Education Mankz no longer Mod?!

[aLtikal]

Anyone remember Abit, Epox, and DFI?

Im still rocking an ABIT AB9 Pro in my current PC. The damn thing has been running OC'd CPU's, RAM and GPU's for 5-and-a-half-years and its still working fine. Im going to use it untill it dies and only then will I upgrade

<3 Abit

[siliconfanatic]

In all actuallity I am old enoigh and have been on the computer scene plenty long enough. The AMD I loath is the current one. The AMD that was on top, kicking butt and taking names, that is the AMD I love and respect. As for the new one: am I not allowed to have a differing opinion? If AMD can get its former glory and brilliance back from intels current grip, before they slide into financial death, I will be able to respect them again. If they keep it, and get that spark back, I'll be able to love them again. Seeing as my mind is playing tricks on me and my long leave of the computer scene due to, well, life, i cant remember what caused AMD to slow down enough to let intel take the scene, could you refresh me from a modders pov? From what I remember, AMD was a juggernaut at the time. Mind you, I wasnt as heavily into it then as I am now.

[Tangster]

Originally Posted by siliconfanatic

what caused AMD to slow down enough to let intel take the scene

Intel's massive R&D budget. AMD's much smaller R&D budget. That's about it.

[siliconfanatic]

Ah... that would explain it. Why was there r+d budget so small?

[bodkin]

Originally Posted by siliconfanatic

Ah... that would explain it. Why was there r+d budget so small?

Vastly smaller company, could never hope to pour money into it like intel did and can.

[Burnout21]

Originally Posted by siliconfanatic

Ah... that would explain it. Why was there r+d budget so small?

They've always been a small company when compared to Intel. What happened was AMD kept the K8 architecture for way too long, and K10 came far too late and was far too under powered even though the technology showed promise, but just took far too long to hit the market in the form of the Phenom II series.

I've not looked at their stuff in a long time, but I've not looked at Intel either since 2008. I have heard good things about AMD's APU range but their linux support is pretty poor in my opinion which puts me off in a big way.

[Skill3d]

Still rocking my DFI sli-dr with an opty 165 old indestructible hardware.

Too bad DFI isn't around anymore... (well not for the consumer-market) let's hope for a AMD & DFI comeback... those good old days.

[TheBlackSwordsMan]

I'm a Gygabite fanboy.

[Shirty]

I haven't had two boards from the same manufacturer in my main machine after all these years. I simply have no brand loyalty, I have just bought what has been by common consensus the best bang for buck board every time I've switched (usually only when upgrading socket tbh).

[Margon]

Originally Posted by siliconfanatic

In all actuallity I am old enoigh and have been on the computer scene plenty long enough. The AMD I loath is the current one. The AMD that was on top, kicking butt and taking names, that is the AMD I love and respect. As for the new one: am I not allowed to have a differing opinion? If AMD can get its former glory and brilliance back from intels current grip, before they slide into financial death, I will be able to respect them again. If they keep it, and get that spark back, I'll be able to love them again. Seeing as my mind is playing tricks on me and my long leave of the computer scene due to, well, life, i cant remember what caused AMD to slow down enough to let intel take the scene, could you refresh me from a modders pov? From what I remember, AMD was a juggernaut at the time. Mind you, I wasnt as heavily into it then as I am now.

Not being old enough or not knowing stuff that other people know, is not a crime - was merely an observation that you probably weren't aware.

AMD has never been a "juggernaut" it's always been a relatively small company. They were on top as they had a vastly superior chip - first on the 64-bit consumer chip scene and first real dual core. Then yeah R+D - intel spent massively on making their architecture better, AMD didn't have the money.

AMD still make good chips - they just don't make good high end chips. Intel don't have anything that can touch the amd chips with built in good quality gpu's.

I think your reasons for "not respecting" a company are quite silly, it's like you have read a few articles, gotten the gist of what a few people say or think and then taken that as gospel.

"the computer scene" - there is no computer scene.

[siliconfanatic]

You get what I meant by computer scene. I said that for lack of a better word. And my other reason is all my experiance with customer support, RMA'ing etc have been horrible. Had three doa graphics cards from them so far. Then all three times they denied they had ever listed, made or designed said card. Then when we finally got a working card. Week later it fries. Then on with the chase again. When AMD was on top there support was great. And you are right, great in the low to mid range sector. Never really looked at those though. I mentioned them getting it back, but i am mostly concernerned with the support. Its one thing to not reply, but telling such an ugly lie..... *fumes*

[longweight]

I avoid Asus for all hardware.

[Shirty]

Originally Posted by siliconfanatic

You get what I meant by computer scene. I said that for lack of a better word. And my other reason is all my experiance with customer support, RMA'ing etc have been horrible. Had three doa graphics cards from them so far. Then all three times they denied they had ever listed, made or designed said card. Then when we finally got a working card. Week later it fries. Then on with the chase again. When AMD was on top there support was great. And you are right, great in the low to mid range sector. Never really looked at those though. I mentioned them getting it back, but i am mostly concernerned with the support. Its one thing to not reply, but telling such an ugly lie..... *fumes*

Unless I'm very much mistaken, AMD don't make graphics cards... so one assumes that you were in fact dealing with one of AMD's partners?

[siliconfanatic]

ATI is owned by AMD so I consider them as AMD.

[Shirty]

The difference between ATI and AMD is semantic (although it's all AMD now), my point was that whilst they design the GPU and a reference board, they then then license partners like Sapphire, ASUS, XFX, Gigabyte, MSI etc to actually make the cards and get them into the distribution channels.

[siliconfanatic]

Good point. Thing is as I posted they also denied even designing the card- which is the equivocal of shoving a fresh, steaming pile of bull **** in front of your face. I can understand giving one the runaround, as its a logical business tactic to avoid hemorrhaging money like Mitt Romney in a Rolex store. But blatantly lying to me is a step to far IMHO.

[Shirty]

If it was a non-reference model they were telling the truth, and either way it was the board manufacturer's responsibility rather than AMD's directly.

[siliconfanatic]

It was reference. ATI and everything. Not a sign of any other company, though it I will keep that in mind before get into another argument with an Nvidia rep(that was several months ago, right after my argument(s) with AMD, before someone burns me)

EDIT: If it weren't for the fact that this is a message board, I wouldn't be able to keep from asking how we have managed to derail this thread so much.

[Shirty]

I agree.

But I need the last word.