Quasar should've just asked if they had problem with the 65nm production process ;)

Seems odd that he specifically said that "from a process perspective we have not had 80nm process issues" instead of just saying "we have not had any issues". Almost like it was a hidden joke. Because you wouldn't have 80nm issues if you were actually on 65nm, now would you?

*sigh* Speculating is fun for only so long. Then you want the curtain drawn to see where you were right, where you were wrong and what you hadn't even considered.

I think one would be REALLY hard-pressed to read that interview and conclude that R600 is based in anything BUT 80nm. To me, it's as black on white as it gets.

The "from the process perspective" qualifier is interesting though. To me it leaves open a possibility that R600 might have had non-process related problems. Like, an overly ambitious or simply buggy design.

7-5-14

This?

ocworkbench actually..

I agree completely. It's possible that they had bugs in, say, their 80nm PLL, IO pads or any other part that requires circuit design. That doesn't mean that 80nm by itself is hard, complex, or "sucks" as some enlightened individual suggested. :wink: It just means it's a bug that could have happened in any other process.
My general feeling is that, on this forum and on enthusiast websites in general, way too much importance is given to the process problems and too little to simple human failure. In real life, the ratio between those 2 is something like 50 to 1 in 'favor' of latter (if not higher).
That only time I remember where switching from one process to another was considered to be a real problem was going into 130nm, because suddenly stuff like SI and IR drop were certain to bite you if you chose to ignore them.

Wazzzaaaa ??? :?: Maybe they fu*k with us . . .:evil:

That does fit in with both expectations and (memory) products available on the market. That doesn't make it true, of course, but at least it's possible that it is.

that entire explanation makes absolutely no sense, delaying r600 so u can launch it alongside low end cards can do nothing but potentially hurt sales. i dont buy it for a second

How in the world could it "hurt" sales by launching an entire family.

The low end and midrange parts are certainly not going to take away from sales of the high end part.

And the low end and midrange parts can only gain sales from trickle down effects of reviews of the high end product. At the worst, they would still only sell as well as they would if they didn't launch with a high end product.

There is the argument that they have lost sales on the High End by delaying it another few weeks, but considering they already missed the Christmas season, a few weeks sales is a bit of a drop in the bucket when you consider the entire lineup.

I wouldn't be shocked to hear that high end products only made up 1-5% of the total PROFIT (not revenue) from the entire graphics card lineup top to bottom. In that case, a loss of a few weeks worth of sales if it has the potential to boost the sales of low end and midrange parts makes sense from a buisness standpoint. And considering that's a few weeks in a part of the year NOT particularly well known for high hardware sales...well, it's not exactly end of the world stuff.

Granted as an enthusiast in the SMALLEST mainstream graphics niche market, it certainly doesn't sit well with me. Well, HTPC might be a smaller market than the enthusiast market, but I wouldn't be so sure about that.

AMD is a business. They are doing what they think will get them the most money. In this case, boosting sales of low end and midrange parts due to the delay of the R600. The card has been delayed months already, if delaying a few weeks will boost sales of the entire line then that might more than make up for the loss of revenue from lost R600 sales over the past few months. It may or may not work out as they planned, but there "is" a reason for it.

Then again without any of us having any insider knowledge, who's to say they aren't blowing wind up our arses. But considering the situation AMD is in. It wouldn't exactly benefit them to outright lie to the public and shareholders, eh?

Regards,
SB

If we take that quote at face value then it's good news because there should be R600 supply at launch (rather than a month or a few weeks later as sites have suggested).

Thanks for the link mate. Im just note getting a good vibe from the people AMD is sending out to do press. I also dont think that their stock is going to be doing very well this month.

epic

And it took AMD to make them understand that launching the entire line is faaaaaaaar more profitable?After years of being in the business?Riiiiiiggghhhhhht, I can see the light now, before they simply didn`t give a shit about the low-margin high volume parts that make the bulk of sales because...umm...they simply didn't, duuh. Anyway, since it`s ATi, they be telling the truth, no doubt about it. So on launch day, everyone and their dog will be able to get an R600. Cool.

So I see ATI's halo still fits after all this time :lol: So if they really had problems you think they would come and pour their hearts and souls out to us begging for an apology for the delay? I don't see how any logical person could think that a "family launch" could possibly be beneficial to R6xx sales. The market for high-end R600 products just doesn't care whether it's launched alongside its middling siblings or not. Even if they are trying to redefine the brand or reinvent themselves or some other such marketing move I don't buy it. It's not like it's a AMD thing - they launch their CPU's haphazardly all the time.

If anyone should even want one by then, that is. Otherwise, fully agree. They must have thought "nah, all this high-end mindshare just sucks, let's miss a few months of revenues and lose more of our image so we cann sell more low-end chips afterwards". Yeah right.

I think you might've bothered with quoting the second paragraph of Henri's answer there, too....;)

I know from previous discussions on the matter that some people think that ATi is in such a hurry to "get something out" to compete with G80 that it's going to rush out an incomplete product line with unpolished drivers, but this quote would seem to dispel such notions. Being realistic about the matter, should the R600 family meet market expectations at its release then the fact that it shipped post G80 will be among the first facts to be forgotten. IE, if R600 meets expectations then who cares if it shipped later than G80? About the only group I can imagine that would care about it is the group which jumped the gun for G80 and couldn't wait...;) Time will tell it all, one way or the other, and by all appearances we don't have long to wait.

AMD should care. G80 has a great impact on brand recognition. By the time the mid/low range get out, we do know that it will benefit of the high end situation. And right now, G80 is quite welcomed it seems, whereas R600...

I'm sure AMD cares a lot more than you do Walt :) I'm amused that you're trying to imply that no product is better than a product with relatively unstable drivers. Which one do you think has greater benefit to the manufacturer?

Of course there will be high demand for R600. But what about all those guys who would've stretched a little further to go for the big boy. Now that the market will be flooded with attractive and cheap DX10 parts from both IHV's it's a bit silly to think that high-end R600 sales would not be impacted.

I'm really amazed that some people are trying to argue that having no product is a good strategy. I must have missed that class during my marketing course :lol:

I forget to quote the second part :wink:

But only if the competition doesn't offer a faster and/or cheaper product in the same ballpark. Which is not the case now, and probably also won't be for long after R600 appears (I ass-ume that nV will bring the successor of the G80 either simultaneously or imediately after the R600 release, be it G81, G90, GX2 or whatever).

In order for R600 to become a success, it HAS to crush the competition speed-wise, price-wise or both. I don't believe for a second that it will do either.

Though it's all just my personal opinion and unfounded predictions, but that's what my common sense tells me.

Surely either or both would signficantly help. :lol: Don't know if I agree tho that it can't be a reasonable success if it's a competitive part with whatever its going up against at a competitive price. And our front page seems to reflect that the GPGPU wars are continuing to heat up, and at the volumes we're talking about for tippy-top high-end parts, that could be a signficant factor in ultimate commercial success as well.

With success I mean back to the 1st place in sales charts, no less :)

GPGPU is nice and all, but I think that market is quite a bit smaller than the "sure" buyers (the gaming crowd).