So here is where you don't buy there product and force there hand to drop prices.
At the end of the day there prices are high because you the consumer keep buying there product on and in a set routine, so then where is the answer?
shareholders will soon start to yell when the profit for that month is down and they don't recieve a check in the mail for that month therefor the company will be forced to lower prices reguardless
I dont know why people keep saying stuff like this.
I love PC and love to watch the industry grow. I have my whole life.
CPUs have really ceased to be so exciting while GPUs keep going and going.
So a comment like this one makes me cringe. I mean, All that is left is AMD and Nvidia. If people really boycotted them because they are coming out with more/better products? Surely not!!!
I mean, come on. Look at it. The first Hawaii chips on the stock coolers, there is no way AMD was holding back "to milk" their customers. This chip was on the very very edge. Could not run without throttling. Does anyone doubt that AMD was trying? Trying very hard to get the most they could but were limited by heat and power consumption.
It makes perfect sense that the only reason they would have cut down the hawaii was power constraints. There is also the massive transistor density for such a large chip. The yields could have been an issue as well. Either way, the shortage shortly after would have to indicate that they wasnt holding anything back. If the chip was cut down, it would have to be out of pure necessity, nothing less.
If the consumption, heat, and/or yields played a factor in disabling parts for the hawaii, it wouldnt have been a choice. But you could bet your butt that AMD would have been working frantically to get these things in order. Cause when you put all that money in designing a chip, the last thing you want is to end up with a chip that is 10-20% slower because of disabling parts of the die. This isnt about milking anyone, it is about practicalities and respins.
Nvidia once said making huge chips is @#$$@ing hard. And it obviously is. Hawaii was very ambitious for AMD. If they had to cut down parts, i still commend them on their effort. I still would love to see the full chip. The only issue (and it can be as big as one makes it) is that David specifically smacked down the rumor about Hawaii being cut down. Why would he do it if it was really cut down? Perhaps its not something that they were proud of? Maybe they thought they would never release a full chip?
I dont know, i am reaching. But i can see where this wouldnt be cool to some people. It would be dishonest and misleading. But i would be more interested in what a full chip would be like. But then again, I didnt buy Hawaii.
Either way, if it turns out AMD cut down hawaii for the 290x......there is no way they did it to "milk". It would have been pure necessity. A full chip would clearly have toppled nvidia and AMD would never let that go......unless there was no choice.
Facebook
Twitter