×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AMD Next-Gen Kaveri APU Shipments Slip To 2014

Soulskill posted about 8 months ago | from the better-late-than-slow-and-power-hungry dept.

AMD 138

MojoKid writes "The story around AMD's upcoming Kaveri continues to evolve, but it's increasingly clear that AMD's 3rd generation APU won't be available for retail purchase this year. If you recall, AMD initially promised that Kaveri would be available during 2013 and even published roadmaps earlier in May that show the chip shipping in the beginning of the fourth quarter. What the company is saying now is that while Kaveri will ship to manufacturers in late 2013, it won't actually hit shelves until 2014. The reason Kaveri was late taping out, according to sources, was that AMD kept the chip back to put some additional polish on its performance. Unlike Piledriver, which we knew would be a minor tweak to the core Bulldozer architecture, Steamroller, Kaveri's core architecture, is the first serious overhaul to that hardware. That means it's AMD's first chance to really fix things. Piledriver delivered improved clock speeds and power consumption, but CPU efficiency barely budged compared to 'Dozer. Steamroller needs to deliver on that front."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

138 comments

what about the next NON APU chips? (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 8 months ago | (#44727059)

I don't like Intel lack of PCI-e in the i5 and lower range i7.

also where are the nexgen higher end i7's with QPI?

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (3, Informative)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 8 months ago | (#44727429)

Steamroller FX chips aren't even on the roadmap at this time. That doesn't mean that they will never come, but AMD is clearly prioritizing their APUs over enthusiast-oriented chips at this time.

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44727941)

Indeed... I haven't bought an Intel CPU in roughly 9 years, but with the way AMD are going with their AM3's I'll be dropping them like a stone in less than a year.

Sad, since AMD seems to need every customer they can get right now :(

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (3, Informative)

Apothem (1921856) | about 8 months ago | (#44728105)

AMD hardware is what's backing up the XBOne, PS4, and WiiU. I'm sure they have plenty of customers.

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (1)

Kjella (173770) | about 8 months ago | (#44730089)

But all those designs now are fixed and they won't be asking for new ones except maybe a die shrink for 5-10 years based on the last generation (Nintendo 6 years, Sony and Microsoft 8 years), if anything I would expect this generation to last longer. Those royalty payments will be much needed but that market won't provide any new business until 2020.

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (0)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 months ago | (#44730761)

That's fine, who actually needs a new CPU? I think anyone who has a working computer and buys a new computer right now of any type other than a laptop is a nutcase. I can understand moving to Haswell for mobile or even small-scale off-grid, because of the amazing power consumption benefits. They really are astounding, especially considering Intel's poor past record on power consumption with literally every processor before Haswell except the Mobile P3 — some of the CPUs had pretty low consumption, but the chipsets were always awful.

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44731905)

Funny, 'cause I'd consider myself mad to buy a laptop.

Laptops are fine for 'light work', but those thermal constraints really limit their usefulness for heavy processing. As an example, the machine I'm on grinds Poem@home workunits when I'm not using it. The CPU (overclocked, no less) gets within 3 degrees of it's maximum operating temperature during long runs. Doing that on a laptop would force thermal throttling (massively reducing throughput), as well as softening the plastic in the laptops chassis. That's on top of potential damage to the HDD and screen.

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (2)

hairyfeet (841228) | about 8 months ago | (#44730597)

And as somebody who builds and uses AMD exclusively while I'd like to see some new chips come out I have to say....it makes perfect sense. Their production is being taken up by the console Jaguar chips (based on Bobcat, i don't know WTF the console manufacturers were thinking but its good for AMD regardless) and coming out with a new chip would take resources away from that. Also there will of course be mainstream boards based on jaguar once the orders for the console chips are filled and I'm sure they are hoard a big pile of X6 and X4 jags that had one or two modules not pass muster so there is designing chipsets for those and of course their GPU line so their plate is rather full ATM.

I also really can't blame them in this matter as I have been saying for years and time and time again I've seen with my own two eyes that CPUs passed "good enough" several releases ago and even the Phenom II based chips and first gen Bulldozers really are overkill for all but a handful of users. Take myself as an example since I do a LOT of multitasking and therefor use more CPU than most. I transcode videos, edit multitrack audio recordings and I just loooove my shooters. Now throughout the 90s and a good chunk of the 00s I HAD to replace my PC every 2 years with major upgrades such as CPU and RAM added on the "off" years because I really had no choice, the software coming out at the time would just overwhelm a 2 year old PC, and now? I'm typing this on a 2009 Phenom II X6 with 8GB of RAM, 3TB of HDD space, why would I buy a new PC? Frankly the only upgrade I need is to swap out the aging HD4850 for an HD7770 and that will be less than $100 come the holidays so even with me multitasking like mad even this 4 year old chip runs everything I want to run and runs it well.

So there really isn't a point in them coming out with new CPUs or APUs at the moment as the ones that they are selling now are extreme overkill. I'm sure a few will chime in with "But but but...i7!" but ya know what? Know how many people actually give a rat's ass about which corp has the biggest e-Peen? From what I've seen selling to folks from all walks of life, from the gamers to the grandmas i'd say that number is less than 5%, maybe even as low as 3%. Everybody else just wants a snappy powerful system at a good price that won't sit there bogged down and the current AMD chips deliver that in spades. I've had not a bit of trouble moving desktops based on Phenom II X3 and X4, even the Athlon X3 and X4 moves pretty briskly and of course those 6 and 8 cores are easy sells to the heavy multitaskers and everybody likes those new $400 quad APU laptops as those babies have plenty of cycles to spare. Showing off how you can just plug them into any TV and get a full 1080P media center when you are done roaming for the day just seals the deal, no problem.

Personally if I were in the big chair I'd probably be doing the same thing, wait until the next gen consoles are out, get the Jaguar ULV APU boards and laptops out (probably along with a "the same tech that powers the PS4 and Xbox N!" advertising campaign) and then and ONLY then would I start really concentrating on getting those next chips out. Also remember that they hired back the chip designer that made the original Athlon64 along with the A6 for Apple so I'm sure he is cooking up something as well so it might be smart to wait and see if his new chip will be worth dropping the BD arch for. All in all I'd say AMD is in a good position right now, all three major consoles are using chips made by them (one GPU and two APUs) and while their current chips might not win a dick measuring contest with Intel frankly they are extreme overkill for the majority of mainstream customers whom I can tell you are quite happy to have that bang for the buck. It also helps that Intel has been stupidly greedy as of late, with the bottom of the barrel Pentium Dual Core being the chip they have matched price wise with the new X6s and frankly they don't have anything priced in the realm of the X3s and X4s, makes it that much easier for guys like me to make a sale, go AMD!

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (1)

Blaskowicz (634489) | about 8 months ago | (#44727595)

If you want lots of PCIe the Intel 4820K is coming, somewhat soon.

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 8 months ago | (#44727953)

The 4820K doesn't support ECC RAM, though.

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44728979)

The 4820K doesn't support ECC RAM, though.

So get a next gen Xeon E5 released at the same time?

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44729083)

Probably the "non-apu" chips will cease to exist on some point of the future, but with the HSA thing, probably the "enthusiast" CPUs will use the embed video core for CGPU math only.

Re:what about the next NON APU chips? (1)

Barefoot Monkey (1657313) | about 8 months ago | (#44730799)

I agree that, since I'm going to get a dedicated graphics card anyway, I'd much prefer some more focus CPU. That being said, an APU could open new possibilities for using OpenCL and the like without bogging down the main CPU cores or competing against graphics for the GPU's precious shader units. Now I'm intrigued - I wonder if this arrangement would actually work...

oh noooo (0)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 8 months ago | (#44727077)

An unnecessarily overpowered chip will be delayed, so more of the hardware features no one asked for will be delivered to a market that usually works in symbiosis with the Microsoft inefficiency treadmill but is now being destroyed entirely by that same company.

Re:oh noooo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44727307)

Can't really say it's overpowered; there are plenty of applications out there that will devour any compute resources you can throw their way. Media encoding is a biggy, games will be there soon due to high core counts in the new consoles, it's only the folks who do nothing but browse the web that don't benefit.

And AMD has to bolster their offerings any way they can right now; until highly-parallel programming becomes the norm rather than the exception, they're at a huge disadvantage versus Intel. Steam hardware survey has them down from nearly 50% share at their peak down to 10% or so. They're only surviving due to low cost parts that don't disable arbitrary features.

Re:oh noooo (4, Insightful)

Ambassador Kosh (18352) | about 8 months ago | (#44727637)

I would love to see what these chips do for engineering simulations. In simulation software there is a lot of back and forth between parts that can be done on a gpu for a huge performance gain to parts that work best on a cpu. The problem is that mostly you end up running them pure cpu only because the overhead of handing off to the gpu and getting a result back is so high. Kaveri is the first chip I know of that can do a zero copy transfer between the gpu and cpu. It may not be great for all apps but it should be AMAZING for engineering sims if they are modified to take advantage of it.

Some of the papers I read found that on simulations large enough for the gpu to make a difference you could get a 50x performance increase and theoretically it should have been around 200x or so but the overhead of loading and retrieving the data was still very large.

Re:oh noooo (1)

loufoque (1400831) | about 8 months ago | (#44730273)

Looks like the developers you work with haven't discovered asynchronous operation and the principle of overlapping communication and computation.

Re:oh noooo (1)

Ambassador Kosh (18352) | about 8 months ago | (#44731743)

In a simulation there are a lot of steps where you have some linear calculations and then some other calculations that can be thousands run in parallel but the next linear calculation depends on the parallel calculation. Async makes no sense for that. The next linear calculation can't be run until the previous parallel calculation has finished. Think of some steps as simple linear equations and the next step as a set of codependent equations that need to be converged. Doing that in parallel is vastly faster but once you have your converged solution your next step is then another linear step.

What you end up with is a lot of back and forth from parallel to linear parts and the back and force kills your performance if you try to run it on a current cpu/gpu setup.

Re:oh noooo (1, Insightful)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 8 months ago | (#44729003)

An unnecessarily overpowered chip will be delayed, so more of the hardware features no one asked for will be delivered to a market that usually works in symbiosis with the Microsoft inefficiency treadmill but is now being destroyed entirely by that same company.

Why don't you wait for it to come out before criticizing it. AMD is in trouble and it would hurt us all including the intel fan boys who are reading these comments if AMD is gone.

I noticed Intel is already raising prices on the newer I7s for no other reason that they think there is no competition as everyone bashes them in every tech website.

Steamroller is actually slower than the older Phenom II per clock cycle and is a crappy chip. That is true. I still own a phenom II but my crappy mobo is showing its age as it is downclocked to only 2.6 ghz. But it runs VMWare Workstation with its x6 core processor very competitively! I mean it can trounce a x4 icore7 easily from the same time period 2010ish in parrallel processing!

Want hardware virtualization iwth that intel processor? Oh, you need a special bios unlocked for $$$ more money (as much as my whole machine at $599!) AMD would never do this.

Remember Intel fanboys that even Intel had crappy chips out there such as 486sx, buggy pentiums, and of course the Pentium IV. The mistake for Steamroller were
1. Everyone would be using a tablet by now and would like smooth graphics like the Iphone has had for 5 years in which PCs still do not do right with smooth scroll thanks to XP support and crappy integrated chipsets
2. The APU would be faster than any 7990 as the ram controller would be on the card with instant low latency! Turns out that wasn't true as complications got in the way of that
3. AMD had done right iwth the Phenom II was great multicore and parrallel performance. SteamRoller has all its cores share cache and a central FPU :-( FYI they are not true cores like Intels or the older Phenom IIs.

I was hoping these last 2 issues would be fixed in Kaveri. AMD is in trouble and its ATI cards can't keep them afloat forever. Nvidia is being very aggressive with Kepler in that department.

Re:oh noooo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44731939)

Your third points a common misunderstanding.

The 2 cores on each BD/PD/SR module are actually two cores - the FPU on one core can be linked to the FPU on the the other to handle double precision operations much faster than can normally be done, but when that's not needed they operate as two independent FPUs.

The problem's nothing to do with the FPU. They made the same mistake intel did with the P4's - the pipeline got too long. Combine that with AMDs higher memory latency and the fact they're a generation behind on fabrication technology, and it's a wonder they're still in the game at all.

The FX-8350 is still a great buy if multi-threaded workloads are your thing.

First! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44727095)

The new Kaveri APU is so fast I came back in time to post first!

Re:First! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44727127)

The new Kaveri APU is so fast I came back in time to post first!

It seems broken. You weren't first. Or second.

OMG four whole months to wait. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44727129)

The doctors said I was getting better, I was making really good progress. I could see the light at the end of the tunnel. But now... this. THIS. I am utterly destroyed.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 8 months ago | (#44727263)

That four months is four months of lost revenue for AMD. Back when I worked in the chip business we typically had about six months after release where we could charge a premium for the new chips before the competition released something better. Unless they slipped too, every day we slipped was a day of premium, high-margin sales lost.

Yeah, we'd probably still be selling those chips two years later, but they'd then be at bargain basement prices with tiny margins.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (3, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 8 months ago | (#44727499)

The thing is, nobody is buying AMD because they are the best of the best. Their most expensive (non-server) chip is only $200. People buying their stuff aren't looking for the latest greatest thing. They just want a computer that performs reasonably well, without breaking the bank. The fact that you can get an 8 core, 4 GHz CPU for $200 is a big plus for some people. Plus AMD motherboards seem to have more features for less money. And they have a better track record for not switching sockets every time they change something, which leaves more room for upgrading your machine later.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (2, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | about 8 months ago | (#44727627)

The fact that you can get an 8 core, 4 GHz CPU for $200 is a big plus for some people.

I guess, for the people who like big numbers never mind that it's usually just breaking even with competing quad-cores with lower frequency but higher IPC. The FX-8350 has a single threaded performance equal to the Phenom II X6 1100T and Intel Pentium G840, it can win some multi-threaded tests because price wise it competes against Intel's hyperthreading-crippled processors but it's no impressive chip. But at least it sucks less than the FX-8150 , which really was the worst of Bulldozer.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (3, Insightful)

DuckDodgers (541817) | about 8 months ago | (#44727789)

never mind that it's usually just breaking even with competing quad-cores with lower frequency but higher IPC.

AMD has clearly lost the performance war. But I'm still hoping the brand sticks around because I believe it's the only thing keeping Intel CPU prices low.

But in any event, I think the really important point is in the end of this article - http://hothardware.com/News/Praying-For-Consoles-AMD-Details-2013-Game-Plan-Offers-Updates-on-New-APU-Performance/ [hothardware.com] - AMD is banking its future on the APUs in embedded applications, low end laptops, and consoles. Unless they get into tablets and mobile devices in big ways, I think they're planning to grow their share of a market that's shrinking rapidly. "King of console processors" is meaningless if 90% of the demographic that played Xbox360 in 2005 is playing on an iPad in 2020.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (2)

0123456 (636235) | about 8 months ago | (#44727835)

AMD has clearly lost the performance war. But I'm still hoping the brand sticks around because I believe it's the only thing keeping Intel CPU prices low.

Intel CPU prices were higher when AMD was competitive with them.

ARM are Intel's real competitor at the moment, not AMD.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (4, Insightful)

ifiwereasculptor (1870574) | about 8 months ago | (#44728081)

ARM is a threat to Intel in the near future and indirectly. People are gravitating towards tablets and smartphones instead of buying deaktops. However, those of us that actually need desktops today have only Intel and AMD to turn to, and Intel's margins are too high and their products are too artificially crippled for my tastes, which is why I sincerely root for AMD's success.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 8 months ago | (#44728131)

But, as I said, Intel CPU prices were higher when AMD's high-end was competitive with Intel's high-end.

Intel has no competition for their high-end desktop CPUs. So why don't they push prices up much higher? It's not because you can turn around and buy a similar performance CPU from AMD.

Re: OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about 8 months ago | (#44728375)

You ask why they don't keep pushing prices up(could ask that until infinity dollars) as if you think Intel's pricing is reasonable for their top end CPUs and you think they are doing consumers a favor for not asking more.

Comparing to top end graphics cards (Nvidia Titan, for example), the top end Intel chips (3970x) are relatively unsophisticated compared to their cheaper line ($300). That is, they are already inflating their margins by astronomical amounts because they have no competition at the top end.

Re: OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 8 months ago | (#44729043)

You ask why they don't keep pushing prices up(could ask that until infinity dollars) as if you think Intel's pricing is reasonable for their top end CPUs and you think they are doing consumers a favor for not asking more.

Comparing to top end graphics cards (Nvidia Titan, for example), the top end Intel chips (3970x) are relatively unsophisticated compared to their cheaper line ($300). That is, they are already inflating their margins by astronomical amounts because they have no competition at the top end.

And just wait to think what will happen if AMD liquidates and closes it doors if it can't get a competitive CPU? We most certainly will accelerate into a post PC world as the costs of all notebooks and desktops at the low end will double very quickly.

Please AMD do not mess this one up. My phenom II is begining to show its age and in 2 years I am planning on replacing it perhaps with this new chip?

Re: OMG four whole months to wait. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44729239)

It's not to do with having no competition. It's simply to do with the kind of customers they have at that point. No one buying a chip for their PC to do real work wants a super high end chip, because the price to performance ratio always drops off at the top end, due to it getting rarer and rarer to find high clocking chips with all cores working when you're binning. People doing serious serious work go and buy Xeons, because they need things like NUMA. The only people who buy extreme high end desktop chips are gamers looking for the longest ePenis they can, and they are willing to pay thousands for anything at all, because to their psyche, the more expensive it is, the better it is.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 months ago | (#44730803)

It's the economy[, stupid]. People won't pay a thousand dollars for a magic CPU right now. Intel is already charging what the market will bear. AMD is chasing the budget segment right now because it's large and growing, and there's no way they can compete with intel for the high end. Intel can just ratchet down their prices until they're only making a reasonable amount of profit. Instead they're taking over the market where Intel is not competitive, which is the only thing that makes sense. The Intel-based Xbox took too long to become profitable, probably in no small part because it had to have a separate GPU. The AMD-based game consoles are going to be simpler because they don't need a second big chip with a fat interconnect. Intel still doesn't have a credible GPU to pack in with its CPU, not for the quality demanded by a console anyway. Right now you can get a laptop for $200 with an AMD APU that will play most games. What can you get with Intel inside for two clams?

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44730909)

Hey, buddy, nobody at AMD cares about your rooting unless you're rooting with your dollars. Got that?

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 8 months ago | (#44731315)

I used to think so, until this month when I got the latest Samsung tablet running an Intel x86 chip. It ran my ARM native code so flawlessly I didn't even notice it until I ran into some obscure DLL that couldn't load. And that was with the current generation, 32 nanometer, I believe. Apparently these chips are already competitive on power efficiency and performance.

By the end of the year, Intel will be making these at 22nm, and by 2015 they'll be down to 16nm. I don't think there's anyone planning to manufacture ARM chips at that size, so with their emulation tech, Intel has a huge potential here to take the market from ARM.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (2)

dunkelfalke (91624) | about 8 months ago | (#44729743)

The CPU prices were higher because it was more expensive to make CPUs back then. With the past technology you couldn't put as many dies on the wafer.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

evilviper (135110) | about 8 months ago | (#44730749)

Intel CPU prices were higher when AMD was competitive with them.

Intel used-to have a monopoly grip on the workstation and server markets. Intel's P4 debacle greatly loosened Intel's grip, and Opteron leap-frogged Intel, and the demand was such that even the most dedicated Intel OEMs started offering Opteron servers and workstations, and AMD isn't gone from that market by any means, so if Intel slips up just a bit, AMD will be there to take up the slack. So Intel has good reason to be much more careful about pricing than they were a decade ago.

ARM are Intel's real competitor at the moment, not AMD.

No. ARM is trying to kill both Intel and AMD, eventually, but for the forseeable future, ARM and Intel/AMD just don't compete in the same space...

Intel/AMD never made any headway into extremely low power, where ARM has a stronghold (rumors are that MIPS might come back to form in the near future as well, and compete with ARM), but in the high-power market, ARM has zero market, where Intel/AMD have a stronghold (after the faltering of all the single-source proprietary (-Unix) architectures.

If you want a workstation that runs Windows, Intel/AMD can do it for you, while ARM has NOTHING to offer you, and doesn't seem to be trying. If you want a phone with good battery life, Intel has one mediocre product offering, trying to threaten ARM more than actually compete, but really there's no question where to go.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44728063)

AMD has clearly lost the performance war. But I'm still hoping the brand sticks around because I believe it's the only thing keeping Intel CPU prices low.

A while back their CEO fired most of their processor design team during lean times, apparently thinking they could re-hire them when fat times arrived again. Alas, firing your core talent during lean times means you will never have fat times ever again. I'm rather doubtful AMD will ever come anywhere near the pinnacles of the past and in fact wondering whether I should permanently write them off.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

Zuriel (1760072) | about 8 months ago | (#44728539)

AMD has clearly lost the performance war. But I'm still hoping the brand sticks around because I believe it's the only thing keeping Intel CPU prices low.

I'm not so sure, actually. I think a big part of today's relatively low prices is Intel competing with itself.

We're well and truly into the age of 'good enough' computing. You don't need a new computer to run the latest Windows or Office version or even most games. Unless you're transcoding hours of video or playing today's games on high detail mode that four year old Core 2 Duo is fine, and will be for a while yet.

If Intel raise their prices, the risk isn't that their customers will flock to AMD. The risk is that their customers will say, "Screw it, my old computer still works fine." Intel have to put out faster chips each year at around the same prices to convince people to actually buy and not just sit on what they already have.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 8 months ago | (#44729059)

They wont flock to AMD.

Most sales are from big name OEMs these days like HP and Dell. They only have intel lines as customers see the stickers and it is a name they are familiar with. Worse, geeks who go to slashdot or its Redmond fanboy version aka neowin.net have been warning them of AMD for a few years now if they users ask them for advice.

There are still some who homebrew systems but they are almost all performance oriented folks who buy Intel anyway. Even a cheap i3 build will cost $200 more than buying one from Dell where you can turn it on and get to work right away due to volume discounts. $350 vs $550 is a big difference from an identical computer spec wise. If HP or Dell make any and I mean any non intel units let me know and I will retract. It is 2am and I am too lazy to look it up now.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

Mashdar (876825) | about 8 months ago | (#44730625)

And yet my $400 HP Llano notbook has made me more satisfied than any laptop I've had in the past :)

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44730513)

I do not think AMD has a good model right now. It keeps selling off production assets to make its bottom line appear better then it is. Don't rely on console's to save your bottom line. All three consoles had much lower total sales and its mainly because the younger people have only so many dollars to spend. Tech has exploded into so many products for young people to buy. Its making every market rethink how they can get that buyer. Right now the sales are in tablets and rightly so. The tablets are more useful then a console, games are cheaper and its portable. Would I buy a Xbox One or a Tablet. At 50 years old I would buy a tablet. At 30 I would buy a tablet. At 20 I might buy both a tablet and a console. I think everyone gets my point. The demographics is there to sell a lot of tablets. Not there for consoles.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (2)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 8 months ago | (#44729465)

I guess, for the people who like big numbers never mind that it's usually just breaking even with competing quad-cores with lower frequency but higher IPC.

If by "breaking even" you mean pretty much beating the similarly priced intel processor on every multithreaded task, and even beating the $$$ top end intel i7 on some then yes.

A good fraction of what I do requires more than one core these days. In things like parallel compiling, I believe that the top AMD one was, in fact, king of the hill. That's a big plus for me for sure. The AMD ones also tend to be very competitive in scientific type software, another big plus.

The new APU should be a game changer. GPU like performance without the wretched CPU-GPU latency that kills GPUs for most applications because GPUs suck at many things.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44727793)

Interestingly some next-gen game benchmarks I've seen put the latest AMD CPUs as competitive as the latest Intel CPUs. I imagine the next-gen consoles being all AMD has something to do with that.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 8 months ago | (#44727845)

I imagine the next-gen consoles being all AMD has something to do with that.

Aren't the new consoles the first time in decades that a console is much less powerful than a typical gaming PC at release? The original Xbox, for example, was a PC with a decent CPU for that era and a faster GPU than you could buy for a PC, and only really limited in RAM.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44727989)

The XBox's GPU was similar to a high end GeForce 3, which came out a month or two before the console.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44729513)

Also I would guess any of the newer athlons at the time would probably run circles around the xbox's 733mhz P3. The consoles are pretty well forced to chase the PC performance spec simply on account of the power budget. When a PC can get away with having a kilogram of copper cooling a cpu that draws as much power as an entire console, it really can't be much of a fight.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

drsquare (530038) | about 8 months ago | (#44729697)

Actually, this is the first generation that has similar memory to a PC. The PS3 launched with 256MB of RAM when a low-end PC might have 2GB, i.e. only 1/8th of the memory. The new consoles have 8GB when a typical gaming PC might have 9-10GB.

Although they've still found a way to ruin that with bloated operating systems taking up nearly half the memory.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

armanox (826486) | about 8 months ago | (#44730689)

Low end PC's at the time shipped with 512MB, not 2GB. If they shipped with 2GB Vista might have faired better.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 months ago | (#44730185)

The original Xbox had a REALLY SLOW CPU for a new piece of hardware from that era. NV2A is in between NV20 and NV25, though, so the GPU was actually competitive when it came out.

Re:OMG four whole months to wait. (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#44728443)

That four months is four months of lost revenue for AMD.

No. That's four months without the increased sales that new feature may inspire (they hope), but in the meantime their current stuff is still selling. It should be obvious. Please sober up before posting again.

What is next? (0)

wbr1 (2538558) | about 8 months ago | (#44727285)

I like AMD now for budget builds. I loved AMD when they were smacking intel. However, this line of chip names has to end soon. There just that many more cool sounding pieces of heavy construction equipment.

The New Phenom VIII x16, based on Suction Excavator technology!
or
From the new Skip Loader core comes the AMD Skippy x8!
or
Our new Pipelayer core provides all the uumph you need to penetrate difficult projects.

These just don't have the same ring.

Greater power efficiency please (-1)

aNonnyMouseCowered (2693969) | about 8 months ago | (#44727425)

AMD and to a lesser extent, Intel, are misreading the mass market. What everybody else except those hardcore GamerZ (rhymes with lamers) want isn't more "powerful" desktop systems that consume enough watts to power a third world household with room to spare but more power efficient APUs, aka SoCs or systems on a chip. I know Intel can do it, but they simply don't want to cannibalize their sales of power inefficient high-end chips. So the typical user is stuck with desktop computers that simply have too much juice for their Twittering, Facebrowsing and Youtubating. I'll probably abandon my AMD desktop altogether for a quadcore ARM if I can find one with good FOSS graphics support. As it is, it's the abysmal opensource graphics support that's keeping me on the x86 koolaid.

Re:Greater power efficiency please (2)

Desler (1608317) | about 8 months ago | (#44727441)

I know Intel can do it, but they simply don't want to cannibalize their sales of power inefficient high-end chips.

Missed the newest Haswell line, eh?

Re:Greater power efficiency please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44727475)

Huh, even ivy bridge is pretty power efficient.

20-30W on idle, the great energy efficiency for work completed, enough processing power for everything except high end gaming.

Sure, I'm looking forward to more improvements in idle efficiency in future computers, and it would be nice if my computers idled as low as an ARM processor. but when you actually have a bit of a workload, the x86 processors are far better, both in performance and power efficiency.

I am NOT willing to give up a good performance for a slight reduction in my power bill.

Re:Greater power efficiency please (1)

dnaumov (453672) | about 8 months ago | (#44727825)

Better then that. My ivy bridge i7 2,6 Ghz Mac Mini (the entire computer, not just the CPU) idles at below 15w and maxes out below 60w at max load.

Re:Greater power efficiency please (4, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | about 8 months ago | (#44727521)

AMD and to a lesser extent, Intel, are misreading the mass market. What everybody else except those hardcore GamerZ (rhymes with lamers) want isn't more "powerful" desktop systems that consume enough watts to power a third world household with room to spare but more power efficient APUs, aka SoCs or systems on a chip. I know Intel can do it, but they simply don't want to cannibalize their sales of power inefficient high-end chips.

How has Intel misread the market? Ivy Bridge was Sandy Bridge with much lower load power. Haswell is Ivy Bridge with much lower idle power. True, Intel is still struggling to compete in the smartphone/tablet segment that is dominated by ARM, but Haswell is far superior to past Intel chips when it comes to power consumption.

Re:Greater power efficiency please (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 months ago | (#44730199)

Indeed, for the first time Intel is the clear winner in power consumption. Until Haswell, the intel CPU+chipset would always consume more power than the AMD CPU+chipset. To me, that is the real story of the modern CPU, not whose CPU is fastest.

Re:Greater power efficiency please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44730387)

> Ivy Bridge was Sandy Bridge with much lower load power.

Ain't that the truth. I have Xeon 1230v2 in my gaming PC and it's actually passive cooled because all it needs is a heatsink to stay under 65 celsius at all times. The PC case has also only one fan.

Re:Greater power efficiency please (1)

edxwelch (600979) | about 8 months ago | (#44731057)

> Haswell is far superior to past Intel chips when it comes to power consumption.
Only the laptop chips. The desktop chips are actually more power hungry. On top of that the laptop chips are only more power effient when doing light work, when fully loaded they have no advantage over Ivy Bridge.

Re:Greater power efficiency please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44727721)

Both Intel and AMD have low power CPU/GPU combos that are less or equal 65W thermal. You can get 35W stuff too. So what's your point?? Maybe you are buying 100+W then complaining it runs hot.

PS = APU is NOT a SoC.

Re:Greater power efficiency please (3, Insightful)

dnaumov (453672) | about 8 months ago | (#44727829)

So basically, you havent looked at Intel CPUs of the past 2 years at all, right?

Re:Greater power efficiency please (1)

Blaskowicz (634489) | about 8 months ago | (#44727889)

I'd consider an ARM desktop if there actually were motherboards to buy!
I only know of one, it's 349 euros and has a Tegra 3 which is outdated but has PCIe. Tegra 4 is a better fit for a desktop, CPU wise, but doesn't have PCIe.
http://shop.seco.com/gpudevkit/gpudevkit-detail.html [seco.com]

What you would need is a Tegra 5 which will just come with desktop graphics, so the feature level and driver support will both be easier. Just use nvidia driver or nouveau, presumably, and have real OpenGL not OpenGL ES. But we don't know if it will be available with PCIe. Funny that the "fuck you!" company is the only one that is building the chip you wish for.

As you can see ARM desktop is just a specialty item with a price that makes it useless. And when it becomes fast (e.g. Cortex A15 cores and not throttled down when it's put to use) ARM goes into 5W to 10W territory, meeting with the x86 guys (Atom, Jaguar, even Haswell/Ivy Bridge!)

ISA doesn't matter that much, low power x86 gives you a desktop. The current problem is Atom 32nm has no GPU drivers other than giving you raw X11 at correct res (given the GPU is a PowerVR, which is maybe the major brand of GPU for ARM SoCs, we can see that indeed the GPU support is indeed non existant in ARM land). And Kabini has been paper launched but we're waiting for the motherboards.
Kabini/New Atom mostly solve your desktop needs and even then Celeron 847 and Intel NUC have been available too.

Re:Greater power efficiency please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44729439)

> ARM goes into 5W to 10W territory, meeting with the x86 guys

Wow, so half the max power usage of CPU+GPU of one is half of the _idle_ usage of the other CPU-only and they are _meeting_?

Re:Greater power efficiency please (1)

Blaskowicz (634489) | about 8 months ago | (#44731129)

Temash has 3.5W to 5.9W TDP, that's the max power use for a CPU+GPU+southbridge. Low end Kabini is 9W. Haswell at 10W.
So yes I say fast ARM and slow x86 meet at a similar point, a few years ago you had an Atom smartphone which was fast and worked. You have a Toshiba tablet with Tegra 4 that overheats, though it's bad design and that ARM SoC is a semi-failure.

Note that "idle" on a modern desktop is not so much 0 to 1% CPU use, I have firefox using 30 to 50% of one CPU core right now doing who knows what. To idle my desktop I have to shut it down, stand by or close firefox.

Re:Greater power efficiency please (1)

ChrisMaple (607946) | about 8 months ago | (#44729313)

There are image processing techniques that are still too compute-intensive for routine use. Linear motion blur correction for a 4000x3000 image can run several minutes on a state-of-the-art processor. Now upgrade that to an algorithm that searches for the sharpest possible image from a set of nonlinear multi-direction blurs: come back tomorrow, and if the CPU hasn't fried itself it still won't be done.

The ability to use CPU power far exceeds any likely improvement in the foreseeable future.

AMD APUs have the highest performance per dollar. (4, Interesting)

Muerte2 (121747) | about 8 months ago | (#44727547)

The AMD APUs really are a great melding of price vs performance. Sure Intel has faster CPUs, but they're also more than twice as much! The highest end APU is $150, and the highest i7 is $340. The i7 will have higher CPU performance, but most games aren't CPU bound, they're GPU bound. The AMD APUs have decent GPUs. They won't replace your high end GPU if you're playing Battlefield at 1080p, but if you're a mid-level gamer they perform great. Plus you can always add a decent GPU for $150 and you're still less than that 4700 i7!

Re:AMD APUs have the highest performance per dolla (0)

Desler (1608317) | about 8 months ago | (#44727863)

Sure Intel has faster CPUs, but they're also more than twice as much! The highest end APU is $150, and the highest i7 is $340.

This just in: high-end line of one company is more expensive than lower-priced low-to-mid-tier option of other company. The AMD APUs are comparable to the i3s and i5s.

Re:AMD APUs have the highest performance per dolla (1)

greg1104 (461138) | about 8 months ago | (#44727881)

Comparing most expensive chips isn't fair or useful. Intel's most expensive chips can cost a lot more because AMD doesn't have anything competitive.

A AMD FX-8350 costs $200. In Intel land, a i5-3750 is the right cost equal, at about $215. Intel's lead is so large that even a previous generation unit from their line up is approximately equal performance to AMD's current models. Which of those two is faster depends on the benchmark [techreport.com] .

At the $100 end of the market, there are a few really cheap models where AMD has a price performance lead over Intel. But the minute you get to even $200, they are at best evenly matched. And Intel's built in HD graphics chips are getting better fast enough that even the AMD APU models won't have a lead at any price level for much longer.

Re: AMD APUs have the highest performance per doll (2)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about 8 months ago | (#44728427)

FX-8350 is 180$, I just bought one. That is, the price difference is 20%, but the comparable motherboard was about 40$ cheaper with AMD. In the 180-220$ range of processors, 75$ is nothing to sneeze at.

Re:AMD APUs have the highest performance per dolla (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 8 months ago | (#44729023)

According to Tomshardware an Icore3 can fucking beat that 8 core. Especially in Skyrim and Crysis.

FYI I am typing this on an AMD phenom II sadly as I am not an intel troll. The FX really is a crappy chip and there is no sense trying to defend it as the people who play games or do any graphics work use dedicated graphics anyway. The intel integrated crap is fine for Office work and web browsing in this day and age.

Here is hoping this next generation one fixes the problems.

Re:AMD APUs have the highest performance per dolla (1)

William Baric (256345) | about 8 months ago | (#44730179)

Are there really that many people playing Skyrim and Crysis? Particularly playing those games with low graphic settings in order to not be GPU limited? A lot of my clients still have Core 2 duo or Phenom II and don't need more power. Even worst, a lot of their employees still have P4 at home and see no reason to upgrade. Also, considering the Xbox One and the PS4 both have an AMD processor (and not a fast one), it's kind of obvious there is very little use of a Core i7 for most people, even for gaming.

Personally, I think it's a shame we can't buy something like a 70$ Athlon II X3 anymore, because with its ECC memory support, it was is the perfect desktop machine for regular people. I did buy a Xeon e3-1230 for myself, but it's a waste of money for most people. I'd say it was even a waste of money for myself.

The only place where I clearly recommend Intel is for laptops, where heat and power consumption is important.

Intel have 30 people working on Intel graphics (3, Interesting)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 8 months ago | (#44727905)

The AMD APUs really are a great melding of price vs performance....

Even though I loath the 70% gross margin that Intel insists on. They have http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTI5MTI [phoronix.com] 20-30 people working on Linux Drivers vs 5 from AMD. There is more than one way to measure bang for buck. That said when I buy a separate graphics card it will be AMD.

Re:Intel have 30 people working on Intel graphics (0)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 months ago | (#44730171)

Wait a second. You know the AMD drivers are for shit, but you're going to willingly choose AMD? The company that pays lip service to open source, but just trickles out information slowly so that the free driver will always suck and never support some of even their old hardware, like R690M?

Why would you pay for abuse? As long as AMD is being a collection of asshats about video drivers, giving them money is just voting for asshattery.

All my CPUs have been AMD for ages now but every time I try an ATI GPU I wind up cussing a lot.

Re:Intel have 30 people working on Intel graphics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44730505)

Lip service? They've pretty much released docs for everything under the sun that cleared the legal dept's requirements. That includes chipsets the help Coreboot along...

20-30 devs vs 5? Gee, strong arming OEMs to shut the competition out of the market when your own products are lack-luster DOES pay off, eh?

Re:Intel have 30 people working on Intel graphics (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 months ago | (#44730657)

Lip service? They've pretty much released docs for everything under the sun that cleared the legal dept's requirements.

Nice weasel words. Get back to me when they release enough information for the R690M to work. That's only been out for years and years.

Re:Intel have 30 people working on Intel graphics (1)

Mashdar (876825) | about 8 months ago | (#44730651)

This is why I just bought an nVIdia video card. :( I would prefer AMD products if they had competitive drivers and performance... Plus, there is a hardware reason for preferring nVidia on Linux if you use wine to play Windows games: You can disable the shaders. This is impossible on ATI cards. :( I've liked AMD as a name since my k6-2, but my game machine is still intel and nVidia. My HTPC and Laptop are a different story.

Re:AMD APUs have the highest performance per dolla (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 8 months ago | (#44728219)

I went to go upgrade my quad core FX last year, in order to get the 8 core I needed a new fan (cause the ones amd ship are a joke ... they keep it cool, running at 6k rpm and loud as a jet) and a new power supply

by the time I bought those two things I was at the price of a 3770k and still didnt get close to performance .. bought intel

until AMD can get their power to power ratio in line they are just not worth looking at in the mid to upper end, and no one cares about the low end, go get yourself a 99$ off lease core2 duo, why not, its got about the same power consumption and is still slightly faster chip than what AMD has in the low end market

Re:AMD APUs have the highest performance per dolla (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44728703)

the highest i7 is $340

The fuck you smoking? Intel's highest-end CPUs go for over $1000. Their entry-level i7's go for ~$300.

Re:AMD APUs have the highest performance per dolla (1)

aliquis (678370) | about 8 months ago | (#44730041)

Throw in motherboard and ram and possibly graphics card in that mix and picking that CPU vs the Intel one make less of a difference.

For me personally I need to get a new HDD, PSU, want to get a case and need a new monitor to.

Reason to pick AMD? None.

Old news delayed, shipment to Slashdot slips (1)

Blaskowicz (634489) | about 8 months ago | (#44727703)

This has been known for a couple months or three months, and even then was not a big surprise as the original target was "H2 2013" with no commitment.

A chance to fix things? (1)

wjcofkc (964165) | about 8 months ago | (#44727915)

How about a decent Linux driver for once.

Re:A chance to fix things? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44728045)

I've been using ATI parts with X since mid-90s, and never had any complaints about driver support (execpt that for around 2 years, I was forced to use a non-free x server [not by ATI; I don't remember who made it, but I ripped it from RedHat, and used it with Slackware] for the GPU on my laptop, in the 90s). It is better now than it ever was. The only real complaint is that the newer free drivers for AMD (e.g., radeon driver) rely on non-free firmware-- but, of course, there are folks working to remedy this issue..

The only company making a GPU that is in the same class of commitment to supporting free software on their GPUs as AMD is Intel.

Oh, you are running some binary blob. Try the free radeon driver. It works quite well-- esp with a 3.11+ kernel, so you get power saving in GPUs using the radeon driver (way cooler running on my laptop, and you won't have to run a -rc kernel in about a week or two when 3.11 is released for real). If you need open-cl, well then you are forced to the binary blob for now, but I expect this will change within a couple years, at the most.

Re:A chance to fix things? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 8 months ago | (#44729033)

I've been using ATI parts with X since mid-90s, and never had any complaints about driver support (execpt that for around 2 years, I was forced to use a non-free x server [not by ATI; I don't remember who made it, but I ripped it from RedHat, and used it with Slackware] for the GPU on my laptop, in the 90s). It is better now than it ever was. The only real complaint is that the newer free drivers for AMD (e.g., radeon driver) rely on non-free firmware-- but, of course, there are folks working to remedy this issue..

The only company making a GPU that is in the same class of commitment to supporting free software on their GPUs as AMD is Intel.

Oh, you are running some binary blob. Try the free radeon driver. It works quite well-- esp with a 3.11+ kernel, so you get power saving in GPUs using the radeon driver (way cooler running on my laptop, and you won't have to run a -rc kernel in about a week or two when 3.11 is released for real). If you need open-cl, well then you are forced to the binary blob for now, but I expect this will change within a couple years, at the most.

The bashing for me is Linux SUCKS with driver support! I had an ATI 5750 and can only run 2009 era distros and not run update on them as Linux lacks a stable ABI because socailists like RMS feel binary blobs are evil and that all should be opensourced and recompiling them enforces this freedom.

I call that slavery as I loose the freedom to run the OS and XORG I want. Every other os including other free ones like FreeBSD have an ABI and because it is stable you can even add them as kernel modules in newer versions. Just select FBSD 6.x compat in ./sysinstall etc. Viola. Works!

As a result I can not recommend standard users switch from Windows yet. If Linux users really want to have me and others use your OS again you need a stable ABI so drivers can materialize and companies like ATI do not have to rewrite their damn drivers on a monthly basis.

Re:A chance to fix things? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44729065)

You're full of it. There's no reason you can't keep running the same OS kernel as long as you want to, not breaking anything. It's YOUR decision to upgrade to the latest shiny new kernel. If you're THAT worried about keeping up to date then this is the price you pay. I mean, it's fun to blame Linux for this. It really is. But all those Android tablets are running it just fine with driver issues.

If you REALLY wanted to see Linux be better-supported by driver creators, then you'd pressure them more, not Linux. A stable ABI isn't the answer you're looking for when simply recompiling the driver is good enough for most bleeding-edge users to play with it. The kernel simply doesn't change THAT much, so extensive testing isn't necessary as often as people seem to think it is.

Re:A chance to fix things? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 8 months ago | (#44729121)

You're full of it. There's no reason you can't keep running the same OS kernel as long as you want to, not breaking anything. It's YOUR decision to upgrade to the latest shiny new kernel. If you're THAT worried about keeping up to date then this is the price you pay. I mean, it's fun to blame Linux for this. It really is. But all those Android tablets are running it just fine with driver issues.

If you REALLY wanted to see Linux be better-supported by driver creators, then you'd pressure them more, not Linux. A stable ABI isn't the answer you're looking for when simply recompiling the driver is good enough for most bleeding-edge users to play with it. The kernel simply doesn't change THAT much, so extensive testing isn't necessary as often as people seem to think it is.

Look my system runs fine when I install it. Then Ubuntu update comes in and it goes black. I am the user at this point and not technical at all. In real life I know to alt F-key another tty and run a kill -9 to run a shell terminal to fix it, but good luck with that for 99% of all other users.

Well I would still be using Linux now otherwise. Android is stable as each minor release has the same ABI. Hairyfeet said the same thing why he does not sell Linux at his shop. He puts it in and the customer always comes back saying their screen or printer mysteriously stops working. The only way around this is to use an enterprise kernel like Redhat/CENTOS that never updates and live back in 2009/2010. I do this in VMWare to get unix work done now.

Why should ATI keep rewritting and supporting drivers based on Linus and others changing things all the time? Isn't that the point of an ABI so you do not have to worry about that? Yes the does change very fast [slashdot.org] .

I write these things because I would like to see Linux used full time and it is frustrating. ATI does make ok drivers. Its just the situation with them.

Re:A chance to fix things? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44729303)

What the fuck are you blabbering about?
$ uname -r
3.10.10-amd64
$ fglrxinfo
display: :0.0 screen: 0
OpenGL vendor string: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
OpenGL renderer string: AMD Radeon HD 5700 Series
OpenGL version string: 4.2.12217 Compatibility Profile Context 8.98

Re:A chance to fix things? (2)

unixisc (2429386) | about 8 months ago | (#44729915)

Why not then use PC-BSD? The latest in 9.2 is that they're adding support for pkgng in addition to PBI, which makes installation of new software even easier. And for those who must have particular Linux apps not supported under the BSDs, there are Linux jails - both Debian & Gentoo - that can be used if one wishes to support it.

Re:A chance to fix things? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44731385)

Radeon drivers in Linux have always been a mess. They might be good for playing games but they go kaboom far to often in situations they shouldn't. I run Linux on a Laptop with an ATI chipset and on my MacBook with an nivida chipset. The system I am running on my both is Ubuntu 12.04 based. On my ATI machine, I have landed in console mode more than once having to switch drivers and kernels on the command line because I tried to changed my screen resolution, tinkered with settings because I found I couldn't take a simple screenshot with my program of choice, etc... Just Google 'radeon drivers and Linux suck' and see what people are going through. I belong to several Linux related communities on g+, one of the most frequent occurrences I see are newbies coming along, who having done nothing destructive, need help fixing a broken system because their ATI chipset puked all over itself resulting in a myriad of different problems. There is a reason System 76 and other Linux system vendors never, ever ever ever ever use ATI. They are just too unreliable and you never know how they are going to react to the next kernel upgrade. My MacBook with an nvidia chipset on the other hand runs like a dream - completely problem free. Vendors use nvidia and the more recent intel HD because they are solid. Considering that ATI would be much more cost effective to use but is never an option even for the low end speaks volumes on the subject. And yes, I have played with all currently available drivers, even the experimental, across kernel versions 3.2.0 - latest, and none of them work right. If you keep your usage super-simple that's one thing. If you want to do much more your mileage may vary, and good luck.

Hope they don't repeat the A8 bugs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44728667)

I hope that AMD fixed the bugs with the APU so they aren't doomed to repeat them. There is a well known bug that if your display goes to sleep while graphical acceleration is being used, you get a flickering effect whenever hardware acceleration is again activated. This alone is enough to make me leary of AMD as trying to get it fixed until I found a workaround was passing the buck to the max. AMD to manufaturer and back over and over blaming drivers, the chip, the thermal control, the bios, the OS, etc. Just got suck of it and I'm not sure I trust AMD anymore because of that and the other problems from the past.

Name Kaveri means Friend is Finnish (3, Informative)

aristotle-dude (626586) | about 8 months ago | (#44729135)

Re:Name Kaveri means Friend is Finnish (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | about 8 months ago | (#44729619)

Furthermore, "apu" means help as a standalone word, or helping/auxiliary as a prefix. So "apuprosessori" would mean a coprocessor.

Also, to nitpick a little, "kaveri" is more like a buddy, or even a (random) guy, as opposed to a close/true friend.

Re:Name Kaveri means Friend is Finnish (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 8 months ago | (#44730037)

Indeed. "Ystävä" can be used for a close friend.

But anyway, "Kaveri APU chip" quite literally says "helper buddy chip" -- the name of this AMD product sounds incredibly cute to the Finnish ear. Even though Kaveri is actually a river.

As a sidenote, Roccat [roccat.org] is a German company which makes PC peripherals which carry Finnish names.

Re:Name Kaveri means Friend is Finnish (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44731383)

So Apu is Homer's kaveri?

hurry pls, need to upgrade soon. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44729203)

damnit. and i was hoping to get some good I/O (2 gigabit, SATA6 and usb3, etc.)
and virtualization tech with low power usage soon ...
i need a board with lots of RAM and oodles of connectors.
i want the main-board with connected peripherals to look like a
japanese radioactive mutant octopus with 16, pls?
srsly, it'll be a SATA6 to gigabitLAN converter for me.

about of AMD Next Gen 2014 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44729669)

I truly planned to article a word to i would like to show some gratitude to the entire fabulous guides you happen to be writing as of this site. Our difficult world wide web investigation has really been compensated along with high quality info to share with our spouses. .PSD Free download [photoshoptravel.com] Rankings file for a large number of among us traffic tend to be rather fortunate to reside an awesome web site several particular people with valuable styles. I am incredibly fortunate to get employed all your web site and appear forward to extra enjoyable minutes reading the following. Cheers quite a lot once more for a lot of items.PSD Free download [photoshoptravel.com]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...