Looks like AMD is done

[Hans]

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3153

I suppose we can say ATI is done also...

[Maryms]

"Given the launch frequencies, you can expect that Phenom isn't a tremendously overclockable chip.

While we were able to run our 2.4GHz chip at 3.0GHz, we couldn't get it stable. Even 2.8GHz wasn't entirely stable, but 2.6GHz was attainable for benchmarks."

---------------

I have to agree HANS as this quote above SUCKS for AMD and if AMD does not do something ASAP they will be heading into a long slumber.

It is the first site that i have read that stated it was not stable at 3.0ghz or even 2.8ghz and if that is true for all of these chips based upon mobo's then it is very very bad for AMD.

[shadowjak]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[J*B]

Quote from that forum..

This was a very sobering article. On a slightly brighter note, Toms Hardware was able to get their Phenom to *3.0Ghz* stable using air cooling, so perhaps there is some hope just yet. The nice thing is that AM2 motherboards can use this processor so the upgrade ability is theoretically friendlier than some of Intel's boards. As long as AMD prices it accordingly, I think it will do alright. It will be nice when AMD really gets going *someday* and we have another successor with a similar bang that the K8 had at its introduction.

[Chako]

It has been a year I would say, ever since Intel came out with their Core 2 Duo chips, that AMD has been scrambling in the performance sector. It looks like things are getting worse for the little company that could. That isn't good news for anyone.

[Ultra54]

AMD's Phenom staggers out of the gate to a lukewarm reception. (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071119-amds-phenom-staggers-out-of-the-gate-to-a-lukewarm-reception.html)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pricing on the two Phenom chips is set at $251 for the Phenom 9500, and $283 for Phenom 9600, both in 1,000-unit quantities. Intel's Q6600, by comparison, is currently $260 OEM ($279 retail) at NewEgg. Current benchmark results from Anandtech, HardOCP, and Hexus indicate that the Phenom, while notably more efficient than Athlon 64 X2 in certain scenarios, still lags the Q6600 clock-for-clock. Phenom may have finally given AMD the ability to offer a quad-core processor to compete with Q6600, but Intel's chip still holds a better price/performance ratio.

</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Instead everyone will probably be buzzing about Phenom’s disappointing showing in benchmarks. As far as we can tell AMD’s woes with Phenom aren’t manufacturing-related either. In other words, the CPU isn’t scaling because of an issue dealing with manufacturing (i.e. leakage, poor yields, etc) rather it’s the basic design of the CPU itself. The architecture just doesn’t seem to scale well to speeds of 3.0GHz and beyond. AMD needs to get this issue figured out, and they need a fix ASAP. If they don’t figure something out soon, they’ll never get their margins up and they’ll continue to lose money each quarter. Meanwhile Intel is basically toying with AMD, they could release faster Yorkfield and Kentsfield processors today if they wanted, but as long as they continue to dominate in performance, they simply haven’t felt the need to do anything.
</div></div>
The last quote is from Firingsquad.
Man, the Q6600 has been out for a long long time and this is AMD's latest?

[filthy]

I love my Quadsky....and the 3000 series are nothing special either
I just feel sorry for people who are/were loyal to AMD/ATI. I will buy AMD/ATI or Intel and or Nvidia...it just happens that Intel/Nvidia are the top dogs so that's what I have, but for someone who can't force themselves to go with Intel and/or Nvidia....what now?

[Ultra54]

Back to the ol Xbox I spose.

[cybolynx]

wii ... not an xbox ...

look how many people bought the pentium 4 cpus ... and they sucked really bad ... and how long did intel try and revamp the p4 line up b4 they quit and brought out a new cpu ... aka core 2 duo ...

only means the presure is on in amd land is all ...

[Maryms]

AMD has not responded well under pressure for more then a year and yes we all know buying ATI has put them under the performance radar for this entire time.

AMD has been in the second hand seat before and came out it with a blast and drove the performance market seat for a few years or more. Look at socket 462 and those 1700+, 2500 Mobile and a few others that many of us had including myself thought they were the CATS meow and at the time they definately were.

AMD has not faultered, but there is something wrong at the moment with their Quad-Core architecture which is a Native quad-core which could very well be the reason that it won't scale as high as they wished it to do right now.

-----------------------------------

Intel does not have a Native quad-core as of yet and it maybe cause they know of this area of fault in having a native quad-core could result in lessor scaling.

To prove this look at the thread i posted about the 1600FSB ES chip that what reviewed. This chip which we can only suspect is a native quad-core from Intel as they stated anything after Yorkfield will be a native quad-core.

This review of the ES chip (ES = Engineering Sample) said it ran very very hot and it was only at 3.2ghz. A lessor scaling then i am sure Intel would want therefore that is why Intel did not produce a Native quad-core in the beginning.

---------------------------------------------

Remember when AMD and Intel argued which technology was better, a native quad-core or a 4 CPU slapped together quad-core.

Intel took the 4 CPU slapped together approach right now.

AMD took the native quad-core approach right now.

It is very hard to say which is in fact better, but native is most certainly a more prosperous idea for PC users.

While intel took a faster approach at quad-core in which has made them the first to market a quad, but also made them more wealthier in the past few months then what AMD can sell.

--------------------------

It is like the turtle and the hare with these two great companies AMD is the turtle right now, but will they win the race of quad-core. Will native quad-core scale higher as they wish it to do so. Will AMD still be around in 5-8 years and kick some serious butt over Intel.

Or

Will Intel win the race and continue to raise the bar for a few years hurting the turtle company even more that they can't really make a 100% full recovery and will be turned into a rock at the end of the race to ony sit idle and watch the HARE go flying by.

[Hans]

Not stopping production of S939 might have given them some more time to work on the Phenom design and make it more compatible. It's a very bad decision they made back then.

[AmdWolfman]

If ATI is going to be the AMD gpu,,,,ATI better make them some awesome rigs.

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hans</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not stopping production of S939 might have given them some more time to work on the Phenom design and make it more compatible. It's a very bad decision they made back then.</div></div>

Yes that was a big factor in AMD's demise of their quantity and production level of a new chip today. If they carried on with 939 for another 3 years they would have made millions of dollars to help produce on time Quad-Cores with 3.0ghz in the beginning.

[shadowjak]

hmmmmmm.Intel core 2 extreme qx9650 and an Asus p5n32-e sli plus.To build or not to build ,that is the question

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shadowjak</div><div class="ubbcode-body">hmmmmmm.Intel core 2 extreme qx9650 and an Asus p5n32-e sli plus.To build or not to build ,that is the question</div></div>

Nope not to build ... wait until the qx9450 or thr qx9550 is out as it will be around 310-325 price range and the qx9450 is a 8x multiplyer 2.66ghz and the qx9550 is a 8.5 multiplyer at 2.83ghz. I am not sure how well Intel does on Half Multiplyers, but if it is like AMD then i would not want to run a Half Multiplyer.

No doubt the qx9450 would/could possibly reach a hopeful of 3.6-3.8ghz on the right board and PC setup or even 4.0ghz maybe possible on the right cooling and mobo, but i have yet to see anyone running a 2000FSB on a intel rig, but have seen 1800FSB.

There is a few more coming out in January is what i have been discovering.


Although if you have the Cash to burn then by all means burn it into such a CPU as the Extreme Cpu and a good $250.00-$300.00 overclocking Mobo and 4GB of memory and run Vista 64bit.

------------------------

Here is a list of what i found for all that is out or going to be coming out:

The Extreme edition features unlocked clock multiplier and will be a usual $1000.00 plus CPU.

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650
Frequency: 3000 MHz
L2-Cache: 2 × 6144 KiB
FSB: 1333 MT/s
Multiplier: 9x
Socket: LGA 775

-----------------------------

Not Extreme Edition list (below) .... These CPU's are not yet available and most likely not until January 2008.

Range of price will be around $270-$520 the QX9450 is going to be around $325.00 CDN from what i gather.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550
Frequency: 2833 MHz
L2-Cache: 2 × 6144 KiB = 12mb
FSB: 1333 MT/s
Multiplier: 8.5x
Socket: LGA 775

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450
Frequency: 2667 MHz
L2-Cache: 2 × 6144 KiB = 12mb
FSB: 1333 MT/s
Multiplier: 8x
Socket: LGA 775
Q9450 2.66 / 12M / 1333 FSB

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300
Frequency: 2500 MHz
L2-Cache: 2 × 3072 KiB = 6mb
FSB: 1333 MT/s
Multiplier: 7.5x
Socket: LGA 775

[shadowjak]

New mobo is $219.00
Processor is going to be around $1000.00
And 8 gigs of corsair dominator ram around $1000.00
YIKES
I could take all the other parts from my main box and use them in the new one along with the case.
Hmm but they are supposed to be coming out with a new chipset and ddr-3 support.
Waiting till after the holidays are over would probably be a better idea.
Then get the ram/qx-9650 and hopefully a new mobo.

[Maryms]

Yes i am waiting until Jan-Feb to look and see what is available, but for right now the QX9450 seems to be a good buy when it comes out.

The QX9650 which some sites state can reach 4.0-4.5ghz np's is only stating so cause it can reach it, but does not mean it is 100% stable. I hate to spend $1000.00 Plus more like $1200.00 on just the CPU alone to find out it is not stable on any given setup.

Anything over 3.0ghz is really useless right now as the main thing that is limited in todays PC's is the GPU's. Until there is faster and better GPU's then there is today 3.0ghz is plenty. So 3.5-3.6ghz on a $300.00 processor makes a better choice for many in the PC market and don't cost over a $1000.00 to find out if it is or is not stable 100% at those speeds and to buy a CPU over $1000.00 to maybe only get 3.8ghz stable is crazy when you can buy a $300.00 CPU and reach almost the same speed.

As for 8GB's of memory i can get 8GB's of memory for around $460.00 plus tax and shipping, but 4GB's (2 x 2GB) is plenty for now as i wait for what mobo and CPU i wish to buy .

So for a CPU one that i like $325.00 plus tax and shipping.
Memory 4GB (2 x 2GB) $230.00 plus tax and shipping.
Mobo the one i like $249.00 plus tax and shipping.

Thats a pretty cheap upgrade to a Quad-Core and 4GB's of memory. In which the CPU could possibly get 3.5-3.6ghz stable on AIR cooling.

Of course i will be waiting to see if prices drop from now until Jan-Feb 2008, but knowing how the PC world is i doubt they will drop that much, not until March-April of next year, but may have the odd sale on somethings.

[AmdWolfman]

i guess we'll have to wait and see

[cybolynx]

http://www.electronicsweekly.com/Article...+in+mobiles.htm (http://www.electronicsweekly.com/Articles/2007/10/02/42284/qualcomm+to+put+xbox+360+graphics+in+mobiles.htm)

like i said .. AMD isnt going anywhere ...

sure there not top dog in in gpu and cpu anymore ... but they are priceing there items in there respective markets ...

but the PC buisness is a smaller market than cellular phones and mobile devices ... most people are happy with off the shelf integrated dell systems ... gammers are a small market ... and growing smaller with consols becomming more and more pc like ...

[Maryms]

Yeah that is all good for that sector (mobile) part of the market, but what about PC users.

[shadowjak]

Yep I'm going to wait and see what the new year brings

[Maryms]

Well i already started my roll to a new build and got a pair of 2x2GB = 4GB PC2-8000 = 1000mhz modules which many are Ocing to 1100mhz-1130mhz of course it depends on the mobo and the ram being used on the modules, but even at 1100mhz is impressive for the price of $230.00 for 4GB's 2x2gb of ddr2 memory.

I got the modules (for less then $200.00) which makes it even a better deal.

[Maryms]

I may need someone to test these sticks out for me. If anyone has a mobo worthy enough to do so let me know.

PM me with what MOBO specs you have and i can then see what is the best choice to test them with as only certain mobo's happen to like these sticks the best and OC them to their fullest, no doubt most DDR2 mobos will allow it to run 1000mhz (default rating) but not all will allow it to do so as some cheaper mobos don't like going over 850mhz and don't have the voltage to run these at stock, some only have a MAX of 1.9v for the memory in the bios.

thks

[Maryms]

Here is the specs of the ram (below), although it may run at 1.9v in order to boot and run at Stock, but there is no 100% provided proof that i can find that they will.

I prefer a person with a mobo that has DDR2 voltage of 2.0-2.4v range to get the most out of these sticks and preferably a CPU that can do at least 3.0ghz or higher.

Capacity 4GB (2GB x 2)
Speed 1000MHz DDR2 (PC2-8000)
CAS Latency CL 5-5-5-15
Test Voltage 2.0~2.1 Volts
PCB 6 Layers PCB
Registered/Unbuffered Unbuffered
Error Checking Non-ECC
Type 240-pin DIMM
Warranty Lifetime

[\m/ Rich \m/]

my board will handle those, but my power supply isnt in yet

[Maryms]

Thats ok, neither is the memory for a 2-3 weeks or sooner, maybe we can try them out on your mobo and see how they fly.

[AmdWolfman]

How you finding that Intel Rich. IS hot running, or cooler then amd, what are you getting for a psu?March products will more then likely 4 mhz.thx

[AmdWolfman]

look how fast the FX series diminished, That was becuzz people founf out that a server cpu was kiking it's butt. Everyone started buying Opterons with dual core.

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: \m/ Rich \m/</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my board will handle those, but my power supply isnt in yet </div></div>

Ok i also have another person who has a "Quad-Core Build" right now (something i rather see) that i may go with to see what it is like on a Quad-Core setup instead of a Dual-Core like yours, but i may let ya test them too to see how they run on a Dual-Core OCed like you have as not everyone has a Quad-Core.

[AmdWolfman]

i'ld like to see pheniom vs quad . jmo

[Maryms]

Reviews are all over the place if you have the time to even scan soonets forums or do a google search.

And FYI the Phenom has a Quad-Core too.

Oh and Phenom LOSES.

[AmdWolfman]

u misread my post about the phenom,thats ok. here are the quads out now




http://www.ncix.com/search/?q=phenom&minprice=Min.+Price&maxprice=Max.+Price

[Maryms]

Yes and those Quad Phenoms vs Intel Quad right now LOSE.

Oh there is no need to provide a link for me to see whats out as i have provided that link and many others as well over the past 2 weeks about the Phenoms, ppl need to read other threads before posting such info over and over and over.. JMO

They are in the same reviews (as above) to tell what they can do and they don't compare to Intel. When the yorkfield comes out which even now thw QX9650 when tested against a 9900 Phenom (yes you read that right a 9900 Phenom, which is not out yet) the 9900 loses too.

The only thing is AMD will have higher clocked Phenoms in Jan-Feb next year then what they have out right now, but Intel will have the rest of the Yorkfields out by then as well.

This is why i am waiting to see if AMD pulls its socks up in Jan-Feb next year as if they do i will stay with AMD.

[AmdWolfman]

see what i'm saying for the best bang for the buck amd is good enuff to hang with intel, for me anyways

[AmdWolfman]

see higher clock speeds already , imagine the 9900

[AmdWolfman]

from what i've read that by next christmas some will be hitting 5-6 mhz

[Maryms]

No your not seeing what everyone else sees, your stating best bang for the buck without reading all the info.

Intel Quad-Core Yorkfield QX9450 price around $325.00
AMD Quad-Core Phenom 9900 price around $510.00
Both chips are not out yet.

Also the AMD Quad-Core Phenom 9700 price $319.00

The yorkfield, runs cooler, faster and over all better then the 9900 Phenom.

That yorkfield QX9450 will smoke the pants off they Phenom 9700 and when Ocing... well it will leave the Phenom 9700 in the dust.

So when actually reading the reviews and know what it is they are stating and know the facts in the matter and what both CPU's are capable of doing.... it sure is not AMD for the best bang for the buck... right now and may not be until June 2008 and thats if AMD picks up it socks by then.

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AmdWolfMan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">from what i've read that by next christmas some will be hitting 5-6 mhz</div></div>

The 9900 is only a 3.0ghz chip and when OCed they on review sites can only hit 3.2-3.4 and even at those speeds the AMD is still losing in the performance.. and the 9900 is what 200.00 more then a QX9450 Yorkfield will be that can possibly OC to 3.4-3.6ghz and slap the pants off the 9900.

OH and your reading wrong again .... it is the INTEL chips that some can OC to 5-6ghz on water cooling (even right now), not a production chip out of the box though (meaning there is no released production chip that intel states will do that).

I doubt by next christmas they will have a production chip at 5-6ghz.. heat will be an issue and not only that Intel will not be (from what i have been reading) working on a 35nm chip for at least over a year like in 2009 and possibly a 25nm in 2010 or 2011.

[AmdWolfman]

it was a oc'ing site i was at.,,,yes thats what I meant I think,lol

[Killswitch]

What I see when I look at AMD right now isn't just what the Phenoms can do, but what their new platform as a whole is capable of. The new 790FX chipset is something to seriously consider because of HTT 3.0, PCIe 2.0, and Crossfire X. So maybe AMD's CPU's aren't as good as Intels when directly compared, but what about everything as a whole when your system is built? Also future upgrading is a big consideration. When AM3 processors come along you don't have to buy another mobo.

BTW, I've read some articles over the weekend that mentioned Intels new 45nm CPUs won't work with Nvidia's SLi chipsets. People are speculating that Intel did this on purpose since Nvidia won't give Intel the rights to run SLI on their own chipsets such as the X38. If this doesn't get resolved then things are looking good for AMD/ATI's place in the gaming market.

[AmdWolfman]

lookin up laddy

[Maryms]

Killswitch not true about not buying another mobo as AM3 will fit into AMD2 (but run at AM2 specs), but not the other way around and the new AM3 chips will be DDR3 only, therefore DDR3 memory boards. This means any AM2 or AM2+ consumer now will have to buy another mobo and memory in that instance i stated.

The 2.0 interface will work for the X38 and X48 chipsets, which even now some X38 mobos have the 2.0 interface in which Nvidia will also have 2.0 videocards very soon or i think they have a few now. i forget. ATI will have theirs out next year Jan-Feb or maybe 1-2 this year.

HTT3.0 is like intels FSB interface, but AMD HTT2.0 can do 2000 and HTT3.0 3000 if need to be. Intel can produce and will do so a 1600FSb chip and a 1800FSB chip in the near to far future remember when OCed the Intel beats AMD right now.. FSB no matter as when you OC a typical AMD CPU 9/10 you won't be running 1:1 at 2000 HT.. usually more like 1600-1800HT.... which is like intels 1600-1800FSB will be and which is like when people now today OC an Intel CPU to 1600FSB.

Yes Nvidia did not give Intel rights to their chip, but who needs SLI anyway when you can buy one card that will beat those two cards and when upgrading to a newer card down the road it is much easier to sell one card then trying to sell both cards.

I am sure Nvidia will resolve their differences with Intel as they must or they will Plunder.

[Killswitch]

ATI has PCIe 2.0 cards out right now..... aka - "The 3800 series".... and soon the 3600's. I read that the 2600's and 2400's are native PCIe 2.0 as well.

[Maryms]

Ah yes, the Nvidia GT's are 2.0 interface and so will the next gen cards be.

[Killswitch]

Who needs SLI you ask? Someone who wants to max out Crysis, that's who. But you may need even more then 2 cards, and that's where AMD's new Spider Platform comes in.... you can run 3 or 4 cards, and I'm quite sure if you had the cash to dish out 4 3870's will blow the doors off a pair of 8800 Ultras.

Edit: Come to think of it, 4 x 3870's would be cheaper then 2 8800 Ultras too! lol

[Killswitch]

AMD isn't dead. I think the products they've released this month, consisting of the 790FX chipset, 3800 series GPU's, and Phenom CPU's are a big step forward as a whole.

Another feature you may want to look at with the 790 chipset is the AMD Overdrive Tool which allows you to tweak and overclock pretty well every aspect of the system from within windows, and apparently with no issues! Very convenient and time saving in respect to keeping you from having to constantly reboot.

Features, tweakability and scability is what's drawing my attention.

Better stepping and unlocked multipliers allowing the Phenoms to have huge overclocks will come in time. Look at the 65nm Black Box Athlon 64 5000+.

I think AMD is far from dead.

[Killswitch]

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/10/10/ati-releases-pcie2-cards

http://download.amd.com/Corporate/SpiderPlatformPresentationv3.pdf

[Killswitch]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NuGcAt-SiSyRc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Killswitch not true about not buying another mobo as AM3 will fit into AMD2 (but run at AM2 specs), but not the other way around and the new AM3 chips will be DDR3 only, therefore DDR3 memory boards. This means any AM2 or AM2+ consumer now will have to buy another mobo and memory in that instance i stated.</div></div>

What you stated here makes absolutely no sense, and you should read and research more throughly rather then skimming through stuff before you come in here and mis-inform everyone.

But anyways, AM2 and AM2+ cpus and mobos are all said to be fully compatible (mobos may need a bios update) BUT obviously AM2+ features such as HTT 3.0 and split power planes (one for the CPU cores and the other for the Integrated Memory Controller(IMC).) will only be available with an AM2+ cpu/mobo combo.

As for AM3 cpus, they too WILL run in AM2 and AM2+ mobos. They WILL work with DDR2! AM2 and AM2+ cpus won't work in AM3 mobos.

Quote: "AMD has confirmed that AM3 processors will work in AM2 motherboards; however, AM2 processors will not be compatible with AM3 motherboards."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_AM3

[Maryms]

Yes killswitch you just stated what i did, but you stated it in a thousands words is all, but in order to go DDR3 (with of course a AM3 cpu) you will need a new mobo is my point, but yes AM3 will be backwards compatible to DDR2, but AM3 emphasizes on using DDR3.

I never mis-informed anyone only to state AM3 will support DDR3 only, meaning AM2+ will not. You just did not understand what i was stating is all or i may have not explained it further in hopes people like yourself would not need further explanation.

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Killswitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Who needs SLI you ask? Someone who wants to max out Crysis, that's who. But you may need even more then 2 cards, and that's where AMD's new Spider Platform comes in.... you can run 3 or 4 cards, and I'm quite sure if you had the cash to dish out 4 3870's will blow the doors off a pair of 8800 Ultras.

Edit: Come to think of it, 4 x 3870's would be cheaper then 2 8800 Ultras too! lol</div></div>

You don't think a one card solution will be faster then a SLI solution which of cousre has been proven many times that one higher-end card out performs two mid-end cards for the same price as buying those two mid-end cards.

It is like 1 x Ultra GTX up against 2 x 8800 GTS 320MB cards.

You will pay the same price for either configuration, but the Ultra GTX will get better frames and performance then two of those 320Mb cards. Samething with ATI's high end and mid-range crossfire.

It is people on a budget that will buy two cards over time.

I prefer the 1 card solution.

Also Nvidia is coming out with a Quad GPU setup or another Dual GPU card setup .. what you think they won't?

They are already working on releasing such cards in the near future 2008 is what is being talked about. They were going to release another dual Gpu card this year in which i already made a thread about that, maybe you missed that thread to read, but it is still visible in soonet in this forum.

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Killswitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">AMD isn't dead. I think the products they've released this month, consisting of the 790FX chipset, 3800 series GPU's, and Phenom CPU's are a big step forward as a whole.

Another feature you may want to look at with the 790 chipset is the AMD Overdrive Tool which allows you to tweak and overclock pretty well every aspect of the system from within windows, and apparently with no issues! Very convenient and time saving in respect to keeping you from having to constantly reboot.

Features, tweakability and scability is what's drawing my attention.

Better stepping and unlocked multipliers allowing the Phenoms to have huge overclocks will come in time. Look at the 65nm Black Box Athlon 64 5000+.

I think AMD is far from dead.</div></div>

Yes another thread i already spoke about and made a topic about is the Overdrive option ... in which again you don't think Intel or some third party will do this in the near future for intel CPU's.

I suppose you missed my thread about the overdrive option ATI/AMD claims to work 100%, but it is still visible in soonet and in this forum.

Thks for posting info that i already know about and just about 90% of the people in soonet that only happen to read this part of the forum know about, cause it was posted weeks ago.

AMD is not dead, but has been stabbed pretty hard in the past year or so and is still hurting and may never recover for another year or so, but time will tell.

Find something new to post about and maybe that will spark my interest.

[Killswitch]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NuGcAt-SiSyRc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes killswitch you just stated what i did, but you stated it in a thousands words is all, but in order to go DDR3 (with of course a AM3 cpu) you will need a new mobo is my point, but yes AM3 will be backwards compatible to DDR2, but AM3 emphasizes on using DDR3.

I never mis-informed anyone only to state AM3 will support DDR3 only, meaning AM2+ will not. You just did not understand what i was stating is all or i may have not explained it further in hopes people like yourself would not need further explaination.



</div></div>

Your statement sounded like AM3 only worked with DDR3 ram and users HAD to buy a new mobo regardless. I don't need you to explain anything to me. You talk like you're the smartest guy in the Soo when it comes to this stuff yet you have a hard time with basic grammar and writing skills. Frankly I'm getting tired of it. I work with and fix electronics and computer equipment everyday. It's my job. Yours is to post on soonet all day and criticize others I guess. I've been reading a lot about this stuff. I asked you before to be more clear with your posts.

[Killswitch]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NuGcAt-SiSyRc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Find something new to post about and maybe that will spark my interest.
</div></div>What's your problem buddy? I don't post stuff hoping that the all mighty and knowledgeable MadMax will commend my findings. I don't give a rats a$$ about what sparks your interest, and I also don't care about what you already posted about. I have other things to do besides stare at all your soonet threads for hours on end.

[Killswitch]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NuGcAt-SiSyRc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You don't think a one card solution will be faster then a SLI solution which of cousre has been proven many times that one higher-end card out performs two mid-end cards for the same price as buying those two mid-end cards.

It is like 1 x Ultra GTX up against 2 x 8800 GTS 320MB cards.

You will pay the same price for either configuration, but the Ultra GTX will get better frames and performance then two of those 320Mb cards. Samething with ATI's high end and mid-range crossfire.

It is people on a budget that will buy two cards over time.

I prefer the 1 card solution.

Also Nvidia is coming out with a Quad GPU setup or another Dual GPU card setup .. what you think they won't?

They are already working on releasing such cards in the near future 2008 is what is being talked about. They were going to release another dual Gpu card this year in which i already made a thread about that, maybe you missed that thread to read, but it is still visible in soonet in this forum.

</div></div>
I didn't say anything about 1 high-end card against 2 mid-range cards. But there you go again, skimming through posts and flapping your tongue not knowing what's going on.

I clearly mentioned FOUR (4) ATI 3870's AGAINST TWO (2) 8800 GTX ULTRAS....... PLAIN ENGLISH. DID YOU CATCH IT THAT TIME?

THIS WAS A POINT I THREW OUT FOR DISCUSSION CONCERNING AMD'S NEW SPIDER PLATFORM WHICH WILL DRAW ATTENTION TO GAMERS AND POSSIBLY ALLOW THEM TO PULL AHEAD OF THE COMPETITION SINCE, NEW INTEL CPU'S AND NVIDIA'S SLI CHIPSETS ARE NOT COMPATIBLE AT THE MOMENT.

I didn't say anything about Nvidia and Intel not ever doing anything like this, so where did you get that from? I'm just pointing out good things about AMD/ATI such as their new Overdrive software. BTW, last time I checked this was a free country so if I want to briefly mention that I can do so without your permission.

This is a thread about AMD possibly going under. If you're going to turn this into an argument, and degrade others, and whine about things you already posted, then you should stay out of this thread.

If someone can't raise points about what AMD is doing to stay alive, then this thread might as well not even exist.

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Killswitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Your statement sounded like AM3 only worked with DDR3 ram and users HAD to buy a new mobo regardless. I don't need you to explain anything to me. You talk like you're the smartest guy in the Soo when it comes to this stuff yet you have a hard time with basic grammar and writing skills. Frankly I'm getting tired of it. I work with and fix electronics and computer equipment everyday. It's my job. Yours is to post on soonet all day and criticize others I guess. I've been reading a lot about this stuff. I asked you before to be more clear with your posts.</div></div>

And your point of all of this is = don't read if you don't care too.

There is no talk about me stating that i am the smartest guy in the soo on this stuff, but i do have adequate time most of the day to research these things out and if people have a failure in understanding something that is posted whether it is by me or someone else. Then they need to ask questions instead of making stupid insults.

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Killswitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NuGcAt-SiSyRc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Find something new to post about and maybe that will spark my interest.
</div></div>What's your problem buddy? I don't post stuff hoping that the all mighty and knowledgeable MadMax will commend my findings. I don't give a rats a$$ about what sparks your interest, and I also don't care about what you already posted about. I have other things to do besides stare at all your soonet threads for hours on end.</div></div>


Well then why are you posting to them then if you don't care to read an post and discuss such information?

Kinda pointless for you to post is it not?

You think i care about what you post and there again you limit your knowledge by useless insults again and if you had read other posts and threads you would have noticed that there was no need to post to me about it as i already read and posted such information, but i suppose you like to be a ranter and post such insults for no reason, but it is your style and has always been that way.

Np's you buy what you want, but to post things that have already been posted and discussed not only by myself but you as well. Then blow it off as you don't care about such information when you don't understand something that has been posted by another member. You then try and insult them with what knowledge you think you have about computers. I don't care if you state you work all day at computers it is not the first person in the world that has or still does. You think you know it all, but you don't.

The old saying of if you don't like the post or thread. Then don't discuss and post back to it unless your going to be helpful.

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Killswitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NuGcAt-SiSyRc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You don't think a one card solution will be faster then a SLI solution which of cousre has been proven many times that one higher-end card out performs two mid-end cards for the same price as buying those two mid-end cards.

It is like 1 x Ultra GTX up against 2 x 8800 GTS 320MB cards.

You will pay the same price for either configuration, but the Ultra GTX will get better frames and performance then two of those 320Mb cards. Samething with ATI's high end and mid-range crossfire.

It is people on a budget that will buy two cards over time.

I prefer the 1 card solution.

Also Nvidia is coming out with a Quad GPU setup or another Dual GPU card setup .. what you think they won't?

They are already working on releasing such cards in the near future 2008 is what is being talked about. They were going to release another dual Gpu card this year in which i already made a thread about that, maybe you missed that thread to read, but it is still visible in soonet in this forum.

</div></div>
I didn't say anything about 1 high-end card against 2 mid-range cards. But there you go again, skimming through posts and flapping your tongue not knowing what's going on.

I clearly mentioned FOUR (4) ATI 3870's AGAINST TWO (2) 8800 GTX ULTRAS....... PLAIN ENGLISH. DID YOU CATCH IT THAT TIME?

THIS WAS A POINT I THREW OUT FOR DISCUSSION CONCERNING AMD'S NEW SPIDER PLATFORM WHICH WILL DRAW ATTENTION TO GAMERS AND POSSIBLY ALLOW THEM TO PULL AHEAD OF THE COMPETITION SINCE, NEW INTEL CPU'S AND NVIDIA'S SLI CHIPSETS ARE NOT COMPATIBLE AT THE MOMENT.

I didn't say anything about Nvidia and Intel not ever doing anything like this, so where did you get that from? I'm just pointing out good things about AMD/ATI such as their new Overdrive software. BTW, last time I checked this was a free country so if I want to briefly mention that I can do so without your permission.

This is a thread about AMD possibly going under. If you're going to turn this into an argument, and degrade others, and whine about things you already posted, then you should stay out of this thread.

If someone can't raise points about what AMD is doing to stay alive, then this thread might as well not even exist.</div></div>

Yes i read it the first time and discussed another type of setup involving a question to you. Which you then again went to discuss a 4 GPU setup. I suppose you missed reading again about the Multi-Gpu card Nvidia plans to make and also about a Quad-GPU setup in the near future or a two card setup that has 2 GPU's per card.

I still don't know what your point is about AMD/ATI as i never stated or anyone for that matter that they are going under. I never started any arguement it is you who came on in and started the insulting towards me.

-------------

The last part of your post (i quoted below) you need to read it again for yourself and take your own words into consideration.

"This is a thread about AMD possibly going under. If you're going to turn this into an argument, and degrade others, and whine about things you already posted, then you should stay out of this thread."

[Maryms]

Now back to topic before i get rudely interupted again.

For anyone who cares to see some benchmarks on the 9700 vs the QX6600 Kentsfield and two Yorkfield processors QX9650 and the QX9770.

Let me note the AMD 9700 was OCed to 3.0ghz to obtain a little better benchmark then the QX6600 which the QX6600 is at a stock speed of 2.4ghz throughout the testing. The 9700 is only $30.00 cheaper then a QX6600 Kentsfield and we know the QX6600 can OC to (in many instances) 3.4-3.6ghz. Now the question remains what about the QX9450 CPU and what it can do for around the same price as the AMD 9700.

If amd reduces prices by about $100.00 they may have a good go at selling these Cpus byt the truck load.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTQyMiw4LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

[Killswitch]

Dude you don't get it. Roll back here a bit. You stated that I was wrong when I said users didn't have to swap out an AM2 mobo to run an AM3 cpu. So then when I explained it in detail you said it's exactly what you stated and come out with......

"I may have not explained it further in hopes people like yourself would not need further explanation."

Is that not an insult? Isn't my explain about AMD's cpu upgrade paths enough to tell you that I know what I'm talking about? This is crazy.

I wasn't trying to insult you, nor was I trying to say I know everything. If I did I would be working for one of the companies being discussed here. I was just trying to get a point across to you that I do know what I'm talking about and I don't need you of all people trying to tell me that I don't comprehend this stuff. What I don't comprehend is the way you put things across sometimes, and I know that others don't as well. That's how these kinds of arguments start around here.

Especially in scenarios like this. How is it possible that what you said can be the same as what I said if you disagreed with me in the first place? Sounds dumb eh? That's how it is chum.

That's where it all starts with you and it goes on all the time with everyone who is a part of soonet and posts in these sections. When I first joined this parade last year there were many others who were active in here, posting 3DMark scores and such. But everything ALWAYS turn into a stupid argument and it was always based around you. You've been booted quite a few times now, and it wasn't for nothing. Now there isn't too many others around. The fun is long gone here I guess. I make a few posts about what I like and see with AMD and you jump on my back. Looks like everyone got tired of the same old thing and went else where.

I posted my thoughts about AMD in here for everyone to read, not just you. If what I state doesn't interest you then don't comment on it. I am very interested in this topic and I'm curious to see what becomes of AMD, but if there is something that was already mentioned in another thread...... who cares? I didn't mention those things to have a deep technical discussion about them in here. I'm just merely pointing them out. Kind of like listing pros and cons. What do they have going for them and what sucks about them. Is that OK with you? lol

LOL Remember when the 8800GT came out? You got banned because you were all pissed off about Mboy posting other info. You don't own this site/forum. People can post things if they like. If someone missed one of the MANY posts that you make everyday you don't need to make a big deal out of it. Take a pill and mellow out a bit. You don't need to take everything so personal. We haven't even met. We're just a couple of people typing stuff and clicking on "Submit".

Make this a past time to share info and have discussions to go along with our hobby. You're taking this stuff way too seriously and not allowing the rest of us to enjoy it.

[Killswitch]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NuGcAt-SiSyRc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now back to topic before i get rudely interupted again.

For anyone who cares to see some benchmarks on the 9700 vs the QX6600 Kentsfield and two Yorkfield processors QX9650 and the QX9770.

Let me note the AMD 9700 was OCed to 3.0ghz to obtain a little better benchmark then the QX6600 which the QX6600 is at a stock speed of 2.4ghz throughout the testing. The 9700 is only $30.00 cheaper then a QX6600 Kentsfield and we know the QX6600 can OC to (in many instances) 3.4-3.6ghz. Now the question remains what about the QX9450 CPU and what it can do for around the same price as the AMD 9700.

If amd reduces prices by about $100.00 they may have a good go at selling these Cpus byt the truck load.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTQyMiw4LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

</div></div>I think the Phenom chips are OK for the amount of cache they have compared to Intel's which is double. I hope AMD will produce some more processors soon with more cache and better stepping to compete on a level field with Intel. Right now I think it's honestly hard to say that the Phenom sucks. I wonder how the Q6600 would measure up if you take half of it's cache away?

[Maryms]

Killswitch this rant of yours that you started was all due to the fact that you did not understand what it was i was stating and instead of asking me what i mean't which is typical of you and a few others in here, you decided to rant all over a post i made. I only have been banned from soonet do to stupid little boys that wish to rant and insult me when they don't understand something, a typical way for many people your age and yes i have to admit i got caught up in it all and used foul language and that is why i was banned at those times, as for 3dmark scores many years ago that was again about people with small minds who wished to progress into an argument that ATI didn't rule way back then when i was posting scores to prove otherwise.

Its the samething over and over with people like yourself who wish to comment on posts of other people in which you don't understand. I thought you of all people would have understood the post i made based upon all other threads and information that has been given in this forum.

It was never mean't as an insult when i stated "I may have not explained it further in hopes people like yourself would not need further explanation." as i figured you of all people would have understood that post, but apparently with your vast knowledge in computers in which you stated several times... you did not understand the simple worded post which is OK, but why not ask a question like (are you sure NuGcAt-SiSyRc that AM3 is ddr3 only) and i would have responded NO as it is backwards compatible like i posted in the same post "Killswitch not true about not buying another mobo as AM3 will fit into AMD2 (but run at AM2 specs), but not the other way around and the new AM3 chips will be DDR3 only" what part of that did you not understand.

I not only stated AM3 is DDR3 only which it is, but it is also backwards compatible to AM2 specs which would = DDR2 backwards compatibility. AM3 is the only socket AMD will have for DDR3 capabilities in the near future.

I am now sure you understand this post i made at that time correct? and that is why i posted another post responding to your 1000 word post "Yes killswitch you just stated what i did, but you stated it in a thousands words is all, but in order to go DDR3 (with of course a AM3 cpu) you will need a new mobo is my point" i am sure you now understand that post now correct?

See you went into this rant for no reason and then tried to make it look like ... oh this guy posts in here all day long and got banned for several reasons cause he does not post things that you don't understand.

Also the thing about Mboy67 (unknown to you and others) was just all a joke that got carried away and as if i care about getting banned. You and a few others seem to think i give a two hoots about getting banned. It is the love of knowing how some soonetters will react when MadMax gets banned = priceless as i can't for the life of me ever understand what people love so much about MadMax = I suppose they admire him so much they like it when he is banned cause they always state the name serveral times when it is banned. Well i tell ya what i am not MadMax that name is no longer in use, why cause i made it that way and love everytime someone states it in soonet now that it is a banned name i use to use.

------------------------

Now lets get back on track and if you don't understand a post, just ask and therefore your rants of not understanding something won't be necessary for all to read.

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Killswitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I think the Phenom chips are OK for the amount of cache they have compared to Intel's which is double. I hope AMD will produce some more processors soon with more cache and better stepping to compete on a level field with Intel. Right now I think it's honestly hard to say that the Phenom sucks. I wonder how the Q6600 would measure up if you take half of it's cache away?</div></div>


Now that is something we can agree upon that AMD is OK for the cache they are running, but what the review does not show is benchmarks at high resolutions in which scores will be very different based upon Video Cards and Drivers. The Cpu's when tested at a 800x600 resolution basically eliminates any GPU involvement in the scores. This is something i don't like to see in reviews as it does not give an overall system performance.

I am not going to go AMD just for the CPU speed and Vice Versa with Intel. We all would rather see a overall performance in benchmarks and for the past year or so it has been Intel based Systems that have been getting the Edge over AMD based systems.

I dislike that Intel is winning and i have never ran a Intel setup yet in my entire PC usage life, but people can change ships if need to be as if one is sinking (not sunk though) then why not jump onto the other one until the sinking one gets some floatation devices to help it gain speed again and possibly win the race.

[Killswitch]

I'm not sure if this was mentioned already or not, but most or all of the reviews that we're seeing right now are testing with engineering samples of the Phenom.

QUOTE:
"**This Engineering sample processor was supplied through a source in China and ran at reduced HyperTransport and NorthBridge bus rates. So while I feel good about the 3GHz numbers we are showing, this was not an officially supplied AMD CPU."
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTQyMiw2LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

So it sounds like we have some hope yet. I wouldn't risk ordering anything, either AMD or Intel, until we see some solid credible numbers. It's still too early to judge.

We should see a good review from this site soon, so they claim. lol

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/11/19/inquirer-school-benchmarketing

[Maryms]

Yes that is why i am waiting and others i know for Jan-Feb to see what is out. Then ES chips are always tweaked or not tweaked for some ES chips and at launch we never really see such expectations as the ES chips. Therefore it can go either way AMD scores higher when launched or lessor then it is now and same goes for the Intel ES chips.

I love to get a QX9450 at 4.0ghz 8 x 500 stable with the DDR2 1000mhz 2x2GB (4GB dual channel kit) memory i will be getting sometime soon, but 3.6-3.8ghz is more practical.

If AMD can produce a chip that can OC to 3.8-4.0ghz then it will be a race for sure, always keeping in mind the price per performance factor as this will be on everyones mind come launch date.

As for GPU's that is going to be a big debate that we can't have now as the 8900GTX cards are not even out and the Dual Gpu card Nvidia was going to release this year is not even out.

It is going to be one heck of a year in 2008 for the PC wars, battles will be one, but by who is always the mystery until we see the consumers put these products into action.

[Killswitch]

Hmmm.... says here (http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/11/18/amd-delays-phenom-ghz-due-tlb) that AMD reports that there is a problem with L3 cache, but it's an issue that causes the system to lock up when all cores are running at 100% and clocked at 2.4Ghz and up. They say updating the bios on any new 790FX mobo should clear things up. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

They say that the B3 stepping CPU's will be the ones to look for, and with the errata problem cleared up, "Phenoms will have no problems competing against Intel in clock-per-clock action."

I hope they're right!

[Maryms]

Well if they are right and it does fix the issue then there will be a good race going on, but i hate to be the consumer with all those headaches and have to fix what they fudged up. I suppose this would mean that the Next Batch of Phenoms will hopefully be fixed of this issue right out of the box.

Now remember i said post something new and maybe it will spark my interest, well i new there was a serious Flaw in the Phenoms, but never bothered to look into the actual flaw. This is no doubt the reason why AMD could not launch a 3.0ghz chip this time round.

Now this sparks my interest a little bit more towards AMD's Phenom processors, but man i am leary to buy them until i know 100% the bugs like this serious one is fixed.

I may stick on my agenda which is buying an Intel Quad-Core QX9450 if the price is right when launched or wait a little more to see what AMD delivers to consumers in Jan-Feb 2008.


This is bad for AMD for sure:

"Even though the channel already got its hands on the Phenom 9700 (2.4 GHz) part, it will have to be pulled off from the shelves."

[Maryms]

If this is correct about power consumption of the Phenoms. I will not be looking at AMD's phenoms.

Check it out Phenom vs Yorkfield and Kentsfield:

The Q6600 is less power then the AMD 9700, but what is most impressive is the QX9650 stock 3.0ghz CPU is lower then the AMD 9700 2.4ghz stock and Q6600 2.4ghz stock Cpu's.

I want to maybe buy the QX9450 when released which the power consumption should be lesser then the QX9650.

http://www.hothardware.com/articles/AMD_Spider_Platform__Phenom_790FX_RV670/?page=13

[cybolynx]

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3273141

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3274083

AMD has there processors priced so low ... they should stay in the market for some time ... AMD has always been cheaper than intel ... this was and is AMD's sellilng point ...

they might not be top dog but if they can get close ... ( stock speeds) thats what sells ...

PC Gammers are a small market ... when compared to standard pc users around the world ... if AMD cant beat intel in processing power but come close enough and then beat intel in price ... wich they have always done ...

honestly we wont see amd come to an end ... with so many divisions they have running ... they can drop the cpu market at any time and still stay afloat ...

[Maryms]

CyboLynx... dude ... Intel wants to be low on the Quad-Cores to sell them right now and in the very near future Jan 2008 when the rest of the Yorkfields come out which include the Dual-Core yorkfields. You will see a major reduction in the 65nm Intel chips being sold today and not only this you can't just post one place listing prices as there is other places that are selling those CPU's cheaper. Tiger is not a good place to list prices from.

AMD may not be top dog, you can cay that again for now and if the power consumption is like i posted about. I think we will need a 850-1000w PSU, but for yorkfield we can stay with our Nice 650-750w PSU's.

Also with the L3 cache issue, i hope for AMD's sake they fix it in the next Phenom batch.

[cybolynx]

who cares about $350 and over cpus ... im talking about the ones close to 200 bux .... i only used them as referance to the price on the cpu ... i could have used any site yes ... and yes you can get those a bit cheaper at other places ...

[Maryms]

Ok so for a cheap arse build, like cheap in Quality this time round go with a EL-CHEAPO phenom and if you want Quality with less NO,,,very much less power consumption, then go with Intel.


Yes you could have found better places to post better prices, but thats a AM2 CPU you posted about, old technology now and the Core Duo2 smoked them anyway so a justifiable higher priced product from Intel.

[cybolynx]

EL-Chepo ... lmao

and the power consumption is not anythng to raise a nose about ....

[filthy]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CyboLynx</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> PC Gammers are a small market ... when compared to standard pc users around the world </div></div>

I think PC gamers are the primary consumers in the market who drive the PC market. Standard users still use PII's and such cause all they do is surf porn and chat.

[cybolynx]

not really .. if you look at all the computer sales and use ... call centers and such ... schools ... most computers are not gammers ... scientific work servers ... no gammers are just a small market ...

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CyboLynx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">EL-Chepo ... lmao

and the power consumption is not anythng to raise a nose about ....</div></div>

What ya mean it not anything to raise ya nose at??????

200watts more.... what????

[Maryms]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SaneSam</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CyboLynx</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> PC Gammers are a small market ... when compared to standard pc users around the world </div></div>

I think PC gamers are the primary consumers in the market who drive the PC market. Standard users still use PII's and such cause all they do is surf porn and chat.</div></div>

Yes if it was not for us Gamers why on earth would AMD or Intel need to build a 3.0-4.0ghz CPU and make DDR3 memory and water cooling kits and well the list goes on and on and on.

We gamers pay for the non gamers.