Extremetech: "AMD cancels 28nm APUs, starts from scratch at TSMC"

[piesquared]

Can you explain this pun to me, "IntEl?" You've done it deliberately numerous times and I don't understand what it references.

Acronymn for Integrated Electronics for which intel is named.

 

[Ajay]

I'm not sure Bobcat needs to be fixed, as far as performance goes. It outperforms Atom and ARM by a healthy amount already (although ARM got some tough competition coming), AMD already has by far the densest GPU logic around (Bobcat's GPU block is much smaller than a PowerVR SGX543MP2 yet outperforms it by a lot, and intel's gpus are hideous on die size v performance), they just need high volume low power chips for tablets. Their Z-01 doesn't appear to be high volume, since it's only in one model.

Good point, especially after looking at the pic NUSNA_Moebius posted. Looks like Intel puts _allot_ more effort into optimizing it's mainstream desktop parts than it's mobile parts.

On the other hand, if they can scale Bobcat's performance up, they'll have a legitimate contender to Intel's ULV chips at a much lower cost.

This is more like what I was thinking (advancing vs fixing). And if AMD can manage to market this right (at least to OEMs), then they could grab some decent market share from Intel. AMD really needs more design wins - and they have an opportunity for that here, if they execute and market effectively.

 

[Idontcare]

Acronymn for Integrated Electronics for which intel is named.

That would be the reasoning for why Intel is named Intel.

How was Intel's name created?

Intel is a combination of the two words "integrated" and "electronics."

Source

Which was not the question.

Can you explain this pun to me, "IntEl?" You've done it deliberately numerous times and I don't understand what it references.

The question is why do you insist on capitalizing the "e" in Intel, spelling it "IntEl" rather than spelling it correctly as "Intel"?

I have my suspicions why (hint, it has something to do with the psychology of a fanboy) but I'd rather not speak for you, we are all waiting on pins and needles to hear your tale.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Good point, especially after looking at the pic NUSNA_Moebius posted. Looks like Intel puts _allot_ more effort into optimizing it's mainstream desktop parts than it's mobile parts.

It depends which segment of "mobile" you are talking about. The Atom chip's focus on absolute low power does not fit well 100% with their high performance process.

On their bread and butter designs like Core, the design focus is on the notebook side. All the better binned SKUs go there.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Damn right. Intel spread enough FUD across the internet it's time the real enthusiasts started standing up for their craft, and stop drinking IntEl's coolaid. I've been saying this for years (as well as some others that simply refuse to fall for IntEl's viral campaign). Finally, these tactics are starting to reveal themselves.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15869683

Anybody with a clue would write IntEl as the headline act in that story.

Anybody with a clue would recognise that the propaganda campaign AMD waged over Bulldozer fits that to a tee.

Thanks to the effort of a paid AMD propagandist spreading lies like "IPC will rise", many poor saps bought AMD motherboards in advance of the reveal of Bulldozer's dud performance.

Appalling conduct.

 

[Vesku]

Tried out my sister's C-50 netbook over the Thanksgiving holiday, AMD has a good thing going with the bobcat line. Hopefully they continue to update it as it has apparently spurred Intel to invest more time and resources into Atom. Win-win for consumers if a performance and feature war heats up in that segment.

 

[piesquared]

That would be the reasoning for why Intel is named Intel.



Which was not the question.


The question is why do you insist on capitalizing the "e" in Intel, spelling it "IntEl" rather than spelling it correctly as "Intel"?

I have my suspicions why (hint, it has something to do with the psychology of a fanboy) but I'd rather not speak for you, we are all waiting on pins and needles to hear your tale.

How about I just call it Integrated Electronics instead of IntEl, since that is what IntEl stands for. Anyway, why do you insist on carrying on this off topic banter?

 

[alyarb]

you are spelling the name incorrectly and at first it seemed there was some attempt at offensive humor, but you are actually just harmlessly misinformed. The name intel is a portmanteau, not an acronym, and it is totally incorrect to capitalize the e.

 

[AtenRa]

http://www.planet3dnow.de/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=4531603&postcount=762

News about cancellation of 28nm low-end at GF is misleading in our view

Post our checks, we view news last week about canceled 28nm low-end products at
GF misleading: 1) prior low-end 40nm products were fabbed at TSMC, 2) With the
yield issues at GF, we believe the status quo was extended, with TSMC to focus on
the low-end and GF on the high-end – we do not view this as a major strategy shift.

 

[podspi]

I wonder if this means the rumors (?) of 28nm Opterons are true, and will be fabbed @ GF, while BC variants will continue to be made at TSMC.

Or maybe they just consider all the 32nm parts high-end, and the upcoming 28nm low-end.

 

[Jacky60]

Whats wrong with AMD's gpu's? They perform great at a better price and better bang for watt. Unless i'm overlooking something?

Maybe Apple knows AMD will be closing down their discreet desktop cards. Which I can't really blame AMD for. Its just really a non-money maker these days. So all the nvidia fannys just might get their wish for amd to be on the way out. Then see how happy they are when it costs $450 or whatever to get a gtx260-192 type card again. :\

Apple don't like products that perform as well or better but are cheaper.

 

[Jacky60]

I kinda laughed at this, but not in a good way.

I've owned AMD CPU's going all the way to my very first 286 system. K6-2, Athlons, XP's, etc. Always liked them for what they were worth, which at many times they were worth more than anything Intel had in the market.

But I have never, not at any time and not on even a single occasion, had any of my friends or family, ever, say anything postive about AMD on those few rare occasions where they could remember such a company even existed.

IMO, in North America at least (family and friends spread from coast to coast), AMD's "brand" is to their detriment. They have associated themselves with low-cost because of low-performance and lowered expectations on behalf of the consumer.

If anything, AMD needs to divorce itself from its brand and attempt to create a new brand. Too much time has passed since they had anything good to associate with their brand.

Now the same was said of Toyota in the 70's and look what they did to build their credibility, AMD is not hopeless, but suggesting they currently have a brand recognition that is leveragable in consumer markets is sadly not true in my experience.

They are on the verge of becoming the next Cyrix IMO. That's not the kind of brand recognition anyone wants for themselves, and that's not the kind of brand recognition that gets you traction in a market.

Right now there is no way I would attempt to convince any of my family to buy an AMD system because I know my family is already, for whatever their reasons, jaded against AMD because AMD has made itself synonomous with low-cost and that means low-quality in the minds of the consumers that my friends and family have turned out to be.

Agreed they have additionally probably tarnished the ATI brand that I believe they should have kept alive and distinct from AMD. I've had loads of great ATI cards and some great AMD cpu's but keeping the two separate would have cost a bit more in marketing terms but allowed AMD to churn our t...rds like Bulldozer without 'ATI' having to share the bullet.
Having said that I would tell my family that Apple is about hype (and arguably usability) BUT you pay a lot more, Intel genuinely does perform better but they aren't 'enthusiasts' nor elite gamers therefore AMD would suit them very well. Having said that everyone who looks at this forum will lose if Intel and Nvidia have effective monopolies of the CPU/GPU market. Capitalism without competition is C.....munism (expletive disguised).