The AMD Execution Thread [2007 - 2017]

Status
Not open for further replies.
I highly doubt that.
Unless he is a crying kid that says 'i dont command so i dont play with you'...

at higher levels, you change work to get a better position, why would you bother to change for an equivalent -or lower- position?

We'll see if he immediately has a new position as a big CEO. Else, he just got kicked out by AMD and PR thrown the classic 'smoking cloud'.
 
tunafish said:
When the new boss fires the CFO, it often means that some kind of "creative" accounting had been going on. This alone is worth the price drop.

As to the BSN article, CFO is typically sort of like the XO in the military. If the rank and file hate the Commander/CEO, it often leads to subpar performance. So, all the shitty decisions that the commander has to do get passed through the XO so that they all hate him and not the commander. AMD went through some pretty hard financial times, they absolutely had to fire people, cut benefits, and generally do mean things. If the rank and file didn't hate the CFO I'd be very surprised.

Of course, this does not necessarily mean that the CFO is innocent or competent. Just that no matter how good engineers the interviewees were, you couldn't reasonably expect them to say anything else.
Click to expand...

Well according to the press release "Seifert's departure is not based on any disagreement over the company's accounting principles or practices, or financial statement disclosures."
 
Davros said:
Dave's been sent in to the thread for damage control :D

I see Amd still has no ceo of gaming goodness....
Click to expand...

Yeah what is Rory's gamerscore anyway? Does he know why Colonel Christopher Blair was so named? Somebody needs to ask the hard questions there methinks. ;)
 
Davros said:
thankfully amd have a cunning plan
they allow reviewers to do a review about only the good parts of a product, then at a later date reviewers can publish the whole review

http://techreport.com/blog/23638/amd-attempts-to-shape-review-content-with-staged-release-of-info
Click to expand...

AMD must have hired Baldrick.

Seriously, though, I'm not sure this is such a bad idea. The CPU market is not what it used to be. Fifteen years ago, you could feel every upgrade, as it made MS Word smoother, every part of the OS, every application faster.

Now, if I gave you a Trinity-based computer, let you use it for a few days, and then suddenly swapped it for an Ivy Bridge one, would you even notice? If you frequently encode video, compile code or compress data, or conversely play games with the integrated GPU, sure, but otherwise you'd probably never know.

Yet reviewers have not fully adapted to this new state of things, so AMD is trying to nudge them in that direction. Somewhat awkwardly, perhaps, but from their perspective it makes a lot of sense to try.
 
Right, and the NDA over everything else will be lifted when the products are actually launched, so it's not as if AMD were trying to trick people into buying them, they can't be bought yet (except for some pre-orders, perhaps).

They're just trying to highlight their strong points, that seems fine to me.
 
Kaotik said:
Not to mention that these aren't really reviews, but previews
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet a large amount of money that if somebody else had done this there'd have been hell in a hand-basket. Why AMD gets a free pass for doing something dumb beats me (there are about a trillion ways in which this could have been handled better, one of the main ones being not leaving a burning trail leading right back to themselves). Also, if this is the game they'll play going forward, they definitely won't win - NV pulls this off with class, and you never hear about it overtly, Intel doesn't need it, they have far better knobs to tweak.
 
Yeah, I was reading the Anandtech review and wondered were the H2H gaming comparisons with discrete cards were. I'm surprised Anand gave them a pass on that to be honest...

It also strikes me as unnecessary. The numbers speak for themselves, and anyone who is interested enough in the topic to be reading the reviews in the first place is going to be able to put 2+2 together.

IOW, the vast majority people who would be manipulated by this tactic are not going to be reading the reviews in the first place.

If no-gaming: Intel
If gaming & discrete-gpu: Intel
If gaming & no-discrete-gpu: AMD

That seems to be the result for now anyway. I think AMD does have a good opportunity if they can get their APU performance above intel + entry level discrete cards. Trinity is OK, just not very compelling. With 512 SPs, they probably could have beat an i3 + 640 and commanded a premium for the chip.

Overall, it just leaves me looking forward to Kaveri more than anything else, which is probably not they had in mind...
 
ninelven said:
Yeah, I was reading the Anandtech review and wondered were the H2H gaming comparisons with discrete cards were. I'm surprised Anand gave them a pass on that to be honest...
Click to expand...
Huh? There's several discrete cards from both nVidia and AMD in the Anand preview/review/whatever in the gaming tests
 
VR-Zone did that: http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-tri...-discrete-gpu-gaming-performance/17272-1.html

After all, AMD just said "gaming benchmarks" they didn't say reviewers were restricted to the integrated graphics. I guess most just assumed they were.

Anyway, it's not super-thorough, but it looks like some games are almost as fast on Trinity as they are on Ivy Bridge, while others present serious framerate nosedives. Then again, the top SKU is probably going to end up cheaper than the i5-3470 to which it's being compared.
 
Yeah, it is close in GPU limited scenarios which is what you would expect. Looks like the quad core Ivy Bridge has ~50 to 70% performance advantage in non-gpu limited situations, which is not as bad as I was expecting.

But... if the A10 is going to retail for ~$150 and the i5 gets you that much more performance for a 33% cost increase ($199), then the intel chip is still going to be the better overall value. I have a feeling the pure CPU comparisons are not going to be kind...
 
ninelven said:
Yeah, it is close in GPU limited scenarios which is what you would expect. Looks like the quad core Ivy Bridge has ~50 to 70% performance advantage in non-gpu limited situations, which is not as bad as I was expecting.

But... if the A10 is going to retail for ~$150 and the i5 gets you that much more performance for a 33% cost increase ($199), then the intel chip is still going to be the better overall value. I have a feeling the pure CPU comparisons are not going to be kind...
Click to expand...

That's true of the i3 processors too though.
 
cal_guy said:
That's true of the i3 processors too though.
Click to expand...
Yes... the i3 is a dual core CPU. That Intel is able to charge what they do for them says it all really. I wonder how it will compare vs the A10?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
Dedicated gaming GPUs bottom of the priority list?
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
Seanspeed
S
F
RDNA5 Speculation
Replies
2
Views
1K
Erinyes
E
T
Re-litigating Radeon market performance *spawn
2 3
Replies
40
Views
3K
Dictator
D
D
Intel, AMD, Microsoft & Others Team Up For Develop The “UALink”, Direct Competitor To NVIDIA NVLink
Replies
3
Views
867
pcchen
P
xpea
Datacenter GPU market supply and demand (2024)
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
Erinyes
E
Back
Top