Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:This is new? (Score 1) 190 190

Resistive touch screens typically get pressure sensitivity for free, capacitive screens do not. It's usually faked by doing tricks with contact patch area. As you push harder your finger tip flattens and contacts a larger area of the screen. I don't know whether Apple's implementation is the same or if they've actually integrated a strain gauge or something for real pressure sensitivity.

Comment: Re:AMD takes care of its customers? (Score 1) 136 136

It's not too late for a single CPU/GPU package to completely change the playing field.

I think Intel say something like their integrated graphics is like 75 times more capable than their first one or whatever.

(I'm not comparing Intel and AMD here. Just stating how things have moved. There's of course the fact that Nvidia invest into Nvidia Grid, cloud rendering and streaming even games to consumers instead.)

It's all about what you need though. Integrated stuff is enough for many. But not for everyone. And streaming games will likely be the same.

But yeah. Who knows how many purchase graphics cards in the future.

Comment: Re:Precisely. (Score 1) 136 136

The problem is, following this logic they should have used Nvidia GPU parts as well. This showcases AMD's weaknesses more than anything else. Its confirmation of what everyone already knows, AMD cant make low heat parts.

The Fury X is quicker than the GTX 980 and in half of the games seem to be quicker than the Titan X it seems:
http://www.tomshardware.com/re...

So why the fuck would they use an Nvidia card if they got as quick card themselves?

I know it may not support feature level 12.1 of Direct X but that's it. One advantage is that it will allow you to get a cheaper FreeSync monitor.

Comment: Re:Yes (Score 1) 136 136

I guess nobody here at /. took the Nokia lesson. No matter how badly your product sucks, you never, ever admit that to the market. It doesn't matter if you got less credibility than the Iraqi information minister, it's still better than the alternative. Do you know how much ridicule they're going to get for this with funny fake ads with the "Intel inside" logo and jingle? It's brand suicide. The only plausible explanation is that AMD is in "screw tomorrow, we need sales NOW" mode. It's not a shocker if the market pairs an Intel CPU with an AMD dGPU if that makes sense, but if I was head of marketing at AMD I'd rather resign than have this to my name.

Maybe.

Their Piledriver processors was mostly released in 2012-2014. It's three years old by now.

Zen won't be here until 2016.

I have no idea whatever they intend to do the SMT ("hyper-threading") with the same number of cores or not but the IPC / clock is supposed to be 40% quicker.

If you take one of their 8 core chips and make it 40% quicker and then added SMT on top of that maybe it would be somewhat competitive.

Skylake which Intel releases real soon is supposed to be 15% faster / clock than current Haswell. And that's supposed to be a large step.

They had Cannondale in 10 nm planned for the next year but it won't happen then.

So yeah, 6700K will be slightly better than 4790K and by 2016 Intel will do another tock for a tick-tock-tock but AMD may be competitive.

Also the FX-8350 and such isn't all too bad relative the 4790K. _BUT IT IS FOR GAMING_.

I assume part of that is due to not multi-threaded well enough games and maybe to a higher degree that DirectX and OpenGL had the CPU overhead it has and don't spread over the CPU cores. When it does. Which is next month. The AMD processors will likely gain some relative Intel for DX12 titles.

So yeah. Just because they aren't competitive for gaming now doesn't mean that will always be the case.

Seem like the plan is for AMD to go 14 nm in 2016. That's not 10. But then again as said Intel won't reach 10 nm in 2016 either.

The text I read seemed to even question whatever they would do it in 2017.

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 1) 98 98

I disagree. On Wii U I'm paying similar dollar amounts to what SNES carts cost back in the '90s, and getting far more content for it. So I'm paying less in inflation-adjusted terms for more content. None of the games I've bought have required DLC to get full content. I did buy the DLC for Mario Kart 8, but it's about $10 for 16 new tracks. That's great value even if you only play each of the new tracks once.

"Everyone is entitled to an *informed* opinion." -- Harlan Ellison

Working...