backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 76 comment(s) - last by murphyslabrat.. on May 25 at 1:59 PM
AMD tries to up its GAME!

Video games are a huge industry and a large part of the money to be made from video games lies in hardware needed to enjoy them. Some gamers gravitate towards game consoles like the PS3 or Xbox and some gamers prefer the PC for their gaming needs.

Both the PC gaming platform and the console platform have their pros and cons. One of the most common cons for the PC gaming platform is the ease of use for gamers when buying computers. AMD announced a new program that it intends to make it easier for PC gamers to get the right hardware for playing PC games.

The program is called AMD GAME! and AMD says that it combines a balance of multi-core processors, HD media capabilities and next generation graphics power. Program partners include Acer, Alienware, Logitech and Microsoft; all of whom joined with AMD to help make it easier for consumers to identify PCs that work well for gaming and HD entertainment right out of the box.

AMD says that according to Jon Peddie Research, two-thirds of all the PCs sold last year had only very basic capabilities when it came to gaming. Nigel Dessau, senior vice president and chief marketing officer for AMD said, “With the support of industry leaders in PC gaming, AMD GAME! ensures consumers don’t need an enthusiast-level knowledge of PC hardware for an optimal gaming system. We in the PC industry owe consumers the same predictability, simplicity and affordability in finding a PC for gaming that the console industry currently provides.”

In addition to AMD GAME! logos on full computer systems, AMD also says that it will place the AMD GAME! logo onto PC components so that consumers will be able to easily identify gaming grade components when building their own computers. AMD says that computers carrying the AMD GAME! logo will combine AMD Phenom processors, future AMD Turion Ultra processors, Athlon processors, ATI Radeon HD 3000 series graphics and AMD chipsets for an enhanced mainstream gaming experience.

What’s not clear from the AMD GAME! offerings is how and if AMD and its partners will somehow let PC gamers know what systems are capable at running what types of games. Any PC gamer will tell you that what will run a mainstream game like The Sims may not offer the performance needed for marquee titles like Crysis or Call of Duty 4.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
A welcome idea...
By MrBlastman on 5/19/2008 12:00:12 PM , Rating: 4
This actually sounds like a good idea in concept and is one of a few ways to address the abysmal problem facing the mass PC Market - awful on-board video(Intel chipset anyone?) and other hardware that makes gaming on that budget-box impossible.

For most of us hardcore users, we build our own PC's and have been for years. For the rest out there, they don't - and just pick up whatever is on the shelf at the local store. Much to their dismay later on, they can't play many games on the machine.

I welcome this, and any other solution that promotes PC's that have adequate hardware to game on. Nvidia should do something similar and as soon as the weak graphics hardware is eradicated on budget boxes, the better.

The systems probably will not be high-end, or top of the line, but anything is better than what the masses are using right now. If more average people had hardware that they could game on right out of the box, it would work wonders for the PC gaming scene and help it grow even larger.




RE: A welcome idea...
By Funksultan on 5/19/2008 12:12:00 PM , Rating: 5
I respectively disagree.

The inherant problem with this is that the logo is unlikely to ever change, while "gaming" standards change on what can be a ridiculously fast pace.

Grandma may walk into Walmart to pick up a new video card so her grandkids can play "WoW3: Digital Crack" and not realize she's buying a product that's been sitting on the shelf for a couple years, and doesn't even meet the basic requirements for the game.

I -hate- to say it, but I think the win here is using the Microsoft gaming index score. Games could easily have a big "5" printed on the label, indicating that you need a 5 to play the game well, while video cards can come with a similar label.

Yes, there are inherant flaws in that as well, but it's a hellava lot closer than just saying "great for gaming". I have a Radeon 6200 that proclaims it's hot for gaming as well, and it's fire died out over a year ago. :P


RE: A welcome idea...
By Funksultan on 5/19/2008 12:14:38 PM , Rating: 2
Did I just suggest "Garanimals" for video components?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garanimals

Yikes.


RE: A welcome idea...
By murphyslabrat on 5/19/2008 12:19:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
. I have a Radeon 6200 that proclaims it's hot for gaming as well, and it's fire died out over a year ago. :P

I wouldn't call some smoldering leaves a fire.

Oh, and I am assuming that you mean GeForce, as the Radeon line started with the Radeon 7000


RE: A welcome idea...
By Alpha4 on 5/19/2008 11:26:20 PM , Rating: 2
I think he meant the Radeon 2600 maybe. The 6200 "turbo-cache" flame was blown the moment somebody opened the window. ;)


RE: A welcome idea...
By SlyNine on 5/20/2008 3:04:31 AM , Rating: 2
More like a wet match, or do we leave that anology for the 5200ultra.


RE: A welcome idea...
By murphyslabrat on 5/25/2008 1:59:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://pcpartscollection.com/apnvgefxuldd.html

Omigosh, I hav never seen such an innapropriate use of the "Ultra" moniker.


RE: A welcome idea...
By bryanW1995 on 5/20/2008 10:34:17 AM , Rating: 3
HEY! I used to have a 6200 with a passive heatsink, it was awesome for surfing the net!


RE: A welcome idea...
By omnicronx on 5/19/2008 11:46:53 PM , Rating: 2
The Radeon line started with the 'Radeon'.. I still have my original All in one wonder Radeon. When the number system was added, it was considered equivalent to a radeon 7200. The 7000 was usually a low profile card and was considerably slower.


RE: A welcome idea...
By StevoLincolnite on 5/20/2008 12:44:56 AM , Rating: 2
It did start with the "Radeon" they all later got renamed though to these:
Radeon SDR
Radeon DDR
Radeon VE
Radeon LE
Radeon AIW
Radeon 7000 (Same as the VE)
Radeon 64/32
Radeon 7200 (Same as the 64 and 32)
Radeon 7500
Radeon AIW VE
I used to have the Radeon 7200 LE back in the day, which was not the best performer by any length, however I soon fell in love with it once I unlocked the TnL unit :)
Paired up with a Voodoo 2 12mb card, I could play any game at the time, be it Glide, OpenGL, Direct 3D and so on.


RE: A welcome idea...
By Locutus465 on 5/19/2008 12:41:18 PM , Rating: 2
I think the issue mention could very easily be worked around by updating the spec bi-annually.


RE: A welcome idea...
By Moishe on 5/19/2008 12:46:48 PM , Rating: 5
Even a box with a "5" on it could sit on the shelf for a couple of years and make that 5 useless.
Basically, any "rating" printed on anything will be obsolete and sooner rather than later in the gaming world.

How about a combination of the number and the year?
5:2008 would mean it can play Crysis... 5:2000 would mean it can play UT.


RE: A welcome idea...
By exanimas on 5/19/2008 12:57:13 PM , Rating: 2
The scale could increase as time goes on. Right now we might rate Crysis to need a "5" video card. A year from now the new top of the line game would need a 6 or 7 depending on how much more intensive it was. Two years from now the best game out (visually) would need maybe a 15 due to some new rendering technology. This is all just a made up scenario, but you get the point. For this purpose, numbers are infinite so why not make use of that?


RE: A welcome idea...
By spluurfg on 5/19/2008 2:08:37 PM , Rating: 3
I know everybody seems to hate 3dmark these days, but the fact of the matter is that it is perfectly suited for this sort of thing. It's not the vintage of a computer that determines how it should be benchmarked, but how it performs on each flavour of directx, assuming the features are enabled.

I.e. dx7 performance us 3dm2k2 score. Dx8 performance use 3dm2k3 score. Or use a similar benchmarking scheme that goes by directx versions

Then games could simply indicate what directx version you need to use, and what approximate benchmark score you need as a minimum acceptable performance. With a mildly populated database, you could quickly see if you could run your favorite games. And if you were in store, all you would need to do is pick up the title you want to play, look at the back, and see which computer fits your needs.

But I think ANY system will be fairly demanding for the average consumer... partly because people don't have a lot of time in their day to learn about this stuff, and partly because some people just don't think hard enough about what they buy.


RE: A welcome idea...
By Pryde on 5/19/2008 10:07:06 PM , Rating: 2
But 3dmark is incredibly inaccurate. Look at the 3870 compared to a 8800GT in 3dmark06, the scores are incredibly close yet in real world performance the 8800GT is 10-25% fast than the 3870. 3dmark has no real comparison to real world gaming.


RE: A welcome idea...
By PrinceGaz on 5/20/2008 12:03:19 AM , Rating: 2
A 10-25% discrepancy is irrelevant for a rating system like this. In order to avoid there being too many rating levels, a rating difference of 1 point should mean a difference in performance of at least 2x, maybe 3x or more.

So for DX9 performance, the 3DMark2006 equivalent ratings could go something like
1: 300-800
2: 800-2000
3: 2000-5000
4: 5000-12000
5: 12000-30000
a 10-25% discrepancy will be more or less irrelevant, as will the CPU so long as it tested on a fast multi-core CPU.

The whole point of ratings is to be able to say to an average game purchaser something simple like "you need a minimum of a 2 to play the game satisfactorily, and a 4 to provide the full graphics experience".


RE: A welcome idea...
By PrinceGaz on 5/20/2008 12:20:27 AM , Rating: 2
In addition to what I've just said, a card would only have one rating itself- based on the performance of it under its latest supported DX version.

A website would be provided where you can go and run a quick online test to determine your card's rating and DirectX version, which would be all you would need to know when choosing a game.

So they run the test and get "Rating: 2, DirectX 9". They can go to the store and automatically exclude games which have DirectX 10 graphics listed in their requirements, along with any games with a minimum rating higher than 2. They can then make their own decision about whether to choose a game that has a recommended rating higher than that of their card, knowing they will have to compromise on how it looks and that it won't be as pretty as any screenshots on the case. Alternatively they could buy a new card based on the game rating they really want to play.

They don't need to know anything about 3DMark or how the rating was decided, only what the game needs and works best with, and what their current or prospective card is rated at.


RE: A welcome idea...
By spluurfg on 5/20/2008 2:59:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But 3dmark is incredibly inaccurate. Look at the 3870 compared to a 8800GT in 3dmark06, the scores are incredibly close yet in real world performance the 8800GT is 10-25% fast than the 3870. 3dmark has no real comparison to real world gaming.


It's better than some of the existing schemes out there. Right now you could get two PCs that are 'vista ready' and get one dx10 capable PC and another dx9 capable PC. Compared to utter incompatibility, a 10-20% performance discrepancy is nothing.


RE: A welcome idea...
By exanimas on 5/19/2008 11:29:04 PM , Rating: 1
Your idea is pretty good in theory, but think more into it. Game X needs a 3DMark score of Y in order for it to be played acceptably. You're an average consumer and want to play Game X, but aren't sure what your 3DMark score would be with a particular graphics card. See what I'm saying? There needs to be some sort of universal graphics card / game rating. They could definitely base it off of 3DMark or a similar benchmark, however, most people would be more comfortable matching a "6" graphics card to a "6" game, than matching a game that requires 3DMark score of 12,485 in DirectX9 to a graphics card that may or may not get you into that ballpark.

So like I said, your ideas work for the company making the rating system, but most likely not for the average consumer.


RE: A welcome idea...
By spluurfg on 5/20/2008 2:57:35 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Then games could simply indicate what directx version you need to use, and what approximate benchmark score you need as a minimum acceptable performance. With a mildly populated database, you could quickly see if you could run your favorite games. And if you were in store, all you would need to do is pick up the title you want to play, look at the back, and see which computer fits your needs.


Approximate scores. If you want to round off to the thousand, works great. If you want to use small numbers or big ones, my point is that you use benchmarks, and there already happens to exist a great set of benchmarks for this purpose.

Further, we're assuming the PC maker will make a marginal amount of effort to participate in the scheme. I.e. the PC in store will say what it scored [approximately] in 3dmark.


RE: A welcome idea...
By BladeVenom on 5/19/2008 4:35:50 PM , Rating: 2
They need to slap a year onto the logo. "Game Ready 2008" That would help fix the problem of out of date hardware still on store shelves.


RE: A welcome idea...
By Funksultan on 5/19/2008 12:59:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Even a box with a "5" on it could sit on the shelf for a couple of years and make that 5 useless.


The numbers would increase as time went on...

Years from now, you could see a game labeled "14" and know that you shouldn't buy that video card labeled "12" to go with it.


RE: A welcome idea...
By P4blo on 5/19/2008 12:47:58 PM , Rating: 1
Surely you mean 'respectfully' ?

To my mind Vista is putting an end to some of the problems as to support Aero it must handle at least some 3D accel. It wont be long before even the base 3D chipsets (even integrated) can handle most gaming. Ok it wont be a 9800GTX in performance but I figure they're going to put this 'Game!' label on just about anything that handles 3D anyhow. If you can play Tetris 3D on it they'll probably stick a Game label on ;)

Anyway, long and short I think the biggest obstacle in the past was machines with *no* 3D accel, that's a thing of the past.


RE: A welcome idea...
By BladeVenom on 5/19/2008 4:32:12 PM , Rating: 2
Yet PCs that aren't capable of running Aero are still being labeled as Vista capable. That is certainly no help to a gaming newb.

Even meeting the minimum specs needed to run Aero could hardly be called a gaming machine.

Even integrated video has had 3d acceleration for a long time, but it sucks for gaming.


RE: A welcome idea...
By DeMagH on 5/19/2008 12:49:31 PM , Rating: 3
I think this might be solvable by changing the sticker every year, like AMD GAME CERTIFIED 2008 , next year will be 2009 ... etc.

Also this is a nice marketing move that i doubt intel/nvidia will be easily countering as they do not design whole GPU/chipset/CPU solutions like AMD "intel does of course produce all, but intel current GPUs are not targeting gamer in the first place"

As a power user, i hate the idea because it gives no details about what kind of performance to expect, it is kind of a generalized slogan for different games, game settings and gaming performance, which isn't a power user's cup of tea.

But as someone in the sales business of computer hardware i think this will make it a lot easier to explain to noobish customers what they are buying and the performance range they will be getting.

Overall, I support the idea, i just don't see it succeeding anytime soon as AMD is way behind the competition with their line of CPUs.


RE: A welcome idea...
By Amiga500 on 5/19/2008 12:58:13 PM , Rating: 2
To support the decision making process in a store, the company will place AMD Game! stickers on machine boxes that will essentially tell people that a PC will be able to run PC Games with a speed of at least 30 frames per second.

from tgdaily...

30 FPS.... still quite vague as no res or settings will be given.


RE: A welcome idea...
By MrBungle123 on 5/19/2008 1:03:56 PM , Rating: 4
other news sites reporting on this have stated that AMD GAME! Ultra is for 1600 x 1200 while standard AMD GAME! is for 1280 x 1024 both at the games default graphics quality levels.


RE: A welcome idea...
By ImSpartacus on 5/19/2008 3:29:45 PM , Rating: 2
RE: A welcome idea...
By MrBlastman on 5/19/2008 1:06:01 PM , Rating: 2
The 2008 and 2009 is a good point - I think that would keep things current rather than someone finding an open box PC 2 years later and buying it based on the label saying it is gaming ready alone even though it is 2 or more years old... without the buyer knowing that.


RE: A welcome idea...
By Funksultan on 5/19/2008 1:06:38 PM , Rating: 2
That's a step in the right direction, but whereas the Microsoft rating is a fixed number, the year of the product doesn't give enough of a clue to it's performance.

I.E. A company may make 2 cards this year, a budget, and a very high end. Both would be labeled "2008". 2 years from now, the high end might still be able to perform as a gaming card, while the budget one will be trash.

I think Microsoft had the right idea. Convert speed, ram, fill rate, cycles, and boil them down into a lowest common denominator number that Joe Public will be able to understand.


RE: A welcome idea...
By ImSpartacus on 5/19/2008 3:32:49 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. The Centrino Mobile system could have years too. It would not be difficult to put a year on the GAME tags.

It also could be a decent advertising ploy around Christmas time: "The new GAME! 2009 computer is out and only $1200! Get it now!"


RE: A welcome idea...
By AlvinCool on 5/19/2008 4:33:39 PM , Rating: 2
I would respectivly add that a 2 year old box would still have a 5 rating (if it was originally a 5) but in reality be, say, a 3 at that point and granny would still buy it thinking it was a 5. Or am I wrong?


RE: A welcome idea...
By lagitup on 5/19/2008 7:18:57 PM , Rating: 2
Anand's article says
quote:
AMD selects the titles for its GAME! logo program based on sales data/popularity across some of the most popular genres of PC games. The games list will be updated approximately twice a year, with the first update to the program coming in early 2009.

So assuming they update the picture on the sticker or something every time they update the standards, any tech incompetent person could get their digital crack fix easy! Wooo!


RE: A welcome idea...
By AntiM on 5/19/2008 12:21:13 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, the concept is good, especially since AMD is in a position to offer a full package....processor, chipset, graphics card, all in one unit. Unfortunately, I think the execution is already flawed, or at least a little confusing. I read the press release, and went to the site, and I'm still not sure how it's going to work. Is there going to be different levels of Game readiness? Will there be something like "Game Capable" and "Game Ready"?
If they're going to do something like this, there should be only one designation. It's either game ready or it isn't. If they are going to have different categories, depending to the power of the machine, then they are relying on the consumer to be knowledgeable so the whole thing becomes pointless. Just ask Microsoft about relying on the consumer to be knowledgeable.


RE: A welcome idea...
By NullSubroutine on 5/20/2008 10:44:16 AM , Rating: 2
Its not that complicated. There is Game! and Game! Ultra.

Game basic means if you get that system you can play with reasonable settings most if not all games on the market at 1280 and below. Ultra means you can do the same thing on 1600 and above.


RE: A welcome idea...
By MrBungle123 on 5/19/2008 12:52:47 PM , Rating: 2
Game Developers should get behind the windows experience index built into vista, sure it's not the most acurate thing in the world but it will give you some general idea how fast a particular system is. If every game had the recommended WEI written on the box instead of or in addition to the min and recommended requirements that would simplify things for consumers.. then AMD could have thier AMD GAME! campaign and post how the system scores under the label. That makes much more sense than some generic label that doesn't really say anything since what is good today is crap tomorrow in the computer industry.


RE: A welcome idea...
By NEOCortex on 5/19/2008 2:17:39 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. I think this AMD Game! thing is almost purely a marketing gimmick, and will most certainly be abused by them simply to sell products. Since it will only be given to systems with AMD components I assume, its not much good as a standard. If anything it will just serve to confuse the customer more.

What there needs to be is a gaming specific index, much like WEI, introduced by both AMD and nVidia (or microsoft), and supported by game manufacturers. Have that front and center on game boxes and computers, and it will take away most of the thinking that the consumer would have to do, allowing them to just spend.


GAME! logo
By crimson117 on 5/19/2008 12:00:31 PM , Rating: 5
Ironically, the GAME! logo could use a bit of Anti-Aliasing.




RE: GAME! logo
By djkrypplephite on 5/19/2008 12:07:17 PM , Rating: 2
I was just noting to myself the lack of amazing design there in the logo.


RE: GAME! logo
By murphyslabrat on 5/19/2008 12:21:15 PM , Rating: 3
They're trying to better represent their hardware, as the HD 2/3 series do not have dedicated AA hardware.


RE: GAME! logo
By FITCamaro on 5/19/2008 12:43:36 PM , Rating: 2
What do you mean by dedicated AA hardware?


RE: GAME! logo
By NullSubroutine on 5/20/2008 10:48:13 AM , Rating: 2
It's designed to be run through software (DX10.1) but otherwise its run via the stream engines.

The dedicated AA hardware means there are logical parts of the GPU that render AA with much of a performance hit. The current R6xx series doesn't have the dedicated hardware to do it as the future DX10.1 will run it all through software.

In a sense, AMD put the cart before the horse on AA software.


RE: GAME! logo
By murphyslabrat on 5/25/2008 1:56:28 PM , Rating: 2
I am not sure which article I read it in, so feel free to do the digging yourself, but one of the reasons for r600's heavy delays were problems with the AA hardware. The end result is that they disabled the dedicated processor for it, and the Radeon 2/3 series take heavy hits for AA.


RE: GAME! logo
By Lugaidster on 5/19/2008 12:53:10 PM , Rating: 1
It's funny you say that since to have DirectX 10.1 compatibility a gpu must have a rather advanced AA hardware since it must allow custom AA algorithms. So in any case, even if ATI GPU's have poor AA quality they still have, not only dedicated AA hardware, but a rather advanced one at that.


RE: GAME! logo
By MrBungle123 on 5/19/2008 1:01:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So in any case, even if ATI GPU's have poor AA quality they still have, not only dedicated AA hardware, but a rather advanced one at that.


if something is "advanced" shouldn't it also be "good"?


RE: GAME! logo
By FITCamaro on 5/19/2008 1:17:27 PM , Rating: 2
Preface: I like Vista.

Vista is advanced but many people do not consider it to be good. Granted their opinion is based off misinformation, early experiences, or someone else's bad experience.


RE: GAME! logo
By Locutus465 on 5/19/2008 1:22:45 PM , Rating: 2
Like FIT I also like vista...

Currently I use the OS as my primary work OS, developing software on a AMD Dual Core laptop with 2GB memory, it works fine in this environment. I also use vista at home on my AMD Quad Core desktop with 4GB of ram, Vista owns in this enviornment.

Basically with Windows XP you're not going to be effectivly utializing those kinds of system resources, it's just not designed for it (particularly 32b which is what most people mean by "Windows XP"). If you plan on going with a "moster build" containing a quad core processor and 4GB+ ram then you'd be absolutly foolish to go ahead and install any flavor of XP on to it. Go 64b Vista for new builds, you'll be *MUCH* happier (particularly when comparing to 64b XP).


RE: GAME! logo
By amanojaku on 5/19/2008 1:01:32 PM , Rating: 2
I remember reading a while ago about some feature missing from the HD series that existed in older cards, but AA is not it. No one would buy a modern card without that capability. The AA in the HD card seems to be pretty advanced, to boot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_R600#Texturing...


RE: GAME! logo
By Locutus465 on 5/19/2008 1:35:13 PM , Rating: 2
AA is very much a feature of the HD (R600) series graphic's cards. I can tell you first hand that the AA support in these cards is amazing. Currently I run Quake 4 with 16xAA on my Radeon HD 3870 with every peice of eye candy I can think to turn on/maxed out and it still runs silky smooth (and looks darn good).


RE: GAME! logo
By MrBungle123 on 5/19/2008 2:30:53 PM , Rating: 2
If you wan't to see how effective your AA is you should turn some of those features down an bit most specifically the resolution... run the game at 1024 x 768 or 800 x 600 with high levels of AA and see if it still looks good. AA is there to help simulate higher resolution gaming for slow machines... it becomes almost pointless when you start running things at "max".


RE: GAME! logo
By Locutus465 on 5/19/2008 2:51:24 PM , Rating: 2
Ok... Considering I average 70FPS with these settings what reason do I have to not max everything including FSAA out? The game is already silky smooth, are we trying to make it "silkier smoother"? I'm not so sure that at this point that's possible, I think that once you hit an average frame rate of 70FPS you're fast approaching the domain of diminishing returns as far as doing things to further push frame rate.

I see it as being better to push image quality at this point using every feature possible. Running 1280x1024 with 16x FSAA pretty much guarantee's no jaggies at all. I'll take that.


A good idea
By AlphaVirus on 5/19/2008 2:33:49 PM , Rating: 2
But really needs to be thought out for a while among both tech savvy and basic users.

The easiest way to tell how well it will work, look out how confused all of these DT users are. Everyone is blurting our random ideas, and while they have good basis nobody can come up with a solid alpha/numeric system that would judge "Gaming Capable".

I think Vista did good with its rating system. Its simplistic for your average user, no extra confusing nonsense, just a 1-5.9 scale.

The main obstacle AMD faces is the ever-racing tech world. Something fast today can become considerably slow next year. The label system has to show some sort of year indicator such as 1H2008 for 1st half of 2008. It is simple enough for everyday users to know how new the item is and also informs the buyer what model year it is.

Now of course this does not handle the speed factor, which is the main purpose, so you could simply throw in 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. this can cover categories.

1 - Economical, budget, basic, word/browsing ($0-300)
Cheapest dual core, IGP
2 - Mainstream user, plays sims and watches youtube ($301-600)
More expensive dual core, cheapest gpu
3 - Budget gamer ($601-900)
More expensive dual core, more expensive gpu
4 - Hardcore gamer ($900-1100)
Cheapest tri/quad core, even more expensive gpu
5 - Extreme gamer ($1101-?)
More expensive quad core, most expensive gpu

So you would have 1-2H2008 or even 2H2008-1.

Or they could even simply mark the box with Economy, Mainstream, Budget Gamer, Hardcore Gamer, and Extreme Gamer. Or they could mark it with both to give the consumer for confidence in their buy.




RE: A good idea
By MrBungle123 on 5/19/2008 2:47:47 PM , Rating: 2
posting a date next to AMD GAME! is still meaningless, without some sort of scale to show what system is needed to be compatible with what game you have done nothing other than futher confuse the average consumer and add more acronyms and lables for technophiles to have to remember.

This entire thing is a marketing gimmick. The average no nothing buy-it-cuz-its-cheaper computer buyer is not going to spend the time or effort to figure out what AMD GAME! 1H2008 Class 4 Category 3.965B means. AMD doesn't really have enough of a market share to really be starting any sort of industry wide standard anyway.

Just use the WEI and be done with it. If for instance games were lableled with Windows Experience Index 4.2 or higher required and the computer had Windows Experience Index 4.7 stuck to the front of it I'm pretty sure your average retard could figure that one out.


RE: A good idea
By AlphaVirus on 5/19/2008 3:06:17 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is, how many average users know what the WEI is? Not many. If anything, they never have even visited past their desktop and Documents folder.

My example was simple, which half of the model year 1H or 2H, year (2008, 2009) and category 1-5.

It all equates to, the higher the number, the better it is. This is usually the best way to sell to someone who knows nothing about the product. Similar to the whole HighDef fiasco, consumers are so knowing now that they know 1080 is better than 720. They know nothing past that but they just know that bigger/higher is better.

If a customer is shopping for a computer and see 2H2009-1 and 2H2009-5, it will be easy enough to know which is better. The year would be of less importance because you wont find many 2004 models on a showroom floor, so perhaps just use

"Gaming grade 1" or "User 5", this goes back to higher being better. When word gets around, you will find average users buying new computers and saying "I dont need anything above a User-3 rating." Just like right now they are saying "I dont need anything above Dual core." because they know quad core is overkill for them.


RE: A good idea
By MrBungle123 on 5/19/2008 3:55:39 PM , Rating: 2
That doesn't make sense because there is not relative performance value given with the system you are advocating. A ultra high end computer from 2 years ago will still outrun a basic barebones machine from today, and is likely faster than a midrange machine from a year ago.

so by your scale 1H2006-5 = 1H2007-3 = 1H2008-1 that doens't make sense... the WEI is essentially a simplified becnchmark that is based on the slowest part of the system. The Highend machine from 2006 might score 3.8, where the midrange system from 2007 scores 3.9 and the lowend machine from today scores 3.7 all relatively close but the benchmark number is far more meaningful than xH200x-x which is nothing more than more meaningless marketing dribble when you have no way of comparing the respective systems to eachother.

What makes more sense this game requires a score of 4.2 or higher to run.

or

This game will work on: 1H2005-3, 1H2005-4, 1H2005-5, 2H2005-2......*insert 3 pages of listings here*... 2H2008-1?
see what I mean?


RE: A good idea
By AlphaVirus on 5/19/2008 5:24:38 PM , Rating: 2
Well I see what you mean, which is why I got rid of the 1Hcrap, and see it fit to use user types.

Economy, Mainstream, Basic (budget) Gamer, Hardcore Gamer, Extreme Gamer. Each class houses certain specs and price ranges of $300 increments except extreme which can of course excede every limit.

If a consumer sees computers next to each other and think "I just need to browse the web" They will know to purchase an Economy or Mainstream. A lot of times you will find people browsing computers because they dont "know the difference" but if you let them know what each computer is specifically made for it will help them out.

This theory rids the use of a number system and goes strictly based on the guts of the system. This is why I originally stated AMD has a lot of work to find the best scheme to capture all audiences.


RE: A good idea
By Lugaidster on 5/19/2008 10:35:55 PM , Rating: 2
But that still does not rule out the age factor. WEI can increment over time to acomodate faster parts; classes can't. Today your computer has 5.9 and runs everything, tomorrow a game needs 7.8 you know it won't run on your computer because your computer will still have 5.9. While your computer can be "Extreme Gamer" today but tomorrow a game needing that class may not run on your computer.

It's a fact that numbers are better than words to compare things otherwise numbers would've never existed.


RE: A good idea
By AlphaVirus on 5/20/2008 10:58:07 AM , Rating: 2
The only problem with numbering system as you state is if you buy a 5.9 system today, and tomorrow run a test and it turns out to be a 5.5, what are you going to do?

You never know when they will update those algorithms and tests. So you are confusing the customers with numbers they do not understand.
So for example, a system is 5.9 first bought and a game requires 5.9 which means you are perfect. But next year your 5.9 score drops to a 4.2, the game score will not drop at all.

The name scheme coexist with how people think, if I don't need it then I don't want to buy it. If a person buys a internet browsing computer, that computer won't have thrills the consumer does not want to purchase.

I guess the main thing I am trying to do is inform the consumer with something they can relate to. If they are not a gamer, they will not purchase the Gamer series. If they are a gamer, they can purchase based on how serious they are about gaming.


RE: A good idea
By Locutus465 on 5/20/2008 11:18:35 AM , Rating: 2
That doesn't happen with the WEI... If your computer is a 5.9 today it will always be a 5.9 unless you change out hardware to make it faster... My desktop is a 5.4, if I want to change the score then basically I have to switch my Western Digital SATA primary disk drive for something a little faster.

What I like about Game! and Game! Ultra is that with those two badges PC shoppers can buy a computer based on badge and know for a fact that it's going to run smoothly for gaming at a certain size montior (more or less, since 19" and blow tend to be 1280x1024).

Also, WEI can be seriously lowered by any single slower peice of equipment in the machine. Remember, it's not an average, it's the lowest rated peice of hardware in your machine. So it's possible WEI won't give you an accurate repersentation of what your actual gaming experience will be.


RE: A good idea
By AlphaVirus on 5/20/2008 2:42:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That doesn't happen with the WEI... If your computer is a 5.9 today it will always be a 5.9

Well thats a problem in istelf. Theoretically speaking, a 5.9 from 2000 could not run a 5.9 game in 2008. When dealing with numbers, there has to be some form of degradation to seperate last years 5.9 with next years 5.9.

I still think the name scheme would work best, forget about all the number matching.


RE: A good idea
By Locutus465 on 5/20/2008 6:03:03 PM , Rating: 2
I think you're assuming that they're not going to add new numbers... MS in fact states (if you've ever read the program description) that new index numbers will be added as nessesary in the future. So in 8 years the max possible index will presumably no longer be 5.9, it might be 12.9 or 18.9 or something.

The biggest problem I have is that if game developers try to use this system then it might mistakingly invalidate a system that might actually be able to play the game just fine... Take your example, say there's a game that requires a 5.9, then my system is invalidated because it only scored a 5.4... Except my graphics card, memory system and CPU are all 5.9 scoring parts, my primary HDD is a 5.4. So I can play the game, load times might just be a smidge longer than they would be with a full on 5.9 system. And if game OEM's *REALLY* get on board and check the experience index and stop installation if your computer isn't up to spec?


Fixed GAME!
By kyleb2112 on 5/19/2008 1:32:17 PM , Rating: 2
So I'm guessing the GAME! system will put AMD CPUs at the top of their performance chart. How cute. A system for people who can't look up benchmarks.




RE: Fixed GAME!
By SlyNine on 5/20/2008 3:20:01 AM , Rating: 2
CPUs are hardly the biggest or most important factor when it comes to Games.

I still game on a 4200 A64, However with Sup Com FA, I really wish I had a quad core. Agian the AMD CPU's would be plenty.


RE: Fixed GAME!
By SlyNine on 5/20/2008 3:20:45 AM , Rating: 2
I should add I have my 4200 X2 running at 2.9 ghz


Game Capable
By mattclary on 5/19/2008 2:53:51 PM , Rating: 2
MS had the right idea, just slap a sticker on it and people will buy it.

;)

AMD: Game Capable!!11!!

fine print: Minesweeper




RE: Game Capable
By Gul Westfale on 5/19/2008 4:51:42 PM , Rating: 2
my thoughts exactly. this seems like little more than a marketing strategy from AMD, along the lines of "turion" or intel's "centrino". how do you tell if a system can play games or not? and why are nvidia/intel products excluded from this, when a core2/8800 combo would clearly be better at gaming than a phenom/HD3870 combo (becuae it's an AMD marketing campaign, i know; but people who actually know what they are buying instead of relying on stickers will laugh at this)?


RE: Game Capable
By Locutus465 on 5/19/2008 5:04:26 PM , Rating: 2
Well for starters, I guess that yes this is "purely marketing"... But this is one of those times where that is a good thing. It's a program designed to help customers who are ignorent of what they need to play the games they want to play to make a better choice about the hardware they buy.

Do you want to play the latest/greatest title? But GAME! Ultra, do you just want to play a few basic set of games like WoW? Just buy a standard GAME! system. This program isn't designed for (but does acknowlege if you look closly) the enthusiest/high end gamer. The basic idea is to try and make it so the LCD isn't intel integrated graphics any more, which would be a boone to pc gaming.

Funny you should mention nVidia, the GAME! logo actually does allow for nvidia chipsets.


How do you tell what is what?
By The Jedi on 5/19/2008 4:11:52 PM , Rating: 2
If only somebody made a gaming PC buyer's guide. It could inform a shopper on how to read a CPU model number and a GPU model number, and indicate what was currently good.

Especially useful would be information regarding Intel vs. AMD and nVIDIA vs. ATI for the present time.

Oh look, http://www.google.com/search?q=gaming+PC+buyers+gu...




RE: How do you tell what is what?
By Locutus465 on 5/19/2008 4:20:37 PM , Rating: 2
You mean like anandtech's periodically updated buyer's guides? Speaking of which, they're starting to let these guides get a bit dated... Very sad :(


RE: How do you tell what is what?
By SlyNine on 5/20/2008 3:22:43 AM , Rating: 2
Hardware has not evolved much the last year. Why update somthing that's still generally true.

This is a low point, things will swing back around and Anand will start updating their guids agian.


Alienware, XPS, ROCK?
By Captin Crunch on 5/19/2008 11:26:57 PM , Rating: 2
I may have just missed something, but I don’t see how this is a new idea, or in any way revolutionary, its just AMD climbing on board the gaming pc orgy right? I.e. Alienware, XPS, Rock, etc. It just sounds like AMD are now trying to tap into an already successful Market, and so they should. However, Acer is the Fail brand, why would anyone want that rubbish in there gaming machine?




RE: Alienware, XPS, ROCK?
By Locutus465 on 5/19/2008 11:51:08 PM , Rating: 2
There's never been any form of marketing champaign like this designed to let consumers know the PCs they're buying will be capable of running the latest games. The point here is that consumers don't have to worry about buying from a specific manufacturer, nor will they have to worry about correctly customizing the computer. They can buy simply based on the badge and be assured of a minimum level of performance.


RE: Alienware, XPS, ROCK?
By Captin Crunch on 5/20/2008 12:46:58 AM , Rating: 2
Fair, that makes sense.

cheers =)


Progress vs Developers
By SlyNine on 5/20/2008 3:17:16 AM , Rating: 2
The biggest problem right now, Besides maybe pirates. Is how Developers continue with ever growing changes in hardware. I think If we kept a standard for a couple of years, a medium spec standard. It could help developers and PC gamers. If devs would develop with AMD Game! in mind, and if AMD Game! Didn't change for a couple of years then AMD Game! Would have merit, But its all up to the devs to embarrass

However without the devs agreeing to keep these standards it's worthless.

I'm not saying they cannot go above and beyond these specs for high detail and for the love of god and advancment I hope they would. But it would be a great place for them to spend most of there time developing. So even when the bells and whistles were not turned on, things would look great at that spec.

However I would have preferred something like a 3850 be more of the standard. As it is its barely able to compete with the consoles.

The ball is in the devs hand as to how something like this should be embarrassed. But I think its worth having a standard that doesn't change every year, and lasts for at least 2-3 years for med-low spec.




duh
By KinEnriquez on 5/20/2008 5:25:18 AM , Rating: 2
at least it's better than Intel's Viiv, or the purported DX10-compliance of its chipsets which can run Crysis at 3fps.

duh




So....Intel...?
By 7Enigma on 5/20/2008 12:31:56 PM , Rating: 2
"In addition to AMD GAME! logos on full computer systems, AMD also says that it will place the AMD GAME! logo onto PC components so that consumers will be able to easily identify gaming grade components when building their own computers."

So would Intel CPU's get one of these stickers? :) I kid...I kid....




"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki