3 ms·
I think it's the other way around. The architecture was being limited by their fabs ability to yeild large chips and in the absence of any CPU perf pressure fro
by andromeduck 6y ago
I think it's the other way around. The architecture was being limited by their fabs ability to yeild large chips and in the absence of any CPU perf pressure from AMD the natural push would lean more towards increacong graphics performance in order to push more pixels. As in I think Intel probably had the same yeild issues as everyone else ~10-32 nm but only Intel had the high margins small chip volume to make it profitable to ramp until Apple and TSMC happened.
- jdsully 6y agoThe architecture is definitely far ahead of anyone else. When you look at Intel chips still being competitive despite manufacturing being a generation behind and with 1/6th the cache per core. I'm an AMD shareholder and my biggest fear is Intel figuring out their manufacturing.