AMD sketches out the next five years

[HEXUS]

The company has plans for new CPUs, APUs and GPUs until 2020.

Read more.

[ZaO]

Let's hope this is stricly for enterprise products. Why can they never give us some good info on high end desktop cpu's for the consumer? I can't believe they're just holding back on that anymore. It's been too long. I'm finding it hard to believe they've even got much in the works with regards to that. Losing hope now, Amd

[DanceswithUnix]

Let's hope this is stricly for enterprise products. Why can they never give us some good info on high end desktop cpu's for the consumer? I can't believe they're just holding back on that anymore. It's been too long. I'm finding it hard to believe they've even got much in the works with regards to that. Losing hope now, Amd

They have only been successful when they have kept what they are doing very quiet. It is frustrating, but I think necessary.

[shaithis]

They have only been successful when they have kept what they are doing very quiet. It is frustrating, but I think necessary.

IMO, as far as gaming CPUs go, they have only really been on par or better than Intel twice.
Once back in the early 90s when they licensed Intels CPUs design and made a 40MHz version of Intel's 33MHz 386 CPU (my first PC had an AMD 386-40 in ). They never got to license the CPU designs again!

The other time was when they moved the memory controller from the northbridge into the CPU.....and that happened while Intel were having a "lost the plot" period with the Pentium-D.

I don't think either can be attributed to being quiet. Both were due to AMD pulling something out of a hat, that Intel hadn't thought of (or had decided not to implement).

Today, in this era of trying to get blood out of a stone (in terms or designing CPUs), coupled with AMD selling off their fab, I doubt AMD are going to pull any major surprises....but if they just get to within 10% of whatever is the desktop i5 at the time, they will be back in the game.

The question is: Can they be bothered?

They might decide it's not worth the investment.....

[DanceswithUnix]

(my first PC had an AMD 386-40 in )

lol, same here. Amazing to think now that AMD was ever better at fabricating things than Intel.

Both were due to AMD pulling something out of a hat, that Intel hadn't thought of (or had decided not to implement).

Erm, exactly. If AMD broadcast what they were capable of, Intel can follow fairly fast and with bucketloads of cash behind them can execute more easily.

Given that Intel seem to have picked up on every single thing that AMD have done, I don't think AMD can afford to be loud mouthed about anything. I mean, can you think of anything that Intel has done that has been original? Apart from the disasters like i432 and Itanium

[abaxas]

Where are the desktop versions of the XBOX/PS4 apus?

[Millennium]

Dunno but I would be interested to add to abaxas question (hey) what's the development chain like, will they get something like DX12 so we can look forward to easier to develop high performance 'AAA' game?

[watercooled]

AMD have an awful lot of firsts over Intel which are often ignored, and I agree that broadcasting them before release would be all-around bad for AMD. They get some good ideas but lately their execution has been lacking, and they can do without Intel implementing their ideas before they get off the ground at AMD.

I mean, not long after AMD announced their 'APUs', Intel started sticking a half-decent GPU on-package, followed by on-die.

Not that it doesn't frustrate me as an enthusiast - of course I'd like something to chew on, but I'll settle for not knowing if it has a chance of improving competition. I've been surprised a few times by how quiet AMD manage to keep things with not even a murmur in the interwebs days before release, and a lot of their best releases have been as such IMO, as DanceswithUnix says.

However, sticking to the subject of gaming CPUs, I'd argue they've been 'on-par' quite a lot from what I can remember, at least in the past 15 years or so. They might not have consistently held the halo spot, but being competitive doesn't require that.

[Millennium]

Yes I like AMD.

They're perky, value, and strongly forward looking produce

[ZaO]

Well I hope you guys are right. But it's just the amount of time they've been quiet now that worries me. I've started to accept that it's probably just going to have to be Intel chips that I buy for quite some time. Even if I prefered to buy Intel chips, I'd still want Amd there for the competition. Right now, they are not competing in my opinion, not even against the i5s. The 4690K is around the same price as the top of line FX chip, with similar performance, yet it uses much less power and pairs with nicer chipsets. There are some other Cpu manufacturers out there that might take Amd's place. But still, I want Amd to be strong in this.

[watercooled]

No-one else besides AMD and VIA, to my knowledge, have an x86 license. That's a pretty big show-stopper as far as current desktop processors are concerned, and VIA haven't been a big CPU player for quite some time.

If desktop computing were more ISA-agnostic, then e.g. wider ARM or POWER cores could prove interesting, but that's no easy change. Even Intel tried and failed with IA64, though it was a long time ago (in computing terms) and now at least the mobile space is more varied WRT ISAs.

[scaryjim]

If Windows computing were more ISA-agnostic ...

FTFY There are many decent desktop OSes that will run happily on non-x86 ISAs, but Windows with legacy compatibility isn't one of them. Perhaps the move towards a unified platform with Windows 10 will encourage more software developers to go ISA-agnostic, and in time we'll get to the point where most applications are fully portable between x86/ARM/PowerPC/MIPS/whatever versions of the OS.

Hell, with the developments in HTML5/WebGL/etc. we might get to the point where the majority of apps, including games, get ported to HTML5 and will work on any device, OS and ISA regardless. I'm not going to hold my breath, though

[DanceswithUnix]

But still, I want Amd to be strong in this.

If you want better AMD chippery, then go build that SteamOS, HTPC, NAS or whatever box you were thinking of doing and use an AMD CPU.

Really, I think it is that simple. AMD got squeezed for funds, the payout from Intel came nowhere close to making up for the lost revenue.

I actually wish AMD would do a kickstarter to do an 8 core with L3 cache of their latest CPU onto an FM2+ platform with minimal integrated graphics to give an updated enthusiast part. They must have most of the modules for such a part already kicking around so raising the few million to turn it into silicon wouldn't be beyond a kickstarter.

[watercooled]

FTFY

True. If MS did a better job of RT then that could've helped things. But having said that, RT if often criticised for things that the likes of ChromeOS are praised for.

Sure, the severe lack of apps and developer support are hard to ignore, but in terms of features I think a lot of people saw 'Windows' and immediately noticed what was missing rather than seeing the OS for what it was.

I mean I didn't spend much time with it, nor particularly get on with Win8 in general either desktop or tablet, however RT did away with a lot of the UI continuity fails that the full version has.

[ZaO]

If you want better AMD chippery, then go build that SteamOS, HTPC, NAS or whatever box you were thinking of doing and use an AMD CPU.

Really, I think it is that simple. AMD got squeezed for funds, the payout from Intel came nowhere close to making up for the lost revenue.

I actually wish AMD would do a kickstarter to do an 8 core with L3 cache of their latest CPU onto an FM2+ platform with minimal integrated graphics to give an updated enthusiast part. They must have most of the modules for such a part already kicking around so raising the few million to turn it into silicon wouldn't be beyond a kickstarter.

Funny you say that. It wasn't all that long ago that I was telling people that all we need to do is buy Amd stuff, then they'll end up back up there lol... But now it's nearly build time for me, I find it hard to pick the Amd cpu and board (though I'll still be getting an Amd gpu), no matter how much I prefer to support them. Hate to say it, but that's the situation. I do like your Kickstarter idea though. But I suppose that might hurt their image doing something like that. Not in my opinion, but maybe to others who Amd need to keep impressed.

[scaryjim]

I actually wish AMD would do a kickstarter to do an 8 core with L3 cache of their latest CPU onto an FM2+ platform with minimal integrated graphics to give an updated enthusiast part. They must have most of the modules for such a part already kicking around so raising the few million to turn it into silicon wouldn't be beyond a kickstarter.

Email address for the semi-custom business is embedded.custom@amd.com

Anyone fancy dropping them a line and finding out the minimum investment cost for a semi-custom FM2+ CPU?