Originally Posted by guttheslayer
Polaris was the reason why titan could afford to go from $1000 to $1200. That indirectly also means all Nvidia lineup will scale up as well
By releasing a high end card every 2 years to me is a fail.
Of course this is one way to see it. For me it was the horrible power consumption and need for good coolers of the Rx500-series. Some posts in this very thread mentioned Polaris wouldn't compete with the high-end. Excuse me, but if small middle-class cards like the RX580 consumes as much power as an almost double as fast card like a 1080 Ti, then it is seriously a fail.
If you of course neclect such important point like many AMD fans usually do, anything can be considered not a fail. Yet then I expect to take the same methods for all brands and products, not just the favorite one.
Originally Posted by HanSomPa
Also note that it's a failure to customers, not to AMD the company. The goals of AMD are different than their customers'.
Nice way to weasel around the issue. Hello .. Hello , anybody home. Think McFly, think!
If a company does not align to the wishes of th customers, they are not entitled to complain when the customers buy something else instead. Ironicall both the AMD management and the AMD fanboys claim it is the fault of the customer then.
Originally Posted by AmericanLoco
You're strawmanning my argument. I never said they wouldn't be influenced. I said products being released in 2017 will be the first products that could possibly be released totally under the current management - from conception to being on the store shelves. Any products AMD released prior to 2017 (Zen, Fiji, Polaris, APUs) would have been conceived under previous management.
AMD only changes the heads of their leadership. The rest of the higher positions are practically the same. Although there is a strange changing in positions going on there. In the end it is the same personal with a new title. Simple difference is what part of AMD they favor.
I tell you what. The CPU division was fighting for more power when the GPU side was somehow keeping the boat afloat for years. There was already a paradigm shift in the way AMD works. The managment still wanted to get their failes "future is fusion" dream going. They then had the glorious idea to go with HBM for both GPUs and CPUs / APUs.
That is the main budget what was going on for the RTG division and barely had crumbs left. The CPU side profits massively and invested the rest in Ryzen. Decisions like this were never in the last managements agenda. Rory Read wanted to heavily go into servers because he is a former IBM person. You can never plan 5-years ahead. Not in a fast changing environment like the IT-sector. As a company you have to always adapt to new situation. AMD right now is not able to react and hope they can skip some developments entirely. Let's see how this works out in the long run.
Originally Posted by AmericanLoco
I have not spoken of any "light". 3-4 years is NOT a lot of time to turn things around in the semiconductor industry, especially when your entire product portfolio is bad. Like I said, it takes 3-5 years for a brand new processor design to see the light of day. The reason why companies like Intel, Apple, Samsung, etc... can release new chips every 8-12 months is because they have multiple teams working on multiple products concurrently.
That's a nice theory, but the reality is the whole company was suffering long before that. Fiji and Hawaii both took ~2 years to come to market, and they were both released before the formation of RTG.
Go back to your comment and see for yourself what your "light" meant. Like I said, Bulldozer wanted to be more than it actually could accomplish. AMD often has this big pipedreams that burst in comparison with the more way on earh competion. Don't even dare to compare AMD with big-shots like Apple or Samsung. Their pocket money is bigger than AMD as a whole.
AMD has ever been a chaos company. In their long history they burned so much money, it is inexcusable. If they were back in the 90's in the same position they were today, AMD would have died the same death many other CPU/GPU manufacturers had at that time. However their strange position of underdog / no monopoly company brings them in cash they wouldn't deserve on their own.
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric
Believe me, there are armchair "experts" on every single subject you can think of on this board.
Indeed. I get so tired of all those "idiots" who don't even know what a fiscal year is, but every new financial result complain about the year would be wrong.
Thos are the same experts lecturing you on how to run a company or how you would not be more qualified than them. I did not spend over 12 years in business eductation to be lectured by infants like that.