?

Log in

Technobabblers
Ranting in Binary for the last 20 years
I hate to say it... 
25th-Jul-2006 02:44 am
But from recent DUO benchmarks and pricing, it looks like it's that time to go Intel again. AMD's top of the line FX62 priced at a heavy duty 1,100 dollars per die can't compare with Intel's 530 dollar priced middle of the row DUO die. I never found myself bothered that there are faster CPUs out there for me to own, I'm a deal hunter. I'm also more likely to buy into the company with the most efficient MHZ / Watt / FPOS (Floating Point Operations a Second) ratios. That for the longest time was AMD, now they got entirely owned by Intel with the Duo CPU. Not just that but AMD's acquisition of ATI isn't really making me jump for joy either. ATI makes both video cards and chipsets for their SLI alternative Cross-Fire for both AMD and Intel CPUs. Now it is going to be a conflict of interest for AMD/ATI to continue to make Intel compatible reference motherboards for their Cross-Fire technology. Which could draw ATI as far as discontinuing development of Intel friendly Cross-Fire boards, or a extreme cut back on what can be available. With AMD at the helm it also causes another problem. Is ATI going to have a direct effect on CPU development in the company? This could be bad if they do, and could lead to a whole stream of proprietary hardware configurations in what AMD already has as 4 pin array configurations in their motherboard/CPU product line-up. This could also affect support of Nvidia based SLI technology working with Cross-Fire, basically leading us dead into a hardware based version of the API wars. "Competition is good." Yeah when you are competing and not outright fighting! Loss of support won't drive down prices it will just agitate hype creating factors of advertisement which will make prices go up. Who knows exactly what will happen, but I can see AMD seriously profiting from this outfit of change. We on the other hand, I think we will get the short end of the stick for a while. If I had the choice in the matter, I would have bought Nvidia... ATI is like the Ford Jaguar vs Jaguar before Ford got it's greedy little hands on it. They just don't innovate, they basically take what has been already done and make it faster. Basically what 3M does for the tape industry, except 3M doesn't make tape that runs hotter, requires more power, is harder to SLI, and requires more cash. For now, if I have to, I'll be going Intel until AMD pulls themselves out of their slump.
Comments 
25th-Jul-2006 01:39 pm (UTC)
My immediate reaction to the acquisition of ATI was that this pretty much finishes off ATI, though of course their cards will continue to run with the current hardware. A graphics card that can only be used with AMD processors will be increasingly optimized for this. And quite possibly the other way around, AMD optimized for ATI, in light of their plans to use the video processor as a more generic co-processor. In the end this may mean that you have to buy both in order for either of them to work to specs. And history shows that those that go all or nothing tend to end up with nothing at all.
This page was loaded Feb 26th 2017, 3:14 am GMT.