POST A COMMENT

55 Comments

Back to Article

  • Wreckage - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    This seems like a bad idea. If for no other reason than other memory makers won't want to help advertise your CPUs anymore.

    This seems to just dilute their brand, rather than help it.
    Reply
  • RaistlinZ - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    We don't need more memory makers. I'd rather see AMD devote more resources to their graphics drivers division. Reply
  • Sttm - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    AMD Ram the perfect Christmas gift for the Fanboy who bought a faildozer cpu! Reply
  • Spazweasel - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    So what do we get Intel fanboys?

    RDRAM of course. That HUGE success, demonstrating clearly just how superior to AMD the Boys in Blue are when it comes to memory choices. Oh wait, I'll bet you're too young to remember RDRAM. Go look it up. Then you'll understand the punch line:

    RIMMing... the activity of choice for Intel-worshipers everywhere! Pucker up, Otellini wants to give you a kiss (with lots of tongue).
    Reply
  • Klinky1984 - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    Your post sounds just a pathetic as the post you were replying to. Reply
  • mcturkey - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    Yeah, if we're going to start throwing around fanboy insults based on technological mistakes made nearly a decade ago, we may as well start talking about that time ten years from now where AMD sells off their CPU division to Foxconn and dedicates themselves to GPUs. Reply
  • Flunk - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    That's not too likely seeing as discrete GPUs will be dead by that point, probably sooner. Reply
  • tim851 - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    So? GPUs are used in millions of consoles and soon billions of smartphones and tablets. The decline of the discrete graphics card will have no impact. Reply
  • Principle - Thursday, November 29, 2012 - link

    Yeah, lets talk about all the crap Intel failed at, and AMD released first. Intel Itanium was pretty much made obsolete by AMD coming out with a much superior X86 workstation and server processor using integrated memory controller which Intel now copies. Intel Larabee never made it to the market of course. AMD introduced first 64-bit processors, which Intel now uses AMD's 64-bit patents, because Intel's sucked. AMD launches first dual core and native quad core CPU. AMD pushed the APU market, which Intel copied. Reply
  • BSMonitor - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    Intel never branded and sold RDRAM.

    Your comment makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in regard to this article.

    If you are trying to bash Intel for trying to introduce us a new RAM type, one that was actually superior to SDRAM at the time. Let's try this one: Intel and DDR3 memory. If you will recall, Intel was first to supply us with DDR3 memory motherboards even when it wasn't clear there was really a performance benefit. Now everyone has 16GB of DDR3 RAM in their system. And they paid maybe $100 for it..

    EPIC FAIL on your attempt bash of Intel.
    Reply
  • taltamir - Friday, December 02, 2011 - link

    RDRAM was a superior technology, it was brought low by a price fixing carter of the other RAM makers. This is not a conspiracy theory but a proven conspiracy as ruled by a court of law with appropriate civil penalties. Reply
  • taltamir - Friday, December 02, 2011 - link

    cartel not carter Reply
  • cmdrdredd - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    Drivers and hardware aren't the same departments. Although I think we have enough memory choices. Patriot, Crucial, Mushkin, OCZ, Corsair, Kingston, GSkill, Adata, PNY, Geil, Team Extreme just to name a few of the ones I know off the top of my head. Anyway to make my point short and sweet AMD would have been better off IMO to work with say Corsair or Crucial to bring performance tested memory to market. In other words, have a certification process for a specific brand and stamp a seal or logo on the heatspreader and packaging to alert consumers that the memory has been tested and is certified at enhanced clock frequencies and tighter timings on AMD platforms. I predict the AMD brand memory will be both more expensive and underwhelming in performance compared to trusted names like GSkill and Corsair. Reply
  • KineticHummus - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    OCZ isnt a memory maker anymore Reply
  • cmdrdredd - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    Good thing lol Reply
  • kg4icg - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    But they do make some fast SSD's Reply
  • bigboxes - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    How are you not banned universally? Reply
  • AnnihilatorX - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    It's call diversification, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

    Why would other memory makers not advertise AMD's CPU just because AMD enters the market?
    Reply
  • Abix - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    I for one am excited. First they bought ATI, now they're gonna make their own RAM. Next up....SSDs!?!?!? Way to diversify AMD. Reply
  • Matias - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    AMD's SSDs would make sense. Huge market, lots of margin, need for controller design... manufacturing their own RAM is the first step. Reply
  • BSMonitor - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    Have you read any of Anand's articles on the development of SSD controllers?? You want your data to rely on a cash starved/R&D nightmare that is AMD and it's engineers.

    I will pass on that.
    Reply
  • JonnyDough - Thursday, December 01, 2011 - link

    AMDs engineers brought us Athlon, the HD4850, and now APUs. So I guess my answer is "yes". AMD is thinking ahead. They want diversification, platform control, and to offer a total solution to companies, such as those that make consoles. When staying "All AMD" you can bet you'll get a very competitive deal on hardware. Reply
  • MonkeyPaw - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    Yeah, I don't mind the idea. Besides, AMD will probably have a markup on them, making for relatively easy profits. Right now, there's generic RAM, and several enthusiasts brands with their own loyal followings. I could see people picking AMD's RAM if only because they know it's designed to work on AMD systems. It's marketing BS, no doubt, but beginner builders probably want one less thing to guess about when buying their first build.

    I wonder if this will lead to AMD-brand graphics cards?
    Reply
  • Homeles - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    AMD has been making graphics cards for 5 years. Welcome to 2006.

    The amount of people that pretend that ATI still exists is absurd.
    Reply
  • StevoLincolnite - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    Well to be accurate, AMD doesn't make anything. They're mostly a design company now, it sold all it's FABS for making it's chips.

    And what he meant was for an AMD Branded card, not chip... But card, which is sold in the retail channels in quantity. - Possibly skipping on a Sapphire made reference design with a new sticker would be a good step to.

    You can get AMD branded "cards" but they're just not something a regular consumer gets at a store.
    Reply
  • BSMonitor - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    Except "do-it-yourself" builders make up a tiny fraction of the market. Reply
  • IKeelU - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    Considering they are moving towards providing the entire platform, this does make *some* sense to me. But then I remember that they split from their manufacturing division, and now this move doesn't make sense to me anymore. Reply
  • ag04sq17 - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    quote:
    AMD shows up to a 20% performance increase in their testing by upgrading from DDR3-1333 to DDR3-1600, while our own results show an average increase in performance of around 14% across seven tested games, which is even higher than AMD’s results.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    Not so much a typo as unclear; the average increase of 14% is greater than AMD's average increase (in two games) of around 10%. Regardless, I've modified the text; thanks. Reply
  • Beenthere - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    If AMD wants to market RAM under their name then it needs to be something special IMO or it's just a bad idea. They aren't designing or manufacturing it and it would be foolish for them to get side tracked with RAM. Reply
  • l3bowsk1 - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    I recently bought 4GB of G.Skill 8CLS DDR3-1600 for like $25 - it's even cheaper now. Will AMD beat this price? No? Then why bother? While some brands are more reliable than others, RAM is pretty much commoditized these days, unless you are building a bleeding-edge system.

    And if you are building a bleeding-edge system, it ain't gonna have an AMD chip in it, unless you've taken a couple sharp blows to the head lately.

    With $80 dual-core Sandy Bridge CPUs beating out AMD quad-cores at almost twice the price (check out the Bench section), AMD is quickly losing their relevance in the desktop market. And something tells me that expanding their brand into new segments isn't going to help.
    Reply
  • YukaKun - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    That's one step closer to a fully integrated solution! SoC for PCs, anyone?

    I think it's a good idea if they actually manage to make a good quality product and pair it with their own solutions.

    I had some issues with RAM vendors with my A8 (Kingston HyperX modules, more precisely), so if an AMD branded module with ensure me that there will be no problems, I could support them with my hard earn money.

    Besides, they REALLY have to work on RAM this time, since half of the HT link will be used by the graphics subsystem with the RAM, lol. Come on AMD, make a great comeback already!

    Cheers!
    Reply
  • think-ITB-live-OTB - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    AMD combining the CPU and the GPU worlds. Now going for the memory market. Brilliant!! AMD RAM, SSDs yes please! but... AMD pretty please, once this foray is tackled. MOBOs next!! oh and Operating System. Holy Hell Batman!!

    A transparent/clear unbranded red acrylic computer case housing an AMD branded Motherboard, AMD CPU/GPU combination, AMD branded RAM and an AMD branded SSD. Powered by an AMD developed LINUX distro focusing on AMD drivers + pushing OpenCL OpenGL etc..

    drop that badboy off on Intels desk with a sticky.
    Like Apples? how bout them Apples!!

    would be a developers Dream!! one phone call for any problem!
    an entire ecosystem (a true ecosystem) unto itself. Lets not discuss the Apple illusion shall we? k.

    I think is a great move. Its a step in giving AMD the edge Intel has enjoyed for so many years. Development focus on their products.
    Reply
  • nicolbolas - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    Possibly a APU with RAM built in?

    i imagine that would sell like crazy for laptops.

    also would boost the graphics of APU's by not having the RAM be limited.

    kind of like the GPU part of the APU, the RAM could adjust with the clock speed of APU (at max clock RAM is at 1800+ MHZ)

    than if you wanted more ram, you could dedicate the RAM on APU to the GPU (making it a lot stronger than now) and use the RAM you install in the system of system RAM

    of course, this would be expensive, but a much better lane setup
    Reply
  • think-ITB-live-OTB - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    why not? of course the technology will have to mature. Is definitely beneficial in a mobile environment. Having everything (or close to everything) on the same page sort to speak, would help in thermal management (ie automatic dynamic voltage control of many facets of the entire system).

    Processing power is reaching its current limitations. Without an endeavour into thermal control, i dont see how real-world users benefit. Having an entire system unified... real break-throughs in thermal management can happen. Who wouldnt want current or better processing power in devices that run 20+ hours on single charges, due to battery advancement and system efficiency. The latter of course coming from the ability to control more than a CPUs TDP levels dynamically. can you imagine a single power-saving button click lowering voltages on the CPU - the RAM - the storage mediums AND the Motherboard itself (shutting down none used essentials like extra buses etc).

    AMD has the graphics and central processing factors covered, this step into memory gets us all one step closer to the above becoming a reality.

    a little far fetched from the topic ... but really, is it? everything is within the same circle. Its all in how you look at the circle - the possibilities reveal themselves.

    Reply
  • BSMonitor - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    What Kool-Aid are you drinking? Reply
  • think-ITB-live-OTB - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - link

    The kind without Sugar.
    Who pissed in your Cornflakes?
    Reply
  • sinPiEqualsZero - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    I can see why people are saying that AMD is "seeding" an ecosystem. But here's my problem: they don't have wads of cash, are dwarfed by Intel, and have just cut 10% of their workforce. That implies that someone believes it is to their advantage to dedicate some of the 90% to AMD-branded RAM instead of to Bulldozer, Brazos, drivers, graphic chip design, supporting software developers, or heck, even marketing.

    With a company this size, I am very much worried about them "casting a wide net" instead of getting really good at a few things that work together. And then they went and supported DDR-1333 which throws me for a loop. Is anyone as confused by this as I am?

    I think this is a bungle on their part but am willing to listen to other perspectives.
    Reply
  • think-ITB-live-OTB - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    wads of cash doesnt necessarily mean anything. Just look at the worlds political systems. Wads of cash, no vision. Greed takes over and no cash left. Companies world-wide have had to let people go.
    I think AMD are seeing a bigger picture but are no different than any other large company in feeling a purse string struggle and had let some people go as well as down on a performance level simply because the baby steps need maturing. That takes time and costs money.

    Besides having more products labelled AMD is marketing. That can only help sell and generate money.

    the 1333 enigma ..hmm, guessing so current value boards that do not work at 1600 they wanted to give those folks a chance to buy AMD as well?
    Reply
  • BSMonitor - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    Dude. Get some coffee. You are tripping.. BAD. Reply
  • think-ITB-live-OTB - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - link

    Again, if the bowl of cereal is yellow. You probably should've asked for toast. Reply
  • sinPiEqualsZero - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    Your comment is a bit unfocused, but I can reply to the part about more AMD-branded items. Memory is a very low margin product and (sadly) the large majority of people who buy computers will never buy a stick of RAM all by itself. They get the computer in a store and that's what they use until they get a new computer.

    How does "just having" a product that doesn't make much money and won't be used by a large number of people help the brand? In fact, it could hurt if their manufacturers run into production problems on a new process, etc.
    Reply
  • think-ITB-live-OTB - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - link

    I think consumers are getting pretty darn smart about the products they buy today as opposed to 5-10 years ago. More and more read forums such as this and get ideas. *gulp* even some of them are unscrewing their store bought computers and having a peek inside.

    don't mean to come off as an a-hole. But to think people are this herd of sheep , force fed products without understanding how they function is coming to an end. Is why companies spend more money on product support (hence more questions) then ever.

    having the name AMD published everywhere and anywhere, including memory sticks. Keeps AMD in the minds of prospective consumers and those *aiding* these consumers in their purchases.

    a good thing no?
    Reply
  • mr2kat - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    I don't know if this is AMD's plan but several years ago I redesigned the dram interface to accommodate on-memory processing. The principle was to accelerate operations on cache space within the memory sticks. As such it can't effectively fit on the cpu side since it would interfere with normal memory transfer operations.

    As an example I implemented fast search on cache space, cache to disk, message management and advanced look-ahead. However this can only work if the cpu is adapted to use the capability and Intel wasn't interested.

    Is it possible that AMD is planning something similar? It would give them a massive edge in server and cloud processing so I hope the answer is yes.
    Reply
  • think-ITB-live-OTB - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    interesting stuff!

    when i hear advanced look-ahead, i start thinking about complex buffering paradigms. yikes!. A massive edge an understatement. The real question is... are we ready for it yet? When i think of the catch up being done currently on things like SMP etc. An advanced and intricate system would take alot of manpower to implement properly.

    good stuff though.
    Reply
  • BSMonitor - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    Who is we? What the heck are you talking about?? Kool - Aide man! You are late!! Get your ass over here! Reply
  • think-ITB-live-OTB - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - link

    Sorry, i dont play nice with self-entitled authorities. No hallway monitor ever stopped me from roaming the hallways. ;) Reply
  • 3DVagabond - Monday, November 28, 2011 - link

    If you go to Newegg to buy RAM it is sometimes listed as "Intel P67 platform/ XMP ready " or something else denoting it's for Intel setups. Also, I've seen user reviews and manufacturer's responses where the RAM needs to be configured to run at it's rated speed on AMD systems. I think there's a market for RAM that people can feel confident will work for them. A lot of consumers don't understand that RAM is RAM and these "Intel P67 platform/ XMP ready " sets will work just fine on their AMD systems, albeit sometimes with bios fiddling. I think that if people have AMD systems they'll find it easier to pick AMD RAM for the peace of mind that it will work. Reply
  • arjuna1 - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    You are still getting your ivy bridge in a few months, an upgrade just a few notches from sandybridge and carrying the usual intel shaft in the rear premium tag, just the way you all like it.

    AMD is trying to push brand recognition, probably aimed at OEMs, I know intel has/had something similar focused on commercial builders, the intel system integrator progamme was it?? or maybe it had another name, who flamed intel because of that?? no one, so lay off AMD's back, drill this through your thick skulls, we all need a healthy AMD if we expect Intel *to be wanting* to offer 8 core haswell based processors at decent prices.
    Reply
  • cjb110 - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    Isn't this also saying that JEDEC are a bit slow and crappy at validating newer memory speeds?
    Ok they have been for a while, but this the first time a non-memory manu has made such a blatant swing at them,
    Reply
  • classy - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    Most memory makers provide a vast array of memory choices for Intel platforms, but not for AMD. So AMD could reap the rewards here, because there is a void for AMD compatable memory. Whe I built an X6 on the cheap a year or so ago, I went through 3 sets of memory before I found one that worked. So I don't think this is bad road to explore. Reply
  • valentin-835 - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    The reason AMD is getting into this business is very simple.
    To put the price gougers out of business.
    You don't need a degree in CS to know that faster memory and more memory
    is the best way to increase performance.
    How many times you see "experts" fussing about Sandy Bridge and all that ?
    The x86 is a legacy architecture. In its constant quest to be "backward compatible",
    it has become a dinosaur.
    If you want to torture the hell out of someone, ask him to write a compiler for x86.
    To ask insult to injury, it supposed to work with an OS like Windows !!
    The way of the future is different.
    No more super-smart compilers and super-smart OS working with awfully complicated
    processors.
    Gives us Open CL, smart programmers, simplified multi-core architectures and lots
    of fast and affordable memory.
    God help us all if AMD doesn't succeed. We'll be back to square one. Buying over-complicated processors for 1500 dollars a piece running bloated OS selling for
    300 dollars a pop. That's the way it was until AMD came along.
    Reply
  • Alilsneaky - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link

    You should really make it extra double triple clear with the performance chart that it is for APUs only.

    Yes, it is mentioned twice in the article and properly explained after the charts are shown, but I bet you my left nut that this graph will show up in a bunch of other places out of context and misinterpreted to tell people they would benifit from high end ram in a normal pc. (dedicated gpu).

    This is the tldr internet and the concept of what an apu is is new to many.
    Reply
  • Romulous - Friday, December 09, 2011 - link

    1. Anyone who is serious about playing games wont be using an A8-3850.
    2. Although it makes a good HTPC, why bother with expensive ram in an A8-3850 ? Put it in the Bulldozza and flatten some South American rain forests.
    Reply
  • Principle - Thursday, November 29, 2012 - link

    Because OEMs screw customers and AMD by using underperforming RAM. AND biased review sites like this one and others reduce AMD performance by using lower rated RAM than the CPU calls for. Look at the benches, they will use 1333 RAM because Intel cpus dont get much benefit perhaps from even 1600, or they may use the 1600 that the Intel is rated for, but also only use the 1333 or 1600 in the AMD system with a memory controller rated for 1866. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now