ATI (I'm going to keep calling them that; going to hate how cleaning crap off my computer I am no longer going to be able to differentiate between old CPU and CPU drivers/nick nacks/rubbish) are going along the lines of the intel tic toc approach. IMO we're not seeing so much competition as continual evolution much as intel are ahead of AMD (as above).
There is no way the 450 competes with the 5850; we're talking 5750 levels.
Given that ATI is now AMD, they know all about what happens if you get a narrow performance / value lead then sit on itOriginally Posted by OilSheikh
September 2003 - Athlon 64 (in FX51 form) takes a substantial performance lead. Intel fail to beat it with Prescott, so AMD just keep tweaking the same old parts for the next three years, slowly upping the clock speeds, then sticking two cores on the same die for native dual-core processing. July 2006 - Core 2. AMD *still* hasn't recovered from that, 4 years later.
That's why AMD needs the Radeon 6000 series now, and why they'll need the 7000 series next November, etc. They don't want another Core 2...
They have and they haven't - the 480 caused much nerd rage but it's still the fastest single gpu card period (and for me the dual AMD gpu is just too much money). The 460 is much more appealing - i'd probably go for two in SLI right now. That said i'm happy to wait an see what the new AMD card has to offer - i'm not married to one or the other really - and i'm not desperate for a new card (still!) just yet.
Certainly whatever your flavour there's good choice and good performance but not enough of a gap to really sway me entirely one way or the other right now. Should be different with these new AMD cards
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote