You are not logged in to Prodigits. Please
|
@a.m.d | |
|
I'm sure there are other people out there who share my view on this: IT has become incredibly bland since Intel released their Core iwhatever series and ATi merged with AMD. nVidia has lost their charm (who remembers the great GeForce 6x x x series, let alone the good old Ti4x x x cards). These days, there are more numbers than necessary and misbranding is common practice. On the CPU front, the same issues appear. |
||
|
46
Replies
3870
Views
0 Favourites
|
||
Page #: 1/5 |  
|
|
|
@a.m.d | 1 May 13 |
|
Look at Intel's CPUs and how they recklessly confuse the general public, or AMD's APU's and whatnot. I miss simpler times where you compared an Athlon to a Pentium 4 and a Radeon 9800 to a GeForce 5900. Any comments? Agreements? Disagreements? Arguments? lol
|
||
|
@trollulz | 1 May 13 |
|
....
|
||
|
|
@trollulz | 1 May 13 |
|
So you can't compare parts? I'm sorry but what you said makes no sense. You can still compare an Intel i5 3570k to an AMD FX-8350. Or compare a nVidia GTX 680 to a ATi Radeon 7970
|
||
|
|
@trollulz | 1 May 13 |
|
And who is confusing the public? Anyone can easily obtain information on parts and look up how they rank in terms of power use, clock speed, socket type and the like. You can't blame companies for customers ignorance.
|
||
|
|
@a.m.d | 1 May 13 |
|
You misunderstand my point. How old are you? Just look at the model numbers you posted. What exactly does that say to the less well informed public? Used to be you could tell someone what CPU you've got and they'd immediately know what it compares to, without having to Google the model number first. You used to be able to look at a CPU and tell from its model number what kind of performance to expect, even compared to the opposition. Not anymore.
|
||
|
|
@trollulz | 1 May 13 |
|
Eh, yeah....the market is larger now and there are more devices and device types so naturally there are going to be more parts. That's a non-argument. Now theres processors and graphics cards aimed at all segments, from mobile phones to tablets to netbooks to laptops to PC's. They can't all use the same technologies dude. By the way, I'm older than you. I have no idea why that is even remotely relevant...
|
||
|
@newt182 | 1 May 13 |
|
You still can look at the model number and know what kind of performance to expect. At least you can with ATI and Nvidia GPU's and Intel CPU's.. I don't know about AMD, but they are cr*p anyway so who cares. 
|
||
|
|
@trollulz | 1 May 13 |
|
They all have a sequential numbering system. The higher the number in that series, the higher the performance.
|
||
|
|
@a.m.d | 1 May 13 |
|
They might be sequential, but they can't compare to each other. The graphics market is still relatively clear, but the CPU market is muddy at best. And yes, AMD's naming scheme is pretty stupid, at least where their APU's are concerned. The point is, CPUs used to have numbers connected to their clockspeed, or relative performance compared to Intel's clockspeeds, in AMD's case. For example, you knew an Athlon XP 3200 was similar to a 3.2GHz Pentium 4. Now there are hundreds of variables.
|
||
|
|
@trollulz | 1 May 13 |
|
All the info is out there. If people aren't going to do research on what they are buying then that's their fault. It takes literally a few seconds to find out i5 2500k's clock speed, core count, socket, caches, power consumption, benchmark comparisons, and all that jazz. It's not hard. It comes down to people being lazy.
|
||
|
|
