Anandtech's poll that never was, regarding who controls Carrizo's User Experience

Discussion in 'Graphics and Semiconductor Industry' started by ToTTenTranz, Feb 5, 2016.

?

Who's at fault for Carrizo ending up on sub-par laptops with single-channel RAM and bad TN panels?

  1. AMD for not imposing implementation guidelines

    54.3%
  2. OEMs for willingly selling products offering a sub-par user experience and pushing down AMD's brand.

    62.9%
  3. Distributors for demanding laptops with price points + specs that lead to sub-par products.

    25.7%
  4. Customers for not knowing any better. They should all be total hardware geeks like us.

    11.4%
  5. ToTTenTranz for creating pointless polls.

    37.1%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    10,498
    Likes Received:
    5,029
    The article in question (great read BTW):
    http://anandtech.com/show/10000/who-controls-user-experience-amd-carrizo-thoroughly-tested-x4

    And the poll in question:

     
    ImSpartacus likes this.
  2. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    10,498
    Likes Received:
    5,029
    BTW, I'm just going to shamelessly paste what I wrote in that article's comments:

    As for the "poll" about who's to blame, IMHO it is:

    1 - AMD for letting OEMs place Carrizo in designs with terrible panels and single-channel solutions. It's just not good for the brand. "You can't put a Carrizo with single-channel cheap RAM because that's not how it was designed. You want to build bottom-of-the-barrel laptop? We have Carrizo-L for you."
    I'm pretty sure Intel has this conversation regarding Core M and Atom/Pentium/Celeron solutions. I know AMD is in a worse solution to negotiate, but downplaying Carrizo like this isn't good for anyone but Intel.
    In the end, what AMD needs is a guy who can properly sell their product. Someone who convince the OEMs that good SoCs need to be paired with decent everything-else.
    $500 is plenty for a 12/13" IPS/VA screen (even if it's 720/800p), 128GB SSD and 4+4GB DDR3L. Why not pull a Microsoft's Surface and build a decent SKU for that price range so that other OEMs can follow? Contract one OEM to make the device they envisioned, sell it and see all others following suit.

    2 - OEMs for apparently not having this ONE guy who calls the shots and knows that selling a crappy system automatically means losing customers. And this ONE other guy (or the same) for not knowing that constantly favoring Intel with their solutions is bound to make the whole company's life miserable if Intel's only competitor kicks the bucket. The consumer isn't meant to know these things, but the OEMs certainly are.
    It's 2016. We're way past the age of tricking the customer to buy a terrible user experience through big numbers (like "1TB drive woot"). He/She will feel like the money just wasn't and next time will buy a mac.
    Want a $300-400 price point? Get a Carrizo-L with a 128GB SSD and a 720p IPS panel. Want $500-700 Price point? Get a Carrizo with dual-channel, 256GB SSD and 900p/1080p IPS screen.
     
  3. Alexko

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,508
    Likes Received:
    928
    I really don't think AMD is in a position to tell OEMs anything they don't want to hear. If they want to buy something from AMD, whatever it is and whatever they intend to do with it, AMD's only reasonable answer at this point is "great, thanks!".

    Things might be different with Zen, and perhaps AMD will have to introduce a new brand with it to distance Zen from their current lineup's image, but that's a different story.
     
  4. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    10,498
    Likes Received:
    5,029
    If the OEMs think they're entitled to that position then there's a lot of collective stupidity IMO. They need AMD as much as AMD needs them, otherwise they risk having to pay $300 for the next 80mm^2 Atoms and $500 for the next lower binned Core i3.
     
  5. silent_guy

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,754
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    I think that's the part where most people would disagree.

    OEMs think that the sales volume for a high-end Carrizo product wouldn't warrant the expense of making one.

    It's pointless to push on a string.
     
  6. zed

    zed
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,524
    Likes Received:
    674
    or spend < $30 for a fanless ARM chip
     
  7. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    10,498
    Likes Received:
    5,029
    And why haven't they then?
    Good luck getting Windows with legacy support running on that...
     
  8. swaaye

    swaaye Entirely Suboptimal
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,497
    Likes Received:
    599
    Location:
    WI, USA
    HP tried Slatebook. One model was 14". ASUS has those Transformer netbooks. Etc. The problem is Android sucks as a computer and the OEM has to develop OS updates themselves which is involved.
     
    #8 swaaye, Feb 6, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2016
  9. lanek

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    315
    Location:
    Switzerland

    Every mobile OS suck for computer ... They are not done for that.. they are good for smartphones, and tablet for media and internet browsing, but too much limited for computer.
     
  10. swaaye

    swaaye Entirely Suboptimal
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,497
    Likes Received:
    599
    Location:
    WI, USA
    I think the OEMs were banking on Android being desirable because it's familiar.
     
  11. Alexko

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,508
    Likes Received:
    928
    These things take time. Single-threaded performance on ARM cores remains a little low, and the software stack remains a little thin, but Chromebooks are selling very well, apparently:
    http://www.zdnet.com/article/npd-chromebooks-outsell-windows-laptops/

    My guess is that if you own a Chromebook are you're looking to upgrade to a newer one, you don't care too much whether its CPU is based on x86-64 or ARMv8 as long as it performs well.

    Obviously, some people are going to need support for legacy x86 software and as long as that remains true, they'll stick to PCs.
     
  12. swaaye

    swaaye Entirely Suboptimal
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,497
    Likes Received:
    599
    Location:
    WI, USA
    I feel like I should get a Chromebook to try out. How has the long term support for them been? Do they get OS updates?
     
  13. CarstenS

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    May 31, 2002
    Messages:
    4,837
    Likes Received:
    2,133
    Location:
    Germany
    As much as i hate being the devil's advocate, but: Why would they? If OEM A has no option other than choosing intel, so has OEM B. If Intel chooses to charge them an arm and a leg even for entry level chips, they will add that pricing to their MSRPs. If volume goes down, Intel might adjust their pricing. if it hurts too much. If not, market rules.
     
    pharma and Razor1 like this.
  14. Razor1

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    749
    Location:
    NY, NY
    yep in a saturated mature market even when a monopoly exists there is still an equalization of supply and demand vs. price.

    Granted competition is always better as it will drive prices down. But there is always a limit to pricing structures in both a monopoly and duopoly.
     
  15. swaaye

    swaaye Entirely Suboptimal
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,497
    Likes Received:
    599
    Location:
    WI, USA
    Also, I don't understand why this is a new topic. AMD has been in this situation since about 2007.
     
    #15 swaaye, Feb 7, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2016
  16. RedVi

    Regular

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    39
    Location:
    Australia
    I think some of the problem lies with marketing traditions and continued focus. With PC's the CPU has been at the forefront of marketing information for decades. The fact is that for the majority of users now it just isn't all that important anymore. Unless they have productivity uses where the program actually brings up a loading screen that isn't tied to a)hard drive speed or b) internet speed then most modern CPU's will be good enough for the majority of users.

    What matters for general every day performance? That the PC has a half-decent SSD and enough RAM.

    What makes a better user experience outside of performance? A decent screen and input devices, battery life and hardware that is efficient and sufficiently portable for the users needs.

    Outside of slightly improved efficiency there should be no need for a general user to go with Intel if an AMD option were offered in an device that was otherwise specced identically. The reality though is that this is how it has been marketed for decades; if you want performance get the best processor intel is offering. The new reality should be: either pay $700 for a laptop with an i7 and slow HDD or pay the same for an i3/AMD with an SSD. Most consumers wouldn't see a smaller hard drive as an upgrade because of how they are marketed currently.

    I recently upgraded an i7 Sandybridge laptop for a colleague that had 4GB RAM from a 750GB HDD to a 250GB SSD and turned the old HDD into an external USB3 HDD. Night and day difference just with the SSD. I understand that this laptop is from another era, but it's still indicative of what most are buying today and what the market generally offers. Unless you're doing video transcoding or 3D rendering, forgo the i7 and spend the money saved on an SSD. Yet when trying to shop for laptops for people this option is very rare, and places like dell's webstore offer no actual hardware customisation these days (at least in my country).

    To me the problem is that laptops are still advertised with the CPU up front and centre. Surely Intel still have a large sway on this, compunded with tradition persevering from a time when it actually mattered a lot more. I'd like to see a switch in focus to advertising SSD's as the major selling point, along with screen and input devices, but while Intel are in some of those markets, they don't have a monopoly on them. So why would they, with their unquestionable power over the retail and OEM PC market ever shift the focus from what they can make the most money from?
     
  17. I.S.T.

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    3,174
    Likes Received:
    389
    Doing some research, and there doesn't seem to be much data about the Excavator core in Carrizo... What are the changes outside of the Power/Heat related stuff? The power/heat stuff is easy to find info on.
     
  18. xpea

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Messages:
    378
    Likes Received:
    340
    well missing an important answer in the poll: AMD for offering slowdozer since ages
    If the green team has a potent x86 core, the situation will be a bit different. When their fastest product can barely match the slowest i3, don't be surprised of the consequence...
     
  19. Exophase

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    2,406
    Likes Received:
    430
    Location:
    Cleveland, OH
    As far as I can find AMD hasn't said a lot, maybe because they haven't really done a lot. There's some information here:

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/9319/...leap-of-efficiency-and-architecture-updates/4

    The biggest change is the increase to 32KB L1 dcache + 8 way set associativity (but the L2 cache has been halved)
     
  20. I.S.T.

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    3,174
    Likes Received:
    389
    Why would they reduce the L2 size? Die size/transistor count reasons?
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...