Wouldn't it be better for AMD if they just focused on making GPUs or CPUs so they don't get rekt by having a war on two...

Wouldn't it be better for AMD if they just focused on making GPUs or CPUs so they don't get rekt by having a war on two fronts? Focusing more time and money into one development would be much better than trying to do both. The only problem I can think of is monopolies, what do you think Sup Forums

Other urls found in this thread:

vr.pconline.com.cn/805/8052764.html
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Why not focus on being the budget king of both ends instead of aiming for performance crown?

Most people buy i3/i5 tier hardware, if AMD could offer a quad core zen at i3 prices with 80% skylake ipc, they won.

>if AMD could offer a quad core zen at i3 prices with 80% skylake ipc, they won.
selling low volume for profit is better than selling high volume for loss. why do people seem to think AMD can just undercut Nvidia/Intel? obviously there's some merchants at work regarding Nvidia and Intel prices, but I'd say 90% of the price is legitimate, so at best, AMD could take a 10% hit, which is pretty much what they do to begin with

>why do people seem to think AMD can just undercut Nvidia/Intel

Because they done it in the past, what are you 15?

They did for the fx series.

Fx6350 could be oc to i5 3470 performance almost and cost less than a i3.

AMD should sell their CPU division to VIA.
AMD should sell their GPU division to ARM/Samsung/Intel.

Their combo of cpu and gpu is what gets them the console contracts though

With a die 4x as big.
Selling a higher cost part for a loss because you're getting owned is not "undercutting."

implying AMD isn't getting paid by nvidia and intel to release shit products

No because APUs are the future. AMD needs to become 1337 in both CPU and GPU technology as much as possible to prepare for the upcoming convergence. Soon we will only have APU chips with HBM on-die to deal with. This will improve laptop battery life and overall performance of things. It will also help make desktops smaller as you will only need a single chip to play vydia and encode HEVC for example.

However current gen APUs are dogshit mostly because they rely on system RAM. If HBM were used then this would replace the need for low end graphics cards like the R7 360 which is what most people aim for.

Finally better APUs would help make HSA more popular since it requires the CPU and GPU to be on the same die.

But it was better value.

If AMD could keep that up then they're in the clear.
Just look at how killer value the 880k is.

Keep what up? Selling parts for a loss? Do you know how business works?

Because their future for CPUs is tied heavily to their GPU advancements. At least in the consumer space.

Do you?
Because you're speaking like you don't but are pretending to.

>AMD sells parts for a loss
>"THIS MEANS THEY'RE A BETTER VALUE AND THEY'RE WINNING!"
You're really not very bright.

A budget Intel/Nvidia build beats an AMD one tho

Find me better value than an apu.

A8 7600 is the best value in aus right now, not sure about america.

>similar multithread performance to a haswell i3(slightly below it though)
>igpu capable of running many games at 1080p on low or medium settings
>$108 for the a8 7600
>$160 for the i3

It's a little bit of an outdated comparison, but the a8 is still better value than a skylake i3 here.

Hopefully zen APUs will offer something just as good in terms of performance and price.

So the pentium series is being sold at a loss? It's cheaper than an fx series processor you dumb fucking sack of shit.

It's also tiny, you waste of oxygen.

yeah come on now just stop, you're getting blown the fuck out

Material costs are insignificant for a CPU.
Kys.

Funny Intel and Nvidia don't use one die for everything then.

Because they need to sell more than one product.

You're a joke, kys.

>he thinks each product gets its own die
God I hope the mods are banning for underage tonight.

Holy shit you're retarded.

>he thinks each product is its own die
>he thinks die space is free
>he thinks selling more for a loss is a winning business strategy if the result is in the favor of the consumer
AMD selling their 315mm^2 chips for $90 and losing millions every quarter while Intel sells 177mm^2 ones for $300 and makes billions sure looks like AMD is winning to me! All AMD has to do is cut prices even more and Intel is sure to go bankrupt!

Nope. Doing it that way will kill one side eventually and drive prices up. You obviously want to suck intel or nvidias cock, but that's not what the other 99.99% of the consumers want.

vr.pconline.com.cn/805/8052764.html
>another SoC deal for a chinese console worth $60 million
Speak for yourself. With CPU IPC stagnating, AMD is the only one providing custom silicon designs with a balanced CPU and GPU, supporting HSA. HSA will play an important role pushing PC computation performance forward once fabs hit a wall going below 10nm. The 2011 Xbox is the first and last Intel/nVidia console the world will ever see.

>i5-6400 getting rekt by the same generation's i3

why the fuck did they even release it
it's fucking pointless

Then don't buy it?
You've found out that all Skylake i5s are stupid except for the 6600k, and if you're not overclocking even that's stupid compared to the Xeon E3 1230 V5.

There are two different groups internally that work on their own projects. Stopping one doesn't mean they have more for the other, it just means they do less overall.

A10-7860k is still cheaper than the i3 and has 2 more GPU compute units. Zen likely won`t see an APU until mid 2017 though, Ausfriend. They still have their Carizzo excavator APUs to dump out which seam really promising if their TDP is to be trusted.

I thought they said they would have Polaris 11 arch during computex, but I`m probably wrong on that. I would assume the Zen apus will have polaris 11 minimum onboard graphics, though.

>what is single core performance

Thats just a game, not really much of a performance benchmark for CPUs. The major difference is that the 6100 is dual core with hyperthreading for a total of four threads. The 6400 is slightly better at multithreading since it has 4 dedicated core.

So, yeah, for games the i3 performs better because it actually has slightly better single core performance. But, if you're doing tasks that involve more multitasking, the i5 is still better.