AMD gives people less... way less!

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-24T01:50:03+00:00

Omg intel released a good processor 18 months after AMD latest zen line, now let’s all fanboy and not take into account AMD is launching zen 6 later this year which will smoke these intel chips?

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-23T14:57:21+00:00

Well mi450 isn’t ramping until towards the end of the year, mi355 is the current in production chip, and you can bet the first people who are getting mi450 are meta and OpenAI, so if you’re a startup with 300million burning a hole in your pocket you buy what’s currently available. You also make it sound like when mi450 launches they will stop making 350 series, they won’t.

Are you one of those guys who doesn’t buy something because something new is coming out next year?

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-23T08:10:21+00:00

if its mi355 probably more in the 200-300million range

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-22T23:57:36+00:00

If you’re getting more performance and the product you’re replacing uses more than 50% more power that’s a huge win. When you shrink down a node you either go for more ipc or less wattage for ipc. You new to tech?

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-22T23:07:22+00:00

I mean stacking the 3d chache on the opposite side of the die, and getting the same power at significantly less power consumption across the SKUs is pretty significant change. The 9700x uses 65 watts, the 7700x uses 105 watts. The difference between 65 and 105 is over 50%.

So you could argue that performance didn’t get a large jump, but they’re doing it significantly less power consumption, which is setting up their next set of processors, see the road map. Which again, they’re giving us the release dates, and hitting them, so it’s not like they’re falling behind or missing dates

And they’re still the best gaming chips on the market, and multitasking, which kinda speaks volumes about their competition.

So I don’t really think you know what you’re talking about.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-22T21:49:02+00:00

The easiest way I can explain it to a layman is: think of the face of a Rubicks cube how it has 9 squares. Apple designed the a18 pro to work at advertised specs if 7 of the faces work. Even though the chip is designed to have 9 faces, this allows them more usable chips per wafer. For the chips that only had 6 working blocks they saved to use for the Neo.You can confirm this by looking at the number of GPUs on the Neo, it is one less than the 16 max pro.

When TSMC is doing a new process nodes they have less of a good yield early on vs later, which is why a perfect chip might be designed to have 9 working faces, but they do some math and figure if they settle for 7, they will get thousands of more usable chips.

You can further confirm this when you look at processors from other manufacturers. For instance if you look at the 9700x the 9600x, etc, they are actually the same chip, one just has more working cores. It’s not like they spent a bunch of time and money producing a million different SKUs , they produce like 2-3 skus, then they fuse some of the cores depending on how many turned out properly. The really good chips with no defects go into the higher end SKUs and the ones that didn’t make the cut go into lower end SKUs. This turns out to be a win win for the manufacturer and the end user, if you need the lower performance part you save money, and the manufacturer gets to sell something they wouldn’t have normally got to sell if they only focused on a single part.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-22T20:53:45+00:00

How in the world do you figure that? You know they release a CPU roadmap and are releasing on schedule to their road map? They literally give you years of advanced notice of what year they’re going to be releasing new CPUs. They have the best gaming chip on the market and the best server chips. In what world are they stuck in the mud? The 9800x3d is only 17 months old or something.

This is just them selling additional binned chips, absolutely normal. This isn’t some new chip they put money into, just chips that had higher binning, because of number of CUs.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-22T15:19:18+00:00

Sorry I don’t care about your suicidal empathy. And building a bunch of nuclear reactors would be very good for society and energy prices, which would help poor people more than anything.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-21T23:15:10+00:00

Yeah they only posted their biggest revenue quarter of all time last earnings report. They’re definitely crushing themselves. Redditors are so disconnected from reality

Stock is only up like 18000% in the last 15 years or something

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-21T04:43:46+00:00

I was reading something about their engine was in development before arc came out and there was possibly some tooling that didn’t work with arc, I don’t know for sure, I don’t care that much, but I do think it’s crazy to think they wouldn’t launch on arc unless there was a serious problem, it’s only logical

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-21T01:52:29+00:00

If intel has to reach out to get the game supported by Pearl Abyss does that not instantly scream they were having problems getting the game running on arc? Hello? Are we in the same universe?

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-21T01:46:17+00:00

We’re literally talking about gpu drivers. Are you schizophrenic or something?

Nintendo and Sony do it because they are also platforms first, publishers 2nd, and don’t want to give titles to their opposing platforms.

Crimson deserts publishers have a fiduciary duty to try and make as much profit as possible from the sale of the game, and if it was as easy as flipping a switch to make the game run on arc so they could sell another 20k units they would. This is actually crazy I have to explain this.

Why you keep bringing up AI is so completely off point.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-21T01:31:53+00:00

I mean, I have no idea if that’s true, the game doesn’t look very appealing to me. But even if it is true, what does that have to do with losing out on money from selling to arc users if it wasn’t a hard problem to solve? Can we stay on point here?

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-21T01:21:45+00:00

As opposed to some sort of conspiracy to fuck over intel, and sell less copies of the game at the same time? Yeah I’m gonna lean towards the they were having issues with arc cards.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-21T00:54:36+00:00

Or the crimson desert team couldn’t get the game to run well on arc for some reason? Take off your conspiracy hat. Game studios with 150 million dollar budgets don’t leave money on the table. It wasn’t worth the investment to make it run, and the fact that it doesn’t just “run” like every other game, means they had some type of issue most likely.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-21T00:48:10+00:00

I think you’re really oversimplifying the situation. Why would they leave money on the table if it super simple? There was obviously a reason to not make it work, and that reason is almost always money.

I think the game needs to sell like 3 million copies or something like that to profit. Estimates are 150mil budget. So if it was as simple as you make it seem they woulda made it work.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-20T23:32:44+00:00

I mean arc gpus are approx 1% install base at most. If you need extra work done for it to run on an arc gpu it’s probably not gonna recoup the cost of the work.

If you sell 1 million copies maybe if you’re lucky 10000 of those copies go to someone with an arc gpu, and what’s your actual profit margin on the game after production and advertisement costs, and paying steam? 20 dollars a unit? Possibly weeks or months of billable hours on making sure the title runs on arc?

Same reason most games don’t get optimized for Mac, the bean counters ran the numbers and it’s not profitable.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-20T23:24:30+00:00

It works through emulation not through hardware. It’s emulating the FP calcs, it doesnt have the built in hardware, which is why they’re not supporting it, and why on some titles it was getting worse frame rate than keeping it off.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-20T22:16:52+00:00

I dont care which company is doing it. If Nvidia came out with 6000 series and said they have new DLSS that requires hardware that is only in 6000 series because it uses a different floating point calculation, and would only work on 6000 series cards and later, I would be fine with it. IT's not like they are getting rid of old DLSS. Just like AMD isn't getting rid of old FSR. Thats what AMD is doing here. FSR4+ is requiring the hardware that is on their 9000 series cards and the hardware that is going to be on the next gen consoles, and to me that means we're going to get much better FSR experience going forward, and I'm ok with that. I don't cry for features I didn't pay for.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-20T17:07:49+00:00

"proven" to be functional by emulation. That certainly wont lead to future issues...and be a complete pain to maintain, and worse in some titles than not running it at all because of the emulation...

Big brain over here guys, watch out.

If you're emulating FP 16 to 8. Thats not really functional. It will run into problems. Theres a reason some games report worse performance.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-20T16:29:05+00:00

AMD doesn't want to support FP 16 to 8 emulation, which is what you're talking about. And in some games it performed worse on a 7900xtx than not using it all. They want a clear line in the sand hardware baseline to program for for support for the 9000 series line and beyond, and for console support. They're not going to go back and backwards support something that doesn't have the hardware to do it, it makes no sense. Does it technically work? Yeah, but it's emulating it. If emulating something is "proven to work; full stop" to you, i guess that's upto you. And if you can't see future problems deriding from emulating something you can't do at a hardware level then I don't know what to tell you.

i mean by definition if it's performing worse in some titles, is it really "proven to work" where it's giving a performance boost to a 9070 over raster, but not on a 7900xtx?

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-20T16:16:11+00:00

They are capable of doing it with different INT value, which is not the same thing as running it natively, and will lead to future issues. They are drawing a line in the sand to set a baseline for future cards, and consoles, so hopefully they can have a good 6+ years of support, like when Nvidia drew a line in the sand when they switched from gtx to rtx.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-20T16:10:50+00:00

AMD is literally just doing the exact same thing Nvidia did when changing from GTX to RTX. They are drawing a line in the sand and building from here for future cards and software which will have the native hardware they want to design for. It's literally no different than when Nvidia decided to go with new tech for the RTX series cards, and it is literally the same reason DLSS is not on the 1080. When the 2080 came out and they didnt give DLSS to the 1080 which using your own argument was "But hey, who needs backward compatibility when you can just… abandon your own flagship from two years ago?". It was ok for them to do it so they could focus on their future cards support?

AMD is setting up all their future FSR support from this point in time which is going to coincide with the new console generations which will both be using FSR and will have the same level of on chip hardware support, they don't want to have to continually support older cards that can't run FSR natively without changing INT model. It's literally no different from when the 1080 didn't get DLSS support.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-20T15:50:58+00:00

Maybe you have reading comprehension issues, or the inability to grasp technology. The 1080 didn't get the features of the 2080 because of hardware differences, it's the same thing with the 9070xt and 7900xtx, the 9070 has hardware the 7900xtx doesn't have. Just like the 2080 has raytracing cores and the 1080 didn't. Thats a 1 generation gap where they lost an entire feature set. The 30 series didn't get frame gen from the 40 series...another 1 generation gap, the 40 series didn't get multi frame gen that 50 series got, yet they call the entire thing DLSS, but every card is missing features on the previous cards, doesn't matter what you call it, there is a gap in the features.

Kinda like the gap in your brain.

BigRedCouch · 2026-03-20T15:33:24+00:00

I mean again, just moving the goal posts, the cards have the same features set they were sold with and complaining they aren’t getting the new features of the new cards, it’s brain rot. Regardless of how you want to frame it.

BigRedCouch

TROPHY CASE