http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/ Engadget Comments for AMD GAME! got game http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 1:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
On other news, GAME! got really ANNOYING! really FAST!.]]>May 19th 2008 1:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 1:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 1:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 1:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 1:57AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 2:14AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 5:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=560

In the end, it looks like a flub that should be an industry-wide initiative not an AMD-only one.]]>May 20th 2008 1:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
AMD, I luv ya, but you need to get your act together business-wise. Cheap marketing stunts will not save you if you can no longer delivery innovative products. ]]>May 19th 2008 1:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/It's Digiorno.

:]]]>May 19th 2008 2:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 2:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/ Cheap marketing stunts [...]

Well everything needs a name.

Intel/nVidia don't market anything like that, but have internally similar monikers for their product line ups.

> [...] will not save you if you can no longer delivery innovative products.

Seconded. Somehow I get the feeling that like VIA AMD with all the production troubles is going into underdog mode... :|]]>May 19th 2008 8:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 1:33AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
Also, you can't have four 9800GX2s in SLI, only two. Unless you have, what? Eight monitors to hook up those cards to, for multiple displays without SLI.]]>May 19th 2008 2:27AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 1:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
Intel does better CPUs. AMD does cheaper CPUs. Rule stands.

I'd say that situation hasn't changed much in the decade - despite AMD64 bubble. AMD is still catching up with Intel.]]>May 19th 2008 8:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 9:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
Trying to push something that utterly fails in gaming under the title GAME! is ridiculous. Anyone building a gaming PC spends a lot of money on quality components and expensive graphics cards. They are NOT going to buy a underperforming CPU just to save a few dollars. Especially when the competition is GREATLY faster.]]>May 19th 2008 10:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 1:56AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 2:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
I'll have to add this to the list of "technologies" that bother me. Centrino (commonly mistaken for Celeron, which makes me laugh), viiv, and now Game!]]>May 19th 2008 7:57AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/I nearly fell out of my seat laughing when I read that one

"You should go to Best Buy, where the sales people are non-commission, and thus less sleazy/cheesy, and more likely to point you to the machine that will suit your needs, regardless of the silly marketing sticker on the box."

Thanks for brightening my morning....
]]>May 19th 2008 9:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 2:13AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 2:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 7:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/

Lawsuit over how GAME! did not deliver gaming preformance in 3......


2.......




1.......




NOW!]]>May 19th 2008 2:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 3:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 3:23AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 3:26AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 9:53AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 5:36AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
K, so there was only one Crysis joke so far, and I felt this thread hadn't yet had enough obligatory references yet...

Additionally based on the overall opinion of this new product I saw it fit to use a reference indicative of said product's destruction...]]>May 19th 2008 5:08AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 5:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
get a life ......
Intel is in the lead its true..but between the AMD and the Intel i have...the 2 are pretty much the same in games....
just put a nice graphic card and good ram in it and it will behave well.]]>May 20th 2008 7:27AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
I don't know what kind of processors you're running, but obviously they're not a Core 2 and whatever AMD has, because you'd notice the difference then.]]>May 20th 2008 7:56AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 5:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/Even a simple 3-level system would work. ]]>May 19th 2008 6:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 6:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
"can it play doom?"
"yes, it has a GAME! sticker"]]>May 19th 2008 6:57AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 8:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 8:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
AMD only was successful because of Intel's failure at the time, and AMD's only fallen behind because Intel got their act together and designed a solid platform. Core 2 could still improve, too, which is exactly where Intel's going with Nehalem.]]>May 20th 2008 8:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
One being the AMD Game tag alone is not enough, you must add a Number or a letter to it such as AMD Game B or AMD Game C, then you must also get the game makers to add a letter on the games. This will allow you to know which games can play on which box.

We all know you can never run Crysis on AMD Game certified box with the letter B, C, or D.
]]>May 19th 2008 8:29AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/GAME!
LIVE!]]>May 19th 2008 10:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 1:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 8:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/May 19th 2008 9:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/19/amd-game-got-game/
AMD may be slower than Intel just now but it is much more stable and reliable - fewer system crashes etc. plus the AMD cool+ quiet driver makes a nice difference]]>May 22nd 2008 10:51AM