backtop


Print 87 comment(s) - last by EricMartello.. on Sep 10 at 7:23 PM


New AMD graphics branding

The evolution of AMD/ATI branding
AMD's market research shows that it's time to get rid of the ATI brand

It's been a long four years, but AMD has finally hits its stride after its acquisition of ATI Technologies way back in 2006. After agreeing to purchase ATI for $5.4B, AMD was besieged with quarterly losses stemming from the purchase, constant pressure from NVIDIA in the graphics market, and beatdowns from Intel (who wasn't exactly playing by the rules of fair business) in the processor market.

With most of its troubles now behind it, AMD is looking to kill off the long-standing ATI brand and bring Radeon and FirePro graphics solutions solely under the AMD umbrella according to AnandTech.

According to AMD's own research in markets from around the world, it came to the following three conclusions:

  1. AMD preference triples when respondent is aware of ATI-AMD merger
  2. AMD brand [is] stronger than ATI vs. graphics competitors
  3. Radeon and FirePro brand awareness and consideration [is] very high

The move will also help to further consolidate AMD's branding which has pretty much gotten out of hand in the past few years [see figure on right]. AMD will begin the transition later this year to phase out ATI branding and move to a more simplified product branding lineup. By 2011, AMD's product lineup will consist of AMD's Opteron for server processors, Vision (which consists of a CPU/GPU hybrid) for consumer processors, and Radeon/FirePro for graphics.

With AMD now taking the discrete graphics market lead from NVIDIA (51.1 percent for AMD versus 44.5 percent for NVIDIA) and preparing to take the fight straight to Intel with three new CPU designs, the next year should be a fruitful one for enthusiasts.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Huh?
By EricMartello on 9/10/2010 7:23:21 PM , Rating: 1
If you're so enlightened about hardware then you'd know that using CPUs for their intended roles more often than not yields better results. The Xeon is intended for workstation/server duty and is optimized for such work. The 980x is an "ethusiast's CPU" that can overclock like nothing else and has more ubiquitous motherboard options.

As for performance, Passmark disagrees with you:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

The 980x is on top by a decent margin...and while the Xeon may excel at tasks for which it was optimized - the 980x is still the best CPU for my needs.

Conclusion:
If you're running a Xeon in your desktop rig / gaming system then you're definitely fingering you e-vag...you spent about $700 more over a 980x for a CPU that runs slower just so you could say you have a Xeon. LOL


"It's okay. The scenarios aren't that clear. But it's good looking. [Steve Jobs] does good design, and [the iPad] is absolutely a good example of that." -- Bill Gates on the Apple iPad














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki