DVagabond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 11:26 PM   #68
3DVagabond
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 8,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenSkywalker View Post
I work in distribution. We have over 100 racks used to calculate trends per item spread out across the locations of my employer. These racks came online in 2008 at the cost of $350,000 each. They have half the computing power of AMD's 9000 series GPGPUs. I'm not inflaming the thread, its' just this whole thing with me knowing what I'm talking about and you not having the slightest clue. Would I put in the order for a $3500 part that was faster then the $350,000 part we currently have? Yeah, without hesitation. Would I get a bonus for pulling something like that off? Probably. Would AMD make truckloads of money on me ordering a couple hundred of them? Yep, close to three quarters of a million dollars. So I get increased performance for my job making my life easier, I'm happy, my bosses save ~$50 million dollars so they are dancing a jig, and AMD makes a ton of profit. Downside here?



I'm not a brain damaged donkey, so explain how 'open source' is going to help them with anything at all in the GPGPU space. The code I need to run, like almost anyone else that is going to be in a comparable position, is proprietary as hell. We don't allow most of our employees to ever see it any way, not the code base itself, even the program running. You have to have clearance to get into the room where the machine is located(no remote access to it). The financial field and insurance industries are the same way. Open source is so much ignorant fan boy wanking.



When is the next time you are going to be putting a purchase order in for a million dollars worth of computing hardware in this segment? When is the last time you got paid for the work you handled on one? Maybe you should sit back down at the little kids table while the grownups have a discussion
For someone who is so superior, and a professional you have the vocabulary of a teenager on a street corner. You've now earned your way onto my ignore list for being anything but a professional in the way you communicate with people. You're merely arrogant, crude, and rude to deal with.
3DVagabond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 11:53 PM   #69
BoFox
Senior Member
 
BoFox's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 689
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3DVagabond View Post
For someone who is so superior, and a professional you have the vocabulary of a teenager on a street corner. You've now earned your way onto my ignore list for being anything but a professional in the way you communicate with people. You're merely arrogant, crude, and rude to deal with.
Looks like it'll be 13 SMX, I think.
__________________
Man, zillions of years!

What is this thing right now?
Tell me, just what is this thing right now?
BoFox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 12:18 AM   #70
3DVagabond
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 8,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoFox View Post
Looks like it'll be 13 SMX, I think.
I'll be curious to see. So far the sources I have seen that say 13 are rumor sites. That doesn't mean they can't be right, but it does mean they could be wrong.
3DVagabond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 12:23 AM   #71
Jaydip
Diamond Member
 
Jaydip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,294
Default

I will offer my perspective here.Just because you have good hardware doesn't ensure success, you need to create a ecosystem which AMD severely lacks.When we entered in a contract with NV there were literally no competition from anyone.Organizations feel safe when you have some proprietary stuff as they invest a lot of money and energy in it.Open doesn't necessarily means better.Now if AMD comes with a superior solution now it will still take a long time to forfeit CUDA and go with Opencl. Migration is a pain and it never works smoothly so you need to consider that as well.Moreover NV is very easy to work with as it has been my experience.AMD has almost always been a follower, they need to change that.
__________________
Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit || i7 4770K @ 4.2 with CM V6-GT || MSI Z87 GD 65||MSI Gaming N780 TF 3GD5/OC GeForce GTX 780|| Corsair Vengeance 16GB 1600 || WD Cavier Black 1TB FAEX X2|| HAF-X || Corsair TX750 V2 ||AL MX 5021E || DELL U2713HM||SideWinder X4||Razer DA

Last edited by Jaydip; 11-05-2012 at 04:41 AM.
Jaydip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 01:08 AM   #72
BenSkywalker
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 8,955
Default

Quote:
Migration is a pain and it never works smoothly so you need to consider that as well.
This is actually fairly huge and not to be underestimated. One of the problems moving forward for AMD is going to be the migration period. For companies like mine, we have yet to migrate to GPGPU computing but we will certainly be doing so on the next upgrade cycle. We didn't do it last time because it wasn't viable, this time it will be and the associated costs of porting the code base won't be that bad as we always refine/improve the code when we move to a new platform anyway(always to increase accuracy which higher computing power allows). Long term where it gets tricky for AMD is once companies are already on nVidia, it becomes very easy to stick with them and much more difficult to break into that territory for mass market concerns(speaking of smaller scale machines with larger penetration, not custom setups like Titan where it is much less of a concern).

If they started moving W9000 parts today and dropped every penny of additional revenue into increasing the development platform they could start to build themselves a nice revenue stream. nV's pro division profits more then AMD as a whole. If AMD can start to get decent amounts of black going out of more then just their consumer GPU division perhaps they can mount a successful counter to Intel on the desktop(may be wishful thinking, but it is their most viable option).

Quote:
ORNL needs to be merely a starting point for K20, and K20 needs to sell huge for Nvidia to be able to continue to maintain it's dominance over AMD and Intel in 2-4 years.
XeonPhi is going to be their biggest competitor. Again using my company as an example, while porting the code base when we swap platforms wouldn't be a major additional expense, it would be an expense and it remains to be seen if that cost is going to be greater then moving to XeonPhi. I'm thinking it is going to come down to how much we are hurt by the non conventional architecture of XeonPhi versus traditional x86 and how well the SIMD units are going to cooperate with our code base. If it works well, then we will almost assuredly end up with Intel over nVidia.

Last edited by BenSkywalker; 11-05-2012 at 01:14 AM.
BenSkywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 11:45 AM   #73
Silverforce11
Diamond Member
 
Silverforce11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,682
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keysplayr View Post
Intel is 14x the size of Nvidia but can't compete against Nvidia in the compute arena. Not even with a two node process advantage could they compete. Not even with Knights Corner. So it isn't the behemoth size that makes you superior. It surely makes it easier to "become" superior but the product is key.
Anyway, just thinking out loud.
This is the point. Intel can't even compete vs NV in the GPGPU sector.. AMD has NO chance. They need to shut up shop and focus on other markets (gaming, mobile, smartphones/tablets etc) where they do have a good chance. A poor company bleeding money needs to invest wisely.
__________________

Rig 1: 3570K | Z77 E4 | Crossfire R290 | 840 250GB + 840EVO 250GB | 8GB G.Skill Ares 2133 | OCZ 850W Gold+ | Nanoxia DS1 | Ghetto Water
Hobby: Mobile Game Dev & Cryptocoin day-trader
Silverforce11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 12:03 PM   #74
Keysplayr
Elite Member
 
Keysplayr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 19,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverforce11 View Post
This is the point. Intel can't even compete vs NV in the GPGPU sector.. AMD has NO chance. They need to shut up shop and focus on other markets (gaming, mobile, smartphones/tablets etc) where they do have a good chance. A poor company bleeding money needs to invest wisely.
Actually, I feel even AMD would have a better shot at competing against Nvidia in the compute arena than Intel does. If only AMD had the software to back up their massively parallel hardware. That is where their money should have went and they should never have sold snapdragon. Such an awful error.
__________________
Member of Nvidia Focus Group
NVIDIA Focus Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time
to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the Members.

i5 2500K Asus P-Z68-V/Gen3 GTX980 SLI
Keysplayr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 01:01 PM   #75
tviceman
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,938
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keysplayr View Post
Actually, I feel even AMD would have a better shot at competing against Nvidia in the compute arena than Intel does. If only AMD had the software to back up their massively parallel hardware. That is where their money should have went and they should never have sold snapdragon. Such an awful error.
Ironic that snapdragon is the most widely sold SoC today among Android devices.
tviceman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.