Results 61 to 71 of 71
Thread: AMD possibly looking to sell
20-11-2012, 02:37 AM #61
EDIT: As for the subject of elitism - there's no elitism in my post. Elitism is most definitely in force on RPS though, when people post about console peasants playing with their tinker-toy Call of Duty 105 instead of sophisticated digital artistic entertainments like Dear Esther.
20-11-2012, 07:54 AM #62
Saying "get a high end system or don't bother" does ring of elitism to me, but fair enough if that wasn't your sentiment. Still, you made a sweeping statement about something which only applies some of the people who play PC games (those who care about maxing all the sliders in the handful of games that can make proper use of a high end system) and that's just plain illogical. Of course high end hardware isn't irrelevant to PC gaming as a whole, but looking at what games most people play it certainly is irrelevant to a majority of PC gamers at this point in time.
20-11-2012, 09:09 AM #63
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
I also don't think RPS is actually that bad in terms of this - there's an element of the "I saw a 1fps drop, I need £1000 of new hardware now" as well as "the game micro-nano-stuttered when the butterfly's wings moved in the foreground and so I want a refund" thing - but this isn't some sort of overclocking dictatorship and we're pretty all-inclusive I think (apart from the drooling imbeciles who play manshoots or football games of course ;) )
20-11-2012, 11:48 AM #64
20-11-2012, 01:30 PM #65
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
20-11-2012, 02:54 PM #66
- Join Date
- May 2012
Not really Soldant. If your going to do PC gaming, do it. What do you know about the gamer before asking them? They might be doing PC gaming on old dos games for all we know. So no, a mid to high range system is only a recommendation on those asking to play new AAA games at full res.
For gamers saying "I want to play games", I'd ask what games and at what level. If they just want Console level graphics, I'd advise a mid range, but last generation, thus budget system. If they have money to burn, then anything £/$600 and north up to £/$1200. :P
So none of us are saying "go low end", we either said "go budget mid end" or "depends on what games". Again, this would be for entry. No one buys a Lambo or Porsche as their first car, do they? The gamers may not even care for or know how to install mods. ;)
Last edited by TechnicalBen; 20-11-2012 at 02:56 PM.
20-11-2012, 06:06 PM #67
And you didn't say it would be better to invest in an upper mid range system (which I would agree with as general advice), you said you might as well get a console if you don't, which is what I reacted to since the primary reason for many people to be gaming on PCs is that they want to play PC games, not that they want shinier shaders.
Last edited by Skalpadda; 20-11-2012 at 06:10 PM.
20-11-2012, 06:14 PM #68
Meh, let's just stick to your main point here: the "better option" is not by any means a fixed or universal concept. Everybody has different needs, and must face different constraints. Budget is one of them.
The only way you can say Intel is always the better option is by making a lot of assumptions and then arguing that everyone who's not making the same ones is a fool.
The 90s were a very different time, silicon and x86 were in full bloom, advancing by leaps and bound (and yet computers were way more expensive). Both silicon and x86 have gone a long way and it now takes a whole lot more work (and money) to make faster CPUs and/or migrate to smaller geometries.
While Intel surely has all it needs to deliver better products, it's only absurd to assume they will have the same drive to deliver significant improvements at a timely pace without a credible competition, be it AMD or a new entrant.
Other than Intel, I can't think of any other firm with the necessary know-how to manufacture x86 processors which will keep all of our existing software ticking along - ARM PCs are a long way to come. With AMD in dire straits and firing its most precious asset, engineers, it's of capital importance they find someone who will invest for the long term, so the firm can stay relevant.
The only foreseeable outcome for the future is an Intel monopoly in the PC space - and to think that will be without consequences is what I'd call short-sighted, if not outright foolish.
Last edited by alms; 20-11-2012 at 06:16 PM.The Onward March of Bundles - For an overview of bundle deals, and more, click here. The new Humble Monthly May comes with Grizzly's-paw-of-approval Dirt Rally, Playdead's of LIMBO's fame INSIDE, and more fab indie games. If you like what I'm doing, and are a new subscriber, please consider using this link, throw some monies at me, at no cost or inconvenience to you. Thanks! Me on Steam and HowLongToBeat.
"I'm too big of a hothead, I've got a history, I've got implants...take your pick."
21-11-2012, 12:09 AM #69
Intel had to admit it dropped the ball with Netburst. AMD brought a new line of CPUs to the desktop consumer market where they're not overly useful, and AMD apparently haven't pushed them to any other market in appreciable quantities (otherwise they wouldn't be suffering as they are).
21-11-2012, 04:45 AM #70
And sure, I can see a difference between 30 and 60 FPS in a side by side comparison, but if a game should dip down to 30 now and then during play that's not something I'm likely to notice and even if I did it certainly wouldn't ruin my experience. I can't prove that most people share this with me, but I do suspect I'm far from alone and I have a sneaking suspicion that those who go around saying they can't stand anything but absolutely steady 60 FPS are either abnormally sensitive or deluding themselves to justify their hardware fetish.
That's besides the point though, and yet again what I objected to was the sweeping statement that you might as well get a console rather than a mid range PC. Let's look at what PC gamers play.
Here's the current top 10 Steam list:
Team Fortress 2
Black Ops 2
Football Manager 2013
I don't know about Black Ops and Hitman but given that they're cross platform games I doubt they require a beefy machine. None of the others require a high end system to run well at 1920x1080. What else is big on the PC? How about Blizzard games, Minecraft, The Sims or League of Legends? Nope, none of those need an expensive PC.
Now let's make up a hypothetical gamer. Let's call him Steve. Steve likes the Civilization games, wants to play LoL with his friends and dabble in StarCraft now and then. Steve is looking to buy a new PC because his old one broke, but oh no! Steve's car also broke and now he can't afford an expensive PC! Steve now has to buy a console and play platformers and third person shooters because as a wise man said on the internet, if you're not getting a PC in the higher mid range you might as well get a console.
21-11-2012, 01:09 PM #71
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
the entire PC industry is feeling the onslaught of mobile computing.Even Intel's production lines are now working less than 50 percent of their capacity due to weakening pc demand. this for sure will affect top end chips.
I hope intel will continue to provide excellent chips for pc even if they'll shift to mobile computing in the near future.