Just let it RIP already, it's been like beating a dead horse.

Still can't believe how many Nvidiots (referring to their attitude, not their GPU choice) want AMD to go under. The only thing achieved by such a thing is that a GTX 970 equivalent will cost the same as a GTX 980. Anybody believing they won't hike the prices as such really doesn't know how the world works. The other thing that competition drives is innovation. Sure, there has been performance improvement from Sandy Bridge --> Ivy Bridge --> Haswell --> Haswell Refresh --> Broadwell --> Skylake, but considering Skylake is truly three architecture generations beyond Ivy Bridge, the performance really isn't 'astounding'. The main performance boost has been on the graphics side of things, which isn't really beneficial for those wanting an i5-6600K to game (discrete cards). The only reason for the improved graphical performance is competition... from AMD APU's. No CPU competition, no real performance benefit, integrated graphics competition, improvement. If only Ivy Bridge had AVX2 and FMA3. Same would apply for Nvidia. No competition, no real drive to do exceptional things. REMEMBER THIS Nvidia and Intel are companies. Most companies main objective is profit, NOT to benefit you. When there's competition, they want to make you happy so you buy from them. By benefiting you, they benefit themselves as you are more likely to buy, and rebuy from them rather than trying alternative brands. If there's no competition, why would they want to spend any more than they have to, just to make you happy? No point, because it's not as if you have any other choice! I've mentioned this before on another forum, and there were a couple of replies from Nvidiiots who said they don't care, they can afford it. How stupid are they, wanting to pay more for potentially less just because they despise AMD.

Chillin is posting only for one reason on Guru3D. He posts to incite flame or to insult someone. He probably want to degrade us to wtftech level or is their top contributor in comment section.

Never understood fanbois. What do they get out of it? Nothing. Shocking behaviour. Narrow sighted too.

Oh dear. Revenues down 26% yoy and margin down 2%. Definitely not a trend that you want to be seeing!

Never understood fanbois. What do they get out of it? Nothing. Shocking behaviour. Narrow sighted too.

Just ignore the fanboys. They don't understand that the only way consumer wins price and/or performance-wise, is if the company (who's products they're buying) have a very good competition. If they don't, then one manufacturer can control the market ( cough* intel *cough) charging whatever they want and not pushing the products, performance-wise. My 2700k (oc'd to 4.8 gHz) is gonna keep going for another few years easily as i still can play most (almost all, with few exceptions) games maxed out @2560x1440... just sad

I agree totally including the part about the 2700k.

It seems to me that some people (not necessary in this thread) go in the other extreme, and "hate" on nvidia because AMD is doing bad as a company... there are several reasons why nvidia can be criticized, but not this. That being said, I totally agree that prices are already ridiculous in both CPU and GPU market, it's like every generation comes out more expensive than the last, without justification. So if AMD would go down, these already absurd prices will go up even further, so no, I don't want them to go down... on the contrary, and I haven't had and AMD card (actually ATi) since my 9800 PRO!

I haven't supported Intel for years simply based on principle. I know that their products are better, but I've never needed the performance they offer, and I still don't. If you want healthy competition, you don't buy what's best simply because you can: you support the company that fulfills your needs. That being said, I've used plenty of ARM based systems. EDIT: But, I would like to point out that I pretty much only consider Intel when it comes to laptops. As for nvidia, they also tend to make better products, but there are 2 things I really don't like about them - their ego, and their cripplingly proprietary nature. Nvidia, as a company, acts like they're better than everyone, including those who are more successful than them. They're so full of themselves that they lose out on major deals (such as the consoles) or push away companies that could have otherwise helped them (such as intel). They support fantastic technologies (such as physx, CUDA, G-Sync, Optimus, etc) but see it as bad practice to have a hardware company make software restrictions. All that being said, I do still sometimes buy nvidia GPUs, but only when AMD doesn't have a product that can do what I want it to do. Anyway, personally, I'd like AMD to get bought out by someone like IBM or Qualcomm. IBM would help level out the performance (but would be more expensive and mostly just focus on servers) while Qualcomm would focus more on consumers. Both companies are already somewhat knowledgeable of AMD's technologies.

As for nvidia, they also tend to make better products,

Nvidia, as a company, acts like they're better than everyone

So you feel they make better products, but you don't like that they acknowledge that fact? Your problem with them they aren't humble enough? Isn't having feelings for a publicly traded company the very definition of fanboyism? :thumbup:

So you feel they make better products, but you don't like that they acknowledge that fact? Your problem with them they aren't humble enough?

No? But, putting words in my mouth to favor your viewpoint could be considered fanboyism. I don't like supporting companies that fight dirty and unashamedly put themselves before the consumer. Both Intel and Nvidia are notoriously anticompetitive. I don't really care if a company is wealthy and gloats about it. It's unattractive, but not a good reason to boycott them. That being said, I never said anything about Intel not being humble enough, and my complaints toward Nvidia's ego was how it stifles innovation, hurts the consumer, and in turn hurts themselves. Nvidia would be a lot more successful if they looked forward rather than pointing their nose in the air all the time.

Hey I am trying my best to keep money in their pockets. I love my Tri-X Fury!

... Anyway, personally, I'd like AMD to get bought out by someone like IBM or Qualcomm. IBM would help level out the performance (but would be more expensive and mostly just focus on servers) while Qualcomm would focus more on consumers. Both companies are already somewhat knowledgeable of AMD's technologies.

If IBM or Qualcomm, will buy AMD, it certainly will not produce x86 CPUs or dGPUs. The same applies to most of the other potential buyers. Nobody will pay to risk investing billions of dollars to start the fight in the market where there are some competitors like Intel or NVidia.

If IBM or Qualcomm, will buy AMD, it certainly will not produce x86 CPUs or dGPUs. The same applies to most of the other potential buyers. Nobody will pay to risk investing billions of dollars to start the fight in the market where there are some competitors like Intel or NVidia.

Huh? The main reason to buy out AMD is because of x86. Also, IBM is already directly competing with Intel with PPC (which today is a lot less valuable than x86) and Qualcomm is already directly competing with Nvidia's Tegra series. IBM has already made plenty of deals with AMD in the past (and, if it weren't for IBM, AMD wouldn't have got as far as they did) while Qualcomm's GPUs are based on hardware AMD/ATi created. I'm not saying either company will buy AMD or even consider it, I'm just saying that if a company is to buy AMD's remaining assets, those 2 are good options.

Huh? The main reason to buy out AMD is because of x86. Also, IBM is already directly competing with Intel with PPC (which today is a lot less valuable than x86) and Qualcomm is already directly competing with Nvidia's Tegra series. IBM has already made plenty of deals with AMD in the past (and, if it weren't for IBM, AMD wouldn't have got as far as they did) while Qualcomm's GPUs are based on hardware AMD/ATi created. I'm not saying either company will buy AMD or even consider it, I'm just saying that if a company is to buy AMD's remaining assets, those 2 are good options.

PPC market is not the same as the x86 market. Intel has a 98% of the PC market with x86 - I wrote about this market. The same applies to NVidia. It is one thing to compete with Tegra, who had just trying to win market, and quite another to compete with NV GPUs for PCs. The chance that a new player will bite a piece of cake in the markets dominated by the Inel and NV is very small. Contrary to what most think is not a licensees of x86 or GCN technologies are attractive for other companies, but their patents in other areas.

Again, what does AMD have to offer any buyer? They sold off the mobile GPU division, their FABS, etc., etc. They have little to no market presence and their losses are increasing, and they have no X86 patent to transfer. What do they actually have to offer? Remember, Microsoft paid 30+% more for Minecraft than what AMD is worth now just to put it in perspective.

Chillin is posting only for one reason on Guru3D. He posts to incite flame or to insult someone. He probably want to degrade us to wtftech level or is their top contributor in comment section.

Grow up...

PPC market is not the same as the x86 market. Intel has a 98% of the PC market with x86 - I wrote about this market. The same applies to NVidia. It is one thing to compete with Tegra, who had just trying to win market, and quite another to compete with NV GPUs for PCs. The chance that a new player will bite a piece of cake in the markets dominated by the Inel and NV is very small. Contrary to what most think is not a licensees of x86 or GCN technologies are attractive for other companies, but their patents in other areas.

Idk, I think Qualcomm could compete it if they bought AMD. I think it would benefit their mobile GPU's regardless. Honestly now that I think about it, I really would like to see Qualcomm buy them.

Huh? The main reason to buy out AMD is because of x86.

Isn't AMD's x86 license non-transferable?

Idk, I think Qualcomm could compete it if they bought AMD. I think it would benefit their mobile GPU's regardless. Honestly now that I think about it, I really would like to see Qualcomm buy them.

Qualcomm already bought AMD's mobile GPU division, Imageon, and renamed it to Adreno.

Qualcomm already bought AMD's mobile GPU division, Imageon, and renamed it to Adreno.

Exactly the reason why I think Qualcomm would be a decent choice for buying out the rest of AMD's assets. That, and Qualcomm seems to be doing modestly well financially. I personally think they could afford to pick up the slack, and if they can't, they could always just ditch the x86 division and just focus on ARM and GPUs.