22 replies to this topic

[Vulpesveritas]

They're out folks. HP has a decent lineup of Trinity processor powered laptops among which is a DV7 with a 9 cell battery.
That thing will have good battery life I would say.
http://shopping.hp.c...ent-Notebook-PC
See more here;
http://shopping.hp.c...3D0&PageSize=15


It is also reported they are coming to BestBuy.

[Arisaema]

Sadly in order to save money, this laptop shares main memory with the video card. In searching for a gaming laptop you should look for a system that has a video card with dedicated video ram.

[Vulpesveritas]

Arisaema, on 16 June 2012 - 08:12 AM, said:

Sadly in order to save money, this laptop shares main memory with the video card. In searching for a gaming laptop you should look for a system that has a video card with dedicated video ram.

It's an integrated GPU. Apparently you don't know much about it. GPU performance is just below a Nvidia Geforce GTX 640m, CPU performance is on par with many mobile i5s. (this is talking about the A10 of course).
If you have 8GB of ram, dedicate 1GB to the GPU, then you will have a decent gaming machine, but one with exceptional battery life, even at load, given that it is only a single processor, running at 35 watts. Furthermore prices should being going down soon, once other OEMs other than HP start manufacturing Trinity-based laptops.

So it really depends, if you need battery life than this is most likely a much better option than a dedicated GPU.

Plus it runs cooler than a system with a discrete GPU.

[Braedin]

sorry, first off it is an HP 2nd it is an amd, i will pass on all accounts, thanks though.

[Vulpesveritas]

Braedin, on 16 June 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

sorry, first off it is an HP 2nd it is an amd, i will pass on all accounts, thanks though.

Lol. It's an AMD processor with higher performance / watt versus Intel mobile processors, far better integrated graphics, and CPU performance of an i5?
What's to hate with the AMD processor?

And HP is just the first to start shipping laptops with them in it.

[Braedin]

never had good luck with amd or hp. so i will just stay away from them. had better luck back in the day with cyrix processors.

[Vulpesveritas]

Braedin, on 16 June 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

never had good luck with amd or hp. so i will just stay away from them. had better luck back in the day with cyrix processors.

Then you've had bad luck. AMD processors are just as (some would say moreso) reliable than Intel processors overall, and HP is just... HP. They have their ups and downs, like all OEMs.

[Gigadouche]

And where are you getting this info that the A10's compute is as fast as an i5?

[Vulpesveritas]

http://www.pcworld.c...ivy_bridge.html
and if i remember correctly there are dual core i5s. And SB i5s in general are comparable.

[Gigadouche]

Vulpesveritas, on 16 June 2012 - 09:31 AM, said:

http://www.pcworld.c...ivy_bridge.html
and if i remember correctly there are dual core i5s. And SB i5s in general are comparable.

Sorry bud, I love AMD as much as the next guy, but nowhere does it show anything supporting your claims about the compute/floating point performance of the Piledriver microarch beating or even being competitive with i5, especially i5 SB. Piledriver has been shown to have about 10% IPC performance increase over Llano (Bulldozer arch), which equates to about Phenom II/Core 2 CPU performance.

[Meldarth Sunphot]

Gigadouche - you are wrong on your numbers.......Llano was faster than Phenom II by 5-10%.......Piledriver is about 5% faster than llano sometimes a little more.......sometimes equal...

Trinity is extremely strong for APU - cpu with intergraded graphics onboard........it destroys Intel's graphics completely while with same battery life as Sandybridge and better than Ivybridge as Ivy is weaker than Sandy in battery life....

We don't have full benches yet as the laptops are just finally coming out; but in Trinity's price range.....Intel doesn't truely have match......soon as full benches come I'll post them.......

Intel's cpu is still a bit stronger in lightly threaded apps; but heavy - they are about equal........graphics there is no contest......

Edited by Meldarth Sunphot, 16 June 2012 - 03:48 PM.

[iron wolf]

Seriously? I only needed to read the first line (Although of course, i did read the whole article) to know this is barely applicable to anyone looking to build a system for gaming:

AMD’s next-generation A-Series processors, code-named Trinity, are the chip manufacturer’s answer to Intel’s new Ivy Bridge processors now appearing in the new Ultrabook laptops.

Ultrabooks? Who games on an Ultrabook?

Personally i find the concept pretty silly - There's not enough iGPU power to play proper games decently, and there's no discrete graphics models. And if you're just surfing or watching <1080p videos, an Ivy iGPU is more than enough to get you by.

I know you're a fan of AMD Vulp, but I'm not going to lie, this post seems like viral marketing to me.

Edit: And if your argument is battery life, then the news is almost as scathing as PCworld's opinion of Trinity's CPU performance - since Ivy still has that beat too.

Edited by iron wolf, 16 June 2012 - 05:33 PM.

[Gigadouche]

Meldarth Sunphot, on 16 June 2012 - 03:47 PM, said:

Gigadouche - you are wrong on your numbers.......Llano was faster than Phenom II by 5-10%.......Piledriver is about 5% faster than llano sometimes a little more.......sometimes equal...

Trinity is extremely strong for APU - cpu with intergraded graphics onboard........it destroys Intel's graphics completely while with same battery life as Sandybridge and better than Ivybridge as Ivy is weaker than Sandy in battery life....

We don't have full benches yet as the laptops are just finally coming out; but in Trinity's price range.....Intel doesn't truely have match......soon as full benches come I'll post them.......

Intel's cpu is still a bit stronger in lightly threaded apps; but heavy - they are about equal........graphics there is no contest......

I didn't give any actual numbers and yeah, Trinity is around Phenom II/Core 2 ballpark IPC... Nehalem, SB, and obviously IB are leaps ahead of that. And it doesn't really trash Ivy as bad as you'd expect, and I believe in a few games the HD 4000 actually beats Trinity somehow (Skyrim & Batman I think). Trinity was heralded as pretty "meh" from pretty much everyone that reviewed it. It needs a stronger GPU for sure. With A10s @ $800 they don't really represent that great of a value yet. And the neutered, non-A10 APUs aren't even worth looking at. Don't get me wrong, I was anxiously awaiting Trinity for 8 months, but seriously put down the kool aid and face the facts, AMD is in the ******* right now.

[Vulpesveritas]

iron wolf, on 16 June 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Seriously? I only needed to read the first line (Although of course, i did read the whole article) to know this is barely applicable to anyone looking to build a system for gaming:

AMD’s next-generation A-Series processors, code-named Trinity, are the chip manufacturer’s answer to Intel’s new Ivy Bridge processors now appearing in the new Ultrabook laptops.

Ultrabooks? Who games on an Ultrabook?

Personally i find the concept pretty silly - There's not enough iGPU power to play proper games decently, and there's no discrete graphics models. And if you're just surfing or watching <1080p videos, an Ivy iGPU is more than enough to get you by.

I know you're a fan of AMD Vulp, but I'm not going to lie, this post seems like viral marketing to me.

Edit: And if your argument is battery life, then the news is almost as scathing as PCworld's opinion of Trinity's CPU performance - since Ivy still has that beat too.

Well, trinity is more supposed to be a budget ultrabook option than a gaming ultrabook option by my understanding, in the ULV department.

And I'm not an AMD fan, I just can't stand criminal organizations. And if blackmail, monopolization, and killing off hundreds of animals and poisoning civilian water sources aren't criminal acts, then I don't know what are. All of which Intel has been found guilty of in the past. AMD hasn't. Clear line of morality to me. AMD does what I need it to do just as well as Intel most of the time. So I refuse to buy Intel and I have an avid hate for them due to their crimes.

Main thing is we don't have a competitive 3rd party here.

Gigadouche, on 16 June 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

I didn't give any actual numbers and yeah, Trinity is around Phenom II/Core 2 ballpark IPC... Nehalem, SB, and obviously IB are leaps ahead of that. And it doesn't really trash Ivy as bad as you'd expect, and I believe in a few games the HD 4000 actually beats Trinity somehow (Skyrim & Batman I think). Trinity was heralded as pretty "meh" from pretty much everyone that reviewed it. It needs a stronger GPU for sure. With A10s @ $800 they don't really represent that great of a value yet. And the neutered, non-A10 APUs aren't even worth looking at. Don't get me wrong, I was anxiously awaiting Trinity for 8 months, but seriously put down the kool aid and face the facts, AMD is in the ******* right now.

Yeah, before a single dedicated driver update was out for Trinity, and only in one review did I see Ivy ever make a win vs Trinity in gaming.
Not sure which one it was TBH.
And no, they're not a great value yet, but then again, only one OEM has released them yet, so it might not all be bad. HP just released them on their highest mainstream (retail) line laptop with the DV7... may be one of the main reasons why.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 16 June 2012 - 06:41 PM.

[iron wolf]

Vulpesveritas, on 16 June 2012 - 06:39 PM, said:

Well, trinity is more supposed to be a budget ultrabook option than a gaming ultrabook option by my understanding, in the ULV department.

Yeah. ie: Nothing suitable for playing MWO on, and not to mention an oxymoron since ultrabooks are usually ridiculously overpriced compared to standard form factor laptops (in terms of price / perf, at least).

Vulpesveritas, on 16 June 2012 - 06:39 PM, said:

And I'm not an AMD fan, I just can't stand criminal organizations. And if blackmail, monopolization, and killing off hundreds of animals and poisoning civilian water sources aren't criminal acts, then I don't know what are. All of which Intel has been found guilty of in the past. AMD hasn't. Clear line of morality to me. AMD does what I need it to do just as well as Intel most of the time. So I refuse to buy Intel and I have an avid hate for them due to their crimes.

Listen, a) When have they been found guilty? Any company found guilty of these things would have been sued into bankrupcy a long time ago. Go ahead and give me a link where anyone of importance in the company actually willfully did anything wrong, and was caught doing it.

Considering they're still allowed to trade across the globe, i'd suggest they've not been caught of anything so henious as to actually make anyone care enough to change their minds about any purchase they might've planned from Intel.

c) You say you're not an AMD fan, but unless Nvidia has managed to club enough seals to put them on par with Intel, you strongly recommend AMD cards across the (budget) board.

I mean, i take it you're an American patriot and AMD is an attractive alternative to you and thats great, but I don't think its appropriate to basically advertise a company's product in a forum for a game that certainly would not suit that product. You would well know from the sheer amount of threads you've posted in that there are many forum visitors here that would be easily led/misled into buying products praised here. (PS: And i'm not just specifying trinity here, but Ultrabooks and indeed HP laptops in general equally so).

[Vulpesveritas]

iron wolf, on 16 June 2012 - 10:47 PM, said:

Yeah. ie: Nothing suitable for playing MWO on, and not to mention an oxymoron since ultrabooks are usually ridiculously overpriced compared to standard form factor laptops (in terms of price / perf, at least).


Listen, a) When have they been found guilty? Any company found guilty of these things would have been sued into bankrupcy a long time ago. Go ahead and give me a link where anyone of importance in the company actually willfully did anything wrong, and was caught doing it.

Considering they're still allowed to trade across the globe, i'd suggest they've not been caught of anything so henious as to actually make anyone care enough to change their minds about any purchase they might've planned from Intel.

c) You say you're not an AMD fan, but unless Nvidia has managed to club enough seals to put them on par with Intel, you strongly recommend AMD cards across the (budget) board.

I mean, i take it you're an American patriot and AMD is an attractive alternative to you and thats great, but I don't think its appropriate to basically advertise a company's product in a forum for a game that certainly would not suit that product. You would well know from the sheer amount of threads you've posted in that there are many forum visitors here that would be easily led/misled into buying products praised here. (PS: And i'm not just specifying trinity here, but Ultrabooks and indeed HP laptops in general equally so).

Part 1: Yeah. No duh. But it's hardware news so eh.

Also, the GPU on Trinity is more or less in line with the minimum GPU requirements for MWO. With an Okay quad core CPU backing it up. And the HP laptops aren't bad. Their warranties are *****-proof / abuse-proof. (See where I dropped mine and was covered, or my overclocking my CPU and it was replaced under warranty despite my killing my PC.)

The only reason on Nvidia versus AMD is that the charts show them rather plainly beating Nvidia in price / performance at nearly every price point. I don't have any problem with Nvidia, save they don't price their cards more competively against AMD.

Second for crimes and such....

From wikipedia, and later from some other sources.


To reduce space used.

Spoiler

Lawsuits

Intel has often been accused by competitors of using legal claims to thwart competition. Intel claims that it is defending its intellectual property. Intel has been plaintiff and defendant in numerous legal actions.

In September 2005, Intel filed a response to an AMD lawsuit,[158] disputing AMD's claims, and claiming that Intel's business practices are fair and lawful. In a rebuttal, Intel deconstructed AMD's offensive strategy and argued that AMD struggled largely as a result of its own bad business decisions, including underinvestment in essential manufacturing capacity and excessive reliance on contracting out chip foundries.[159] Legal analysts predicted the lawsuit would drag on for a number of years, since Intel's initial response indicated its unwillingness to settle with AMD.[160][161] In 2008 a court date was finally set,[162] but in 2009 Intel settled with a $1.25 billion payout to AMD (see below).[163]

In October 2006, a Transmeta lawsuit was filed against Intel for patent infringement on computer architecture and power efficiency technologies.[164] The lawsuit was settled in October 2007, with Intel agreeing to pay US$150 million initially and US$20 million per year for the next five years. Both companies agreed to drop lawsuits against each other, while Intel was granted a perpetual non-exclusive license to use current and future patented Transmeta technologies in its chips for 10 years.[165]

On November 4, 2009, New York's attorney general filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel Corp, claiming the company used "illegal threats and collusion" to dominate the market for computer microprocessors.

On November 12, 2009, AMD agreed to drop the antitrust lawsuit against Intel in exchange for $1.25 billion.[163] A joint press release published by the two chip makers stated "While the relationship between the two companies has been difficult in the past, this agreement ends the legal disputes and enables the companies to focus all of our efforts on product innovation and development."[166][167]

[edit]Anti-competitive allegations

See also: AMD v. Intel

[edit]Japan

In 2005, the local Fair Trade Commission found that Intel violated the Japanese Antimonopoly Act. The commission ordered Intel to eliminate discounts that had discriminated against AMD. To avoid a trial, Intel agreed to comply with the order.[168][169][170][171]

[edit]European Union

In July 2007, the European Commission accused Intel of anti-competitive practices, mostly against AMD.[172] The allegations, going back to 2003, include giving preferential prices to computer makers buying most or all of their chips from Intel, paying computer makers to delay or cancel the launch of products using AMD chips, and providing chips at below standard cost to governments and educational institutions.[173] Intel responded that the allegations were unfounded and instead qualified its market behavior as consumer-friendly.[173] General counsel Bruce Sewell responded that the Commission had misunderstood some factual assumptions as to pricing and manufacturing costs.[174]

In February 2008, Intel stated that its office in Munich had been raided by European Union regulators. Intel reported that it was cooperating with investigators.[175] Intel faced a fine of up to 10% of its annual revenue, if found guilty of stifling competition.[176] AMD subsequently launched a website promoting these allegations.[177][178] In June 2008, the EU filed new charges against Intel.[179] In May 2009, the EU found that Intel had engaged in anti-competitive practices and subsequently fined Intel €1.06 billion (US$1.44 billion), a record amount. Intel was found to have paid companies, including Acer, Dell, HP, Lenovo and NEC,[180] to exclusively use Intel chips in their products, and therefore harmed other companies including AMD.[180][181][182] The European Commission said that Intel had deliberately acted to keep competitors out of the computer chip market and in doing so had made a "serious and sustained violation of the EU's antitrust rules".[180] In addition to the fine, Intel was ordered by the Commission to immediately cease all illegal practices.[180] Intel has stated that they will appeal against the Commission's verdict.[180]

[edit]South Korea

In September 2007, South Korean regulators accused Intel of breaking antitrust law. The investigation began in February 2006, when officials raided Intel's South Korean offices. The company risked a penalty of up to 3% of its annual sales, if found guilty.[183] In June 2008, the Fair Trade Commission ordered Intel to pay a fine of US$25.5 million for taking advantage of its dominant position to offer incentives to major Korean PC manufacturers on the condition of not buying products from AMD.[184]

[edit]United States

New York started an investigation of Intel in January 2008 on whether the company violated antitrust laws in pricing and sales of its microprocessors.[185] In June 2008, the Federal Trade Commission also began an antitrust investigation of the case.[186] In December 2009 the FTC announced it would initiate an administrative proceeding against Intel in September 2010.[187][188][189][190]

In November 2009, following a two year investigation, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo sued Intel, accusing them of bribery and coercion, claiming that Intel bribed computer makers to buy more of their chips than those of their rivals, and threatened to withdraw these payments if the computer makers were perceived as working too closely with its competitors. Intel has denied these claims.[191]

On July 22, 2010, Dell agreed to a settlement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to pay $100M in penalties resulting from charges that Dell did not accurately disclose accounting information to investors. In particular, the SEC charged that from 2002 to 2006, Dell had an agreement with Intel to receive rebates in exchange for not using chips manufactured by AMD. These substantial rebates were not disclosed to investors, but were used to help meet investor expectations regarding the company's financial performance; the SEC said that in the first quarter of 2007 they amounted to 70% of Dell's operating income. Dell eventually did adopt AMD as a secondary supplier in 2006, and Intel subsequently stopped their rebates, causing Dell's financial performance to fall.[192][193][194]



Environmental record

In 2003, there were 1.4 tons of carbon tetrachloride measured from one of Intel's many acid scrubbers. However, Intel reported no release of carbon tetrachloride for all of 2003.[147] Intel's facility in Rio Rancho, New Mexico overlooks a nearby village, and the hilly contours of its location create a setting for chemical gases heavier than air to move along arroyos and irrigation ditches in that village. Release of chemicals in such an environment reportedly caused adverse effects in both animals and humans. Deceased dogs in the area were found to have high levels of toluene, hexane, ethylbenzene, and xylene isomers in lungs.[148] More than 1,580 pounds (720 kg) of VOC were released in June and July 2006, the company stated.[149] Intel’s environmental performance is published annually in their corporate responsibility report.[150]

[edit]Religious controversy

Orthodox Jews have protested against Intel operating in Israel on Saturday, Shabbat. Intel ringed its office with barbed wire before the protest, but there was no violence.[151] As of December 2009, the situation has been stable for Intel Israel while some employees reported working overtime on Shabbat.

[edit]Age discrimination

Intel has faced complaints of age discrimination in firing and layoffs. Intel was sued by nine former employees, over allegations that they were laid off because they were over the age of 40.[152]

A group called FACE Intel (Former and Current Employees of Intel) claims that Intel weeds out older employees. FACE Intel claims that more than 90 percent of people who have been terminated by Intel are over the age of 40. Upside magazine requested data from Intel breaking out its hiring and terminations by age, but the company declined to provide any.[153] Intel has denied that age plays any role in Intel's employment practices.[154] FACE Intel was founded by Ken Hamidi, who was terminated by Intel in 1995 at the age of 47.[153] Hamidi was blocked in a 1999 court decision from using Intel's email system to distribute criticism of the company to employees.[155]

-http://en.wikipedia....onmental_record

http://www.corralesc...d=2013&Itemid=2

There's even a book on the chemical dumping; http://www.faceintel...oilingfrogs.htm

something that might be of concern to you as well;
http://www.tomshardw...ange,11749.html
blackmailing the Russian government.

Also, Intel admitted to blackmailing OEMs like HP, dell, Toshiba, etc. not to use AMD processors for years, most heavily during the Athalon 64 vs Pentium 4 era where AMD had a rather large performance advantage;
http://www.bit-tech....ays-1-25-bill/1

Also, let's not forget in independent investigations the EU, South Korea, and Japan also found Intel guilty...
http://www.techencla...tel-anti-66863/
http://www.pcworld.c...ssor_sales.html
http://www.pcworld.c...violations.html

and a history of anti-trust cases against Intel, dating back to 1991.
http://www.pcworld.c...trust_woes.html


So... blackmail, paying billions of dollars in anti-competitive actions for OEMs to not make AMD chips available in consumer market PCs, endangering the lives of US citizens through dumping of toxic chemicals (and lying about it in official records.), not to mention that they got a lawsuit from Nvidia a few years back for using chipsets without licence... if that matters to you at all. http://www.engadget....pset-licensing/
and another bit.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2887

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 16 June 2012 - 10:55 PM.

[Gigadouche]

iron wolf, on 16 June 2012 - 10:47 PM, said:

I mean, i take it you're an American patriot and AMD is an attractive alternative to you and thats great,

What do you mean by that? Intel (and almost every other major semiconductor company that is still relevant, except ARM) is an American company as well, unless you're referring to the nVidia vs AMD - in which case AMD also got a Canadian background.

[Vulpesveritas]

Gigadouche, on 16 June 2012 - 10:56 PM, said:

What do you mean by that? Intel (and almost every other major semiconductor company that is still relevant, except ARM) is an American company as well, unless you're referring to the nVidia vs AMD - in which case AMD also got a Canadian background.

I have a habit of recommending non-Chinese parts, I push for more ethical parts, and if you read some of my older threads on the forums you would get that I have something of a anti-corruption obsession.

iron wolf, on 16 June 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Edit: And if your argument is battery life, then the news is almost as scathing as PCworld's opinion of Trinity's CPU performance - since Ivy still has that beat too.

I mean battery life versus a comparable Intel powered laptop with a discrete graphics card able to compete with Trinity, or any Ivy Bridge processor with Intel 4000 Graphics.... where Anandtech is showing Trinity the winner;

I see 30% longer battery life on the A10.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 16 June 2012 - 11:23 PM.

[iron wolf]

Vulpesveritas, on 16 June 2012 - 10:54 PM, said:

Also, the GPU on Trinity is more or less in line with the minimum GPU requirements for MWO. With an Okay quad core CPU backing it up. And the HP laptops aren't bad. Their warranties are *****-proof / abuse-proof. (See where I dropped mine and was covered, or my overclocking my CPU and it was replaced under warranty despite my killing my PC.)

I would seriously doubt that a laptop APU would be able to handle sustained very high loads for the length of the average game session, especially considering you've got the CPU / GPU right on the same die instead of split apart, and especially considering the poor thermal characteristics of a super thin laptop, and doubly especially considering HP's reputation for overheating. Besides - If i'm not mistaken, i've seen you steer people away at least once away from buying a laptop for gaming purposes.

Vulpesveritas, on 16 June 2012 - 10:54 PM, said:

The only reason on Nvidia versus AMD is that the charts show them rather plainly beating Nvidia in price / performance at nearly every price point. I don't have any problem with Nvidia, save they don't price their cards more competively against AMD.

Actually, the charts only show that for the ultra low end cards that would struggle to run any modern game at all anyway (ie: the HTPC market). For anything above that, it is as it usually is - competitive. Myself and a few other people linked a few reviews / guides etc that show this.

Vulpesveritas, on 16 June 2012 - 10:54 PM, said:

Second for crimes and such....

What i see is 75% AMD using litigation as a way of evening the competition against intel (in the same way Apple was/is trying to do to Samsung) and admitedly, 25% actual, genuine 'found guilty of illegal behavior'. As for the Environmental damage part - Believe it or not, I'm currently studying to be an Applied Chemist (My 3rd year now). 700 odd kg of CCl4, the only thing worth mentioning in 9+ years of huge scale manufactoring is absolutely nothing compared to what the average petrochemical company puts out (I would know, i just finished an entire subject on Industrial Chemical Safety & Legislation). And here i was thinking they were dumping heavy metals into the ground water or something.

Regardless, i didn't want to start an argument / flamewar / etc - Only to try and convince you to be more conservative in what product recommendations (even unintentionally) you may decide to post across the forums.

[Vulpesveritas]

iron wolf, on 16 June 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

I would seriously doubt that a laptop APU would be able to handle sustained very high loads for the length of the average game session, especially considering you've got the CPU / GPU right on the same die instead of split apart, and especially considering the poor thermal characteristics of a super thin laptop, and doubly especially considering HP's reputation for overheating. Besides - If i'm not mistaken, i've seen you steer people away at least once away from buying a laptop for gaming purposes.

Some people need the mobility, but where one can, you should get a desktop for gaming, end of story.
But for someone such as a college student who doesn't get to spend much time at home, or a traveler of some sort, you may want a laptop. And especially in the student prospect you may want the gaming bit.
And eh, given it is Eyefinity capable, not really that bad. They demo'd Dirt 3 running at 4800X1050p at medium settings averaging above 30 frames per second if I remember correctly with an A10-4600m.

iron wolf, on 16 June 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

Actually, the charts only show that for the ultra low end cards that would struggle to run any modern game at all anyway (ie: the HTPC market). For anything above that, it is as it usually is - competitive. Myself and a few other people linked a few reviews / guides etc that show this.



What i see is 75% AMD using litigation as a way of evening the competition against intel (in the same way Apple was/is trying to do to Samsung) and admitedly, 25% actual, genuine 'found guilty of illegal behavior'. As for the Environmental damage part - Believe it or not, I'm currently studying to be an Applied Chemist (My 3rd year now). 700 odd kg of CCl4, the only thing worth mentioning in 9+ years of huge scale manufactoring is absolutely nothing compared to what the average petrochemical company puts out (I would know, i just finished an entire subject on Industrial Chemical Safety & Legislation). And here i was thinking they were dumping heavy metals into the ground water or something.

Regardless, i didn't want to start an argument / flamewar / etc - Only to try and convince you to be more conservative in what product recommendations (even unintentionally) you may decide to post across the forums.

Eh. Given that several governments independently found Intel to be guilty of monopolization tactics and such... But as far as dumping, while it may not be nearly as bad as the oil companies... I don't support them either when I have the choice. I walk / bicycle everywhere... And I really wish Thorium would take off as a power source. So eh.

I do hate big business in general however. Sadly for commercial products you don't have much choice.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 16 June 2012 - 11:34 PM.