So Long CPU Wars. It Was Fun.

[techs]

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/...g-cpu-wars-it-was-fun/

From todays NY Times

The Great Chip Wars, as we?ve come to know them, ended this week ? courtesy of a new marketing campaign from Advanced Micro Devices.

AMD has decided to sell its products under the Vision banner, a slogan that emphasizes the strengths of its graphics chip instead of promoting the abilities of its CPUs, or traditional workhorse chips. PC makers and retailers will promote three flavors of AMD-based computers, called See, Share and Create models.

The See computers are your basic PCs that can handle everyday tasks. The Share computers add features like high-definition video playback and the ability to work with large media files. The Create computers cater to folks who actually want to make movies or edit photos on a large scale.

In the good-old days, AMD, like Intel, talked more about the raw horsepower of its mainstream chips. Famously, the companies would one-up each other from month to month by raising the speeds of their processors.
(click the link to read the rest)


What started with Intels model numbers without speeds has now spread to AMD.

Will Intel and AMD use this to cut down on research into newer and faster chips?

 

[Arcadio]

OP Below.

Originally posted by: techs
Will Intel and AMD use this to cut down on research into newer and faster chips?

You bet. I guess the Singularity won't be reached as soon as I thought.


This timewarp brought to you by vBulletin.

vBulletin® gets people talking.

 

[Crono]

That might be a smart move. Less competition at top tier of CPUs might hurt consumers looking for faster chips at current or faster pace, though.

 

[IGBT]

it's a new business model. lets see what happens.

 

[TridenT]

We are never going to get a CPU that plays Crysis at max settings now are we?

 

[Newbian]

Originally posted by: TridenT
We are never going to get a CPU that plays Crysis at max settings now are we?

I am sure once the forums switch to vb there will be one.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: TridenT
We are never going to get a CPU that plays Crysis at max settings now are we?

ah, the super original comment that comes along every time we have an article about something new CPU/GPU related

 

[Vette73]

Problem is most CPUs are faster then most software needs out there now. I upgraded to a Q6600 and my video editing software only goes up to 55-65% usage on all the cores.

That and Crysis is usually held back by video card, not cpu, from the reviews I see all the time.

 

[Krynj]

I didn't know there ever was a war. Intel makes superior chips.

 

[dighn]

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
I didn't know there ever was a war. Intel makes superior chips.

you must have short memory. there was a period when AMD kicked ass (around the P4 era)

 

[Krynj]

Originally posted by: dighn

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
I didn't know there ever was a war. Intel makes superior chips.

you must have short memory. there was a period when AMD kicked ass (around the P4 era)

I do remember that. But now Intel seems to have an extremely firm grasp on the market.

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Problem is most CPUs are faster then most software needs out there now. I upgraded to a Q6600 and my video editing software only goes up to 55-65% usage on all the cores.

That and Crysis is usually held back by video card, not cpu, from the reviews I see all the time.

Um... A lot of video editing can be done a lot faster with better CPUs... That's one of the main reasons to get the new processors.

 

[dighn]

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix

Originally posted by: dighn

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
I didn't know there ever was a war. Intel makes superior chips.

you must have short memory. there was a period when AMD kicked ass (around the P4 era)

I do remember that. But now Intel seems to have an extremely firm grasp on the market.

yeah they do.. looks like Intel will no longer have any credible competition anymore, which kinda sucks.

 

[ChAoTiCpInOy]

Doesn't Crysis need a high end CPU/GPU because the code is not really optimized?

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: TridenT

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Problem is most CPUs are faster then most software needs out there now. I upgraded to a Q6600 and my video editing software only goes up to 55-65% usage on all the cores.

That and Crysis is usually held back by video card, not cpu, from the reviews I see all the time.

Um... A lot of video editing can be done a lot faster with better CPUs... That's one of the main reasons to get the new processors.

Yes I am agreeing but newwer cores get so fast that there is little differance as other parts of the system will slow it down including software.

 

[Nik]

This is just AMD giving up because they can't compete with Intel's 2 year cycle.

 

[Nik]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: TridenT

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Problem is most CPUs are faster then most software needs out there now. I upgraded to a Q6600 and my video editing software only goes up to 55-65% usage on all the cores.

That and Crysis is usually held back by video card, not cpu, from the reviews I see all the time.

Um... A lot of video editing can be done a lot faster with better CPUs... That's one of the main reasons to get the new processors.

Yes I am agreeing but newwer cores get so fast that there is little differance as other parts of the system will slow it down including software.

And, just like upgrading CPUs and GPUs, you upgrade the slower one. 32 bit software evolving into 64 bit allows for more ram, which in turn allows for better performance in video processing among others.

It's a never-ending circle. A faster CPU is simply one of the many teeth on the cog that turns progress.

Besides, the software isn't "slowing it down." There's no inherent "limit" to how fast software can work. There's no built-in speed limit. You ever try installing Windows 3.11 on an i7? Once it posts, it would probably boot faster than you can reach for the keyboard.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: dighn

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix

Originally posted by: dighn

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
I didn't know there ever was a war. Intel makes superior chips.

you must have short memory. there was a period when AMD kicked ass (around the P4 era)

I do remember that. But now Intel seems to have an extremely firm grasp on the market.

yeah they do.. looks like Intel will no longer have any credible competition anymore, which kinda sucks.

yeah, that's the point. The war gave us all lower prices while pushing development faster and faster.


but I'm a bit confused--does this mean that AMD is completely out of the CPU market, now? I thought they still maintained a decent share of the server market?

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: dighn

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix

Originally posted by: dighn

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
I didn't know there ever was a war. Intel makes superior chips.

you must have short memory. there was a period when AMD kicked ass (around the P4 era)

I do remember that. But now Intel seems to have an extremely firm grasp on the market.

yeah they do.. looks like Intel will no longer have any credible competition anymore, which kinda sucks.

yeah, that's the point. The war gave us all lower prices while pushing development faster and faster.


but I'm a bit confused--does this mean that AMD is completely out of the CPU market, now? I thought they still maintained a decent share of the server market?

No, AMD is just not going to advertise their cpu capabilities but rather the things your computer can do.

I'm not surprised to see this. With Win7 actually running slightly faster (and needing less memory) than Vista, todays cpu's, even the budget ones, are very effective at running what 95 percent of what people use a computer for (browsing,email,pictures,playing media).
So for the life of Win7, for most people, the cpu is not as important as things like screen size, ability to play hd streaming video and software and the looks of their new computer.

 

[her209]

What the fuck happened to Fusion?

 

[Krynj]

Kinda seems like AMD is targeting Apple's market/demographic. By simply offering up a limited line of computers to un-tech savvy consumers.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: dighn

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix

Originally posted by: dighn

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
I didn't know there ever was a war. Intel makes superior chips.

you must have short memory. there was a period when AMD kicked ass (around the P4 era)

I do remember that. But now Intel seems to have an extremely firm grasp on the market.

yeah they do.. looks like Intel will no longer have any credible competition anymore, which kinda sucks.

yeah, that's the point. The war gave us all lower prices while pushing development faster and faster.


but I'm a bit confused--does this mean that AMD is completely out of the CPU market, now? I thought they still maintained a decent share of the server market?

No, AMD is just not going to advertise their cpu capabilities but rather the things your computer can do.

I'm not surprised to see this. With Win7 actually running slightly faster (and needing less memory) than Vista, todays cpu's, even the budget ones, are very effective at running what 95 percent of what people use a computer for (browsing,email,pictures,playing media).
So for the life of Win7, for most people, the cpu is not as important as things like screen size, ability to play hd streaming video and software and the looks of their new computer.

ah, that's how I understood it. seems like they're using the Apple strategy

 

[Rumpltzer]

Silicon is running out of physics. It's been a long time coming. Scaling can only take you so far when the mobility of the channel material isn't that great. The silicon scaling evolution is drawing to a close, speeds are not increasing, and the CPU makers are being forced into multiple cores.

Evolution isn't cutting it anymore. Throwing bodies at the problem isn't going to cut it. Something revolutionary needs to happen. They need to think hard about what their next step will be. The CMOS makers are working on it, but it's a tough nut to crack and it's going to require an investment of time and money that's much bigger than the huge amounts of time and money that have gone into scaling.

Give it six to ten years to reach the consumer market.

 

[Crono]

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
Kinda seems like AMD is targeting Apple's market/demographic. By simply offering up a limited line of computers to un-tech savvy consumers.

It's nothing new as a marketing strategy, nor is it exclusive to Apple.

It's annoying for people actually interested in meaningful specs, though.
I couldn't care less about your "Vision" label, AMD, just (continue to) produce good budget CPUs and excellent video cards, and I'll buy your products (so long as they're better than their Intel and nVidia counterparts, of course).

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix

Originally posted by: dighn

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
I didn't know there ever was a war. Intel makes superior chips.

you must have short memory. there was a period when AMD kicked ass (around the P4 era)

I do remember that. But now Intel seems to have an extremely firm grasp on the market.

yeah, i thought this would be about the new i5 spanking AMD like a little baby