View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ggrobot Elite Member
Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 45820
|
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:44 am Post subject: AMD tech in Playstation 4? [32489] |
|
|
According to reports from Forbes, Sony will make use of AMD technology for next generation console (Playstation 4). The source of this Forbes report is former AMD employees.
Sony is working on an as-yet-unannounced new gaming console, former AMD employees say, and the processor designer may play a key role in the ne
Read more...
Source: GGMania headlines
GGMania.com - Daily Gaming and Tech news |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Elite Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2004 Posts: 4194
|
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
I ain't touching shit from Sony. Piece of shit company that fucks it's customers over and rips them off. Petty company. To offer Premium memberships and on expiration they rip all the free stuff you got. That's just petty but typical of Sony. Now they got ATI/AMD in there, even more reason to stay away. Company notorious for buggy drivers and quick discontinuation of their products. Ya, there's a solid choice. Fuck why not just put some shit Intel video card in there???? Make it as cheap as you can and grab a few more suckers. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gx-x Elite Member
Joined: 02 Jul 2007 Posts: 2545
|
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
actually, it would be better for them to put intel's sandy or ivy bridge in there instead of AMD's pos cpus. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
El_Coyote Elite Member
Joined: 09 Jun 2004 Posts: 611
|
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tom wrote: | Company notorious for buggy drivers . |
Do you still listen to MC Hammer and wear pastel colour clothes with shoulder pads as well?
atis driver was no worse than my current geforce card. if anything the gtx card's drivers crash more often than it used to with my last ati card. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gx-x Elite Member
Joined: 02 Jul 2007 Posts: 2545
|
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
El_Coyote wrote: | Tom wrote: | Company notorious for buggy drivers . |
Do you still listen to MC Hammer and wear pastel colour clothes with shoulder pads as well?
atis driver was no worse than my current geforce card. if anything the gtx card's drivers crash more often than it used to with my last ati card. |
that's because your GPU overclock is unstable, or if you do not overclock then you GPU is ready for RMA. I don't think I ever had a driver crash on me unless there is a power or OC failure.
edit: if you had the same problems with AMD card, and did not overclock the card, then I would suggest you look into your PSU or something. Drivers shouldn't crash, at all. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Elite Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2004 Posts: 4194
|
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 4:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Never had a problem with ANY Nvidia card I've owned and while drivers come out all the time, I don't jump on every driver. Why? Because everything works all the time. I'm currently running a beta driver and it's never caused me any problems. When I had ATI and even TV tuners, they were all a total pieces of sht. Crash, stutter, control panel that never loads, games that were fucked up, locked up screens you name it. I got so pissed off I replaced the card with a low-mid end nvidia card and POOF no problems what so ever and it even played video's better. Once after 1 year of owning an ATI card, they discontinued the thing and before a few months later the drivers were non-existent. Then ATI had some lame tradeup program and my card that was a year ago $300 only warranted $50 from ATI. Wow, that's amazing. I still have an ancient PCI nvidia card, guess what, I still have drivers and it works perfectly fine even on Vista. ATI is a piece of junk and it's cheap and that's why ATI is using them. Less cost, more money back in return from fools who'll buy their junk. I'm no fool anymore and Sony and their PS4 can go fuck themselves. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gx-x Elite Member
Joined: 02 Jul 2007 Posts: 2545
|
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with you Tom, but you are wrong about one thing - ati cards ain't cheap at all. They have pretty much same price tag as nVidia cards because somehow people tend to think that they are actually even better than nVidia. Mainly because review sites use POS games for test, which more or less have sequels that run on the same engine for past 5 years. I mean really, what PC gamer cares about resident evil or tom clancys hawks? And those aren't the games with same ol' engine I had in mind, games like CoD... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kompressor Junior Member
Joined: 11 Jul 2004 Posts: 229 Location: Earth
|
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 1:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
gx-x wrote: | actually, it would be better for them to put intel's sandy or ivy bridge in there instead of AMD's pos cpus. |
What about AMD is POS? Please specify if you can. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kompressor Junior Member
Joined: 11 Jul 2004 Posts: 229 Location: Earth
|
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 1:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
El_Coyote wrote: | Tom wrote: | Company notorious for buggy drivers . |
Do you still listen to MC Hammer and wear pastel colour clothes with shoulder pads as well?
atis driver was no worse than my current geforce card. if anything the gtx card's drivers crash more often than it used to with my last ati card. |
I've been using GTX drivers for years and have never had one crash. It sounds like you have a fucked up system. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gx-x Elite Member
Joined: 02 Jul 2007 Posts: 2545
|
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 2:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kompressor wrote: | gx-x wrote: | actually, it would be better for them to put intel's sandy or ivy bridge in there instead of AMD's pos cpus. |
What about AMD is POS? Please specify if you can. |
power consumption, heat, performance, performance per watt, performance-cost ratio, performance in general. EVERYTHING is behind intel's current gen technology and AMD's next gen, aka Buldozer is even worse then their current gen and Ivy bridge is going to be an even better sandy bridge, not much better but still better.
If you want details and results/benchmarks, just search some, many sites did reviews. Basically, overall, intels SB i5 2500 outperforms AMD's...anything. And then there is i7 SB with HT, and then there is new IB i7 LGA 2011 with 8 cores and HT with 16MB cache to witch AMD can't currently even dream up an answer to. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Elite Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2004 Posts: 4194
|
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 3:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
As I said, Sony is a POS. They are cutting corners putting second-rate hardware and wait till you see the price. Look at their Vita, another piece of shit and I heard some games take like 2 minutes to load. Wtf, who'd be crazy enough to buy that POS. My android has more power than that POS. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kompressor Junior Member
Joined: 11 Jul 2004 Posts: 229 Location: Earth
|
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
gx-x wrote: | Kompressor wrote: | gx-x wrote: | actually, it would be better for them to put intel's sandy or ivy bridge in there instead of AMD's pos cpus. |
What about AMD is POS? Please specify if you can. |
power consumption, heat, performance, performance per watt, performance-cost ratio, performance in general. EVERYTHING is behind intel's current gen technology and AMD's next gen, aka Buldozer is even worse then their current gen and Ivy bridge is going to be an even better sandy bridge, not much better but still better.
If you want details and results/benchmarks, just search some, many sites did reviews. Basically, overall, intels SB i5 2500 outperforms AMD's...anything. And then there is i7 SB with HT, and then there is new IB i7 LGA 2011 with 8 cores and HT with 16MB cache to witch AMD can't currently even dream up an answer to. |
Intel and AMD have been rivals for a long, long time. There have been times when AMD was faster than Intel, and vice versa.
Also, all Intel hardware is artificially inflated. You can look at two motherboards with basically the same specs, and the one that uses an Intel processor is going to be allot more expensive, not to mention the CPUs are more expensive as well.
If money is no object, then get Intel, but if you want to save allot of money for almost the same performance, get AMD. There is nothing wrong with AMD.
I just really hate Intel because they have always been out to screw you. Long ago they were way overpriced, they would lock their processors so you can't steal from them by overclocking, they are always changing the sockets unnecessarily so if you want to upgrade your CPU, you can't without also buying a new motherboard, and so on, and they had no incentive to release faster processors because because of limited competition. They would take baby-steps with their crap Pentium processors.
It's because of AMD there are faster, cheaper, and unlocked CPUs on the market today because Intel was forced to do it, not because they wanted to.
If AMD never existed, you would be paying five times more for a five times slower CPU today. Most people wouldn't be able to afford a good new system. Kind of like the days where the RAM companies artificially inflated RAM prices until they got caught. Remember those days, when no one had any memory because it was so crazy expensive, and everyone was installing RAM doubling software?
So basically, I hate Intel because they just want your money and to screw you, and I like AMD because they have always been there *for* the customer. I'm not going to help Intel by buying something from them.
Also, personally, I really don't like AMD video cards. I like Nvidia cards. But it's great that there is competition to keep innovation high and prices low. So even though I would never buy a AMD video card, I'm glad they exist, and other people buy them. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kompressor Junior Member
Joined: 11 Jul 2004 Posts: 229 Location: Earth
|
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 3:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Tom wrote: | As I said, Sony is a POS. They are cutting corners putting second-rate hardware and wait till you see the price. Look at their Vita, another piece of shit and I heard some games take like 2 minutes to load. Wtf, who'd be crazy enough to buy that POS. My android has more power than that POS. |
Don't get me started on Sony. They are worse than Intel. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gx-x Elite Member
Joined: 02 Jul 2007 Posts: 2545
|
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
"If money is no object, then get Intel, but if you want to save allot of money for almost the same performance, get AMD. There is nothing wrong with AMD. "
most common misconception these days. You can get a decent (more than decent) Z68 motherboard for less money then the decent AMD mobo costs, I am talking under 100$.
You can get amd 1xxx series 6 cores CPU for the same price intel's SB i5 2500 costs and intel's is the faster one. Only, and I repeat ONLY intel's extreme and highest end CPU's are overpriced and wear the 1000$ mark.
and btw. AMD never had faster CPU than intel. They had "as fast as" or similar for a bit less money but that's it. It might have been faster for some specific things but as far as I can recall, never all around faster I can recall pretty far back, even back to times of first pentium processor...
"If AMD never existed, you would be paying five times more for a..."
Don't go there. It's hypothetical. If intel never existed AMD would do the same etc. etc. AMD also sold you one and the same CPU under two different names many times over. Did they not lock the CPU cores and multipliers and sell the chips for less money? Then you could (still can since they are still doing it) unlock or back in the old days just pencil over the pins on the bottom of the CPU to get the more expensive version.
AMD is far from "the saint" company. Look at what they are doing now, they are pulling back Phenoms such as P2 955/955BE so they can sell you crappy bulldozer instead. They they F'ed up but they don't care, they are gonna make the people buy their new CPU's whatever it takes.
AMD is doing the same thing intel is, but in GPU market with their ridiculously overpriced 7xxx GPU's because they can, because nVidia has not yet released their new GPU. So don't think that AMD wouldn't do the same in CPU market if they could. It's all just business.
5 years back you could grab AMD CPU that is slightly slower than intel's counter part but 30% cheaper. Show me that kind of CPU from AMD today please. Average user that will not overclock is better of with some i5 2400 then with any Phenom in that price range, better than with more expensive 6 core or worse yet 8 core CPU's that they managed to screw up because they perform slower than 6 core ones lol |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2666 phpBB Group
|
|