Read more.Quote:
However AMD shipments are down as Nvidia and Intel grab more customers.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
However AMD shipments are down as Nvidia and Intel grab more customers.
AMD results down huh? Who'd of thunk it given they purposefully constricted supply all through Q4 2013 in order to make Q1 2014 results look abnormally good.
I hope it works out for them - it didn't work out for their customers as prices rose sharply due to lack of supply.
*shakes head*
Butuz
AMD desktop card sales increased according to the article - it was lower notebook sales which were the problem.
AMD's RRP has remained the same since the R series cards were released, the price hikes come from retailers cashing in on AMD cards popularity with miners.Quote:
Originally Posted by Butuz
I'm finding it increasingly frustrating that there are so few laptop's with AMD options. Each time I'm asked to recommend one and know that an AMD APU would be perfect I struggle to find one.
I'm not surprised their results aren't good when you look at an AMD search on Amazon and find Intel laptops in there.
Intel can offer much greater finanical incentives than AMD. The Ultrabook and Baytrail incentive funds are at least $1.3 billion!
First off, Amazon's search seems - to me at least - to becoming more and more erratic. I don't know whether the broad selection of stuff I've bought from them (for other folks) is skewing the results, or the underlying algorithm is just getting too clever for it's own good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Noxvayl
Ignoring Amazon, I did a quick search of a couple of websites:
Dell UK - no AMD, it's now an Intel-only site;
Lenovo UK - three AMD systems, nothing other than budget stuff;
HP UK - seven models with various AMD APUs (and very easy to find!);
PC World - Various models from HP, Acer and Lenovo. Strange thing is that the PC World site has higher spec Lenovo models than Lenovo's own site, e.g. an A8-based G505s.
Problem with AMD is that their GPUs all use more power and run hotter than Nvidia GPUs. And now with intel integrated GPUs starting o become decent, there is less need for discrete except for the high end users. I have been using the integrated on my 3570K for a couple weeks and while its not quite there, given a few more generations, i would consider using the integrated in a LAN rig or other low-mid rigs.
Based on my current GPU, I'll agree with the quote about the red team stuff being more accomplished as "space heaters". :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Devastater6194
But using integrated - especially Intel's integrated - on anything other than a low-end gaming rig? No chance! Check the Hexus benchmarks and you'll see that even a "cheap" discrete card will show those integrated graphics a clean pair of heels. Funnily enough, for what you're suggesting (a low- to medium-end gaming rig) you'd arguably be a LOT better off with a price-comparable AMD APU than anything from Chipzilla.
Don't forget that there's quite a few mini-ITX cases out there these days that support "proper" graphics cards and have space for full-fat ATX PSU's. Heck, saw one the other day that even included a carrying handle - making it ideal surely for a LAN-party meet up? Although, if I was spec'ing one of those rigs today then I'd be looking at Geforce-based - as you say, lower power and cooler running, the latter being especially useful in a small enclosure.
The cards under the HD7950 were perfectly fine with regards to power consumption. The HD7850 was the most efficient gaming card of its generation,ie,for nearly 2 years.The AMD cards like the HD7950 and HD7970 had 384 bit memory controllers and had strong compute abilities that the GTX680 lacked. The R9 290 and R9 290 run hotter due to smaller dies. The GTX780 and GTX780TI consume less under Furmark since they throttle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Devastater6194
OTH,both the stock Geforce Titan and GTX760 throttled too:
http://translate.googleusercontent.c...O8WXjpVXZOU1NQ
http://translate.google.com/translat...1056659%2F4%2F
http://ht4u.net/reviews/2013/nvidia_...est/index8.php
BTW,the reference Geforce Titan still was not running that cool,ie, around 83C to 85C. The R9 290 series was running around 7C to 10C higher with the reference cooler due to a smaller die. The Geforce Titan has a 551MM2 GK110 chip and the R9 290X has a 438MM2 Hawaii chip.
However,non-refence R9 290X cards are fine with regards to power consumption and noise:
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_29...er_average.gif
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_29...noise_load.gif
Remember,Nvidia sent out reference R9 290X cards to reviewers for free,and told them to run tests under quiet mode.
I have used both the HD7850 and GTX660,and the HD7850 does draw much less power,and with similar coolers will run less hotter.
The Pitcairn chip is 212MM2 and the GK106 chip is 221MM2.
I have both a GTX780Ti and an R9 290X, both are running non-reference coolers, my GTX780Ti is running the ACX cooler and my R9 290X has been modded with an NZXT Kraken G10 AIO Cooler bracket that has a Corsair H75 cooler attached to it, so I have no doubt contributed to the rise in GPU sales, lol.
In terms of the cards though, I have to say I am disappointed by the R9 290X, it scores at least 1000 points less than the GTX780Ti running on my i7 system and the score drops further when I run it on my FX8350 PC, temps and noise is better on the 290X which is down to modding the cooler, no doubt if I were to mod the 780Ti I would see similar improvements. But I really wanted to see more from my R9 290X and my expectations were that I should get more. What I have found though is that I get noticeable stuttering in games so playback isn't as smooth as it is on the 780Ti, frame rates are considerably lower too and none of the key advantages offered by the stronger Compute processing power of the 290X are ever used in any of the applications I use or in the games I play.