I've been meeting with AMD a lot these days; in fact, one day last week I actually had to reschedule two separate AMD meetings because I was playing host to a few reps from, uh, AMD. With all of the negativity surrounding Phenom and a relatively quiet graphics division, it's tough to remember that I was actually excited about the ATI acquisition back when it happened. These days AMD is beginning to take shape as a total platform provider, thus when I talk to them it can be about everything from CPUs and chipsets to graphics - hence the plethora of meetings.

AMD has all of the ingredients to be a major player in the PC business. It arguably produces the best integrated graphics chipset around, is at least competitive on the discrete graphics front and, well, produces x86 CPUs. And today AMD is attempting something very industry leader-like.

AMD views the PC gaming market as consisting of three segments: casual gamers, mainstream gamers and the enthusiasts. Casual gamers are the largest portion of the market and generally play things like Solitaire or online Flash games. The Enthusiast market is dominated by those who are already investing in good gaming PCs and have some of the highest requirements for performance/visual quality. The mainstream gaming market, however, is composed of those users who want to play more demanding games on their PCs but aren't always aware of what they need to do so.

In order to help address the needs of this mainstream gaming market, AMD has established a new logo program called AMD GAME!. The idea behind AMD GAME! is to guarantee that anyone buying a PC with this logo will have a good overall gaming experience with it.

The AMD GAME! Requirements
POST A COMMENT

57 Comments

View All Comments

  • ap90033 - Monday, May 19, 2008 - link

    I think more OC than you think. My Q6600 is at 3.2 right now and runs great! Reply
  • Griswold - Monday, May 19, 2008 - link

    And how many out of the (estimated) 250 million casual and mainstream gamers are overclocking? Much more than the total of the (estimated) 13 odd million enthusiast gamers? I dont think so.
    Overclocking is mainly a thing of those who see more in their computer than just another electronic device. The rest turns it on to do what they want to do and then turn it off again, not caring about the "what" and "how". And thats why I think AMD got a little marketing jewel there. Now, they just need to make it shine instead of losing it as per usual.
    Reply
  • fitten - Monday, May 19, 2008 - link

    So your Phenom X3, which was launched a couple months ago, compares similar to the first processor in a line launched well over a year ago on (most likely) single-threaded code? I used AMD exclusively on the desktop for about 7 years but bailed when they hosed me over on two sockets longevity (Athlon64 platforms) and the fact that Intel got their act together and made a better product. But yes, processors are fast enough now that people don't notice the increase fro 90fps to 100fps or whatever.

    Anyway, I hate these 'system spec classification names'. As another poster already said, new games come out all the time that push the machine's capabilities... what's a GAME!Ultra today will be below just GAME! in 1.5 years. So you'll see people selling GAME!Ultra on Ebay and confusing people all along. Other than that, these names just sound stupid, to me, but I'm not in the audience that AMD is trying to woo with these 'make things easier' names.
    Reply
  • FITCamaro - Monday, May 19, 2008 - link

    Exactly. This is a mainstream platform. It's not meant to win any benchmarking awards. Fact is most desktop PCs come with integrated graphics. Even a C2D system with integrated graphics won't play games well. Phenom X3 and X4 processors and ATI graphics cards are more than capable of playing todays games. Are they necessarily the fastest out there? No. But they don't have to be.

    Yes Intel's processors are faster. Nvidia's GPUs normally are faster. But the real world difference typically isn't that much. Even the 3650 is capable of playing modern games on the typical 1280x1024 resolution of today.
    Reply
  • Harkonnen - Monday, May 19, 2008 - link

    ....but I do not think that it goes far enough. I believe the games themselves should have a certification to go along with the hardware.

    Like 'Game A' is certified for Extreme or something and the computer has the matching certification. Which means 'Game A' would need an 'Extreme' certified PC to run at the game's maximum settings. So the game could be labeled 'Extreme' for resolution 1920x1200 and up with maximum game settings and for smaller resolution, say 1600x1200 it would only need a 'Mainstream' Certification.

    I hope you guys are getting what I mean. It is kind of hard to explain.
    Reply
  • retrospooty - Monday, May 19, 2008 - link

    Also what about as time goes by?

    Today the Game Ultra requires a minimum of a 3870. Next year that wont be as powerful, and the year after it will be weak. Are they going to date it? Game ultra 2009, 2010? Or just call it Game ultra and up the specs, thus creating even more confusion?
    Reply
  • anandtech02148 - Monday, May 19, 2008 - link

    Amd can have my slogan, I will sell you "Game On Baby!" for a Zeelleon dollars.
    They exclude gaming on small electronic devices why? I've seen people in traffic playing cellphone games.
    Does this mean Pc gaming is still alive? Pc game development seems to die.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now