Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD Rumored to Phase Out Vision Branding

By - Source: SemiAccurate | B 24 comments

AMD's no stranger to phasing out brands.

A rumor suggests that AMD has decided to kick its "VISION" brand to the curb. SemiAccurate reports that the flashy name has disappeared from its product logos. Vision, of course, was preceded by "Better By Design", which was AMD's first effort to tell consumers that a compute platform needs to be balanced and consist of a powerful CPU and a powerful GPU.

And, of course, some readers may remember AMD Live, which was somewhat similar to Intel's Viiv, but did not live long enough for consumers to understand what it really was.

Given AMD's renewed focus on the consumer market, it is a good idea to remove the clutter and simplify its product naming. Now if we only could get rid of those stale sequence numbers...

Display 24 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 21 Hide
    Fulgurant , December 31, 2012 1:05 PM
    kawininjazxAMD has a big problem right now with their mobile processors. The junk they sell now like the E-1400 and the "AMD Dual-Core" processors give such horrible performance. The only decent running CPUs they have are the A6,8,10 series APUs. It seems like their CPUs get slower every year, I don't know how that's possible.


    Unless you're trying to be sarcastic, your comment is hopelessly self-contradictory. AMD sucks at mobile processors, except for their Llano/Trinity line of APUs, which promise to revolutionize laptop graphics' performance? Granted, there's still work to be done, but it seems clear to me that AMD's doing the most exciting thing in recent memory for prospective laptop consumers.

    On the CPU side, yeah, AMD's behind. That's more a desktop than a mobile problem though, going forward. Whatever AMD loses on the (x86) CPU side in the mobile space is more than made up by its gains in the integrated graphics' space. Now they just have to keep improving performance and power efficiency.
  • 11 Hide
    azraa , December 31, 2012 1:14 PM
    digiexAMD simply lacks vision.

    Please tell me how APUs and modular cpu architectures are not great developments, and, in the future, probably going be even better?
    The major problem AMD faces is that software nowadays is not written to be efficient with modules, which, again, may very well be solved in a few years. If you look at them right now, I guess they do lack vision, but in the short term, 'vision' loses its significance.
  • 10 Hide
    vaughn2k , December 31, 2012 12:09 PM
    They should put more meaning with their branding, and should live to its commitment...
Other Comments
  • 10 Hide
    vaughn2k , December 31, 2012 12:09 PM
    They should put more meaning with their branding, and should live to its commitment...
  • 21 Hide
    Fulgurant , December 31, 2012 1:05 PM
    kawininjazxAMD has a big problem right now with their mobile processors. The junk they sell now like the E-1400 and the "AMD Dual-Core" processors give such horrible performance. The only decent running CPUs they have are the A6,8,10 series APUs. It seems like their CPUs get slower every year, I don't know how that's possible.


    Unless you're trying to be sarcastic, your comment is hopelessly self-contradictory. AMD sucks at mobile processors, except for their Llano/Trinity line of APUs, which promise to revolutionize laptop graphics' performance? Granted, there's still work to be done, but it seems clear to me that AMD's doing the most exciting thing in recent memory for prospective laptop consumers.

    On the CPU side, yeah, AMD's behind. That's more a desktop than a mobile problem though, going forward. Whatever AMD loses on the (x86) CPU side in the mobile space is more than made up by its gains in the integrated graphics' space. Now they just have to keep improving performance and power efficiency.
  • -4 Hide
    digiex , December 31, 2012 1:08 PM
    AMD simply lacks vision.
  • 11 Hide
    azraa , December 31, 2012 1:14 PM
    digiexAMD simply lacks vision.

    Please tell me how APUs and modular cpu architectures are not great developments, and, in the future, probably going be even better?
    The major problem AMD faces is that software nowadays is not written to be efficient with modules, which, again, may very well be solved in a few years. If you look at them right now, I guess they do lack vision, but in the short term, 'vision' loses its significance.
  • 2 Hide
    Shin-san , December 31, 2012 1:35 PM
    Most people I know that buy AMD either knew enough about hardware to not be affected by the Vision branding, or was just buying a very low-end system for price purposes. However, the logo itself made it easier to spot an AMD system, which guarantees that the graphics chip would at least be decent
  • 5 Hide
    back_by_demand , December 31, 2012 2:04 PM
    I understand from a leak that in 2013 there will be a new AMD architecture of all-in-one CPU/GPU based on a new "Simpson" range, it will be code named "APU Nahasapeemapetilon"
  • -3 Hide
    unionoob , December 31, 2012 3:00 PM
    back_by_demandI understand from a leak that in 2013 there will be a new AMD architecture of all-in-one CPU/GPU based on a new "Simpson" range, it will be code named "APU Nahasapeemapetilon"


    Well, i guess we will see new APU line each year when we will see new GPU line.
  • -3 Hide
    sacre , December 31, 2012 3:03 PM
    Back when AMD and ATI merged, I thought "Big things are coming!!"

    I'm very disappointed.

    I'm happy ATI is beating and keeping up with nVidia, that means both companies have to compete for us consumers, but AMD and Intel? No real competition anymore, Intel can do what they want with their prices really and us hardcore folk will end up paying regardless.

  • 0 Hide
    blazorthon , December 31, 2012 3:59 PM
    kawininjazxAMD has a big problem right now with their mobile processors. The junk they sell now like the E-1400 and the "AMD Dual-Core" processors give such horrible performance. The only decent running CPUs they have are the A6,8,10 series APUs. It seems like their CPUs get slower every year, I don't know how that's possible.


    Their CPUs have been getting faster, at least in the laptops, with pretty much every generation. Desktop models have been a little all over, but have been improving if you look at things from an overall point of view.

    Saying that AMD's competitors for Intel's Atom have bad performance seems kinda *pointing out the obvious* to me. At least they put Atom in its place.
  • 0 Hide
    blazorthon , December 31, 2012 4:04 PM
    azraaPlease tell me how APUs and modular cpu architectures are not great developments, and, in the future, probably going be even better?The major problem AMD faces is that software nowadays is not written to be efficient with modules, which, again, may very well be solved in a few years. If you look at them right now, I guess they do lack vision, but in the short term, 'vision' loses its significance.


    Great developments, yes. However, AMD screwed them up in many ways. They could have done much better and they most certianly were capable of much better and still are. Their management seems to have gotten too greedy and most certainly does seem to lack vision IMO. There are great ideas, but they don't seem to have a clue about what to do with them.

    For example, all the improvement in the world for their CPUs won't do enough good until they fix their garbage cache. Improvements in their memory controllers in performance without needing ridiculous memory frequencies (Intel Ivy Bridge has something like 40% more bandwidth and considerably lower latency than Trinity with the same memory configuration and since Trinity needs it more, that's even worse than the number looks) should also be considered.
  • 0 Hide
    jojesa , December 31, 2012 5:15 PM
    kawininjazxAMD has a big problem right now with their mobile processors. The junk they sell now like the E-1400 and the "AMD Dual-Core" processors give such horrible performance. The only decent running CPUs they have are the A6,8,10 series APUs. It seems like their CPUs get slower every year, I don't know how that's possible.

    I don't know about your computer usage, but most users do not need more power than AMD A6 CPUs.
    I have used a Lenovo Ideapad S405 ($349.95/ 4 lbs) with an AMD A6 and for most users is more than enough and you can't beat the price. You could add a SDD and make it fly.
  • 0 Hide
    dalethepcman , December 31, 2012 7:16 PM
    AMD really missed the boat with Windows 8. I would say their vision has been lacking, or at least looking in the wrong direction. They should have done everything within their power to get into the tablet market with a new C/Z series chip, instead we still have underpowered atom devices ruling this field.

    Their fusion chips while a step in the right direction, are only being installed in the dwindling laptop market. If they don't get some drastic power savings in their APU's, or do a die shrink / clock increase on an updated C/Z series chip soon, then they will be in serious trouble.

    A $500 tablet (even with weaker hardware) is a better buy than a $400 laptop for almost all home users.

    I have to agree with the posters getting mass down voted. AMD has lost its Vision.
  • 3 Hide
    waethorn , December 31, 2012 7:47 PM
    A bit late on the takeup aren't we?

    AMD already announced that VISION would be deprecated towards the end of Llano days and would be no longer used with Trinity and Brazos 2.0. It's only held on because there are still a lot of Brazos E-450 systems that are alive and kicking. They haven't completely killed it off because they still say that the E-350 and E-450 will still be used by ODM's for a while, which is a bit maddening, because aside from laptops, not a lot of designs are getting the Brazos 2.0 chips which feature Radeon 7000 series GPU's (not hat they are much faster, but they will benefit from longer support lifecycles via Catalyst drivers), AND probably more importantly, only Brazos 2.0 designs are built from the ground up to support UEFI 2.3.1 with Secure Boot for Windows 8. Most E-350 and 450 designs only support UEFI up to 2.1 or not at all.
  • 0 Hide
    azraa , December 31, 2012 8:33 PM
    blazorthonGreat developments, yes. However, AMD screwed them up in many ways. They could have done much better and they most certianly were capable of much better and still are. Their management seems to have gotten too greedy and most certainly does seem to lack vision IMO. There are great ideas, but they don't seem to have a clue about what to do with them.For example, all the improvement in the world for their CPUs won't do enough good until they fix their garbage cache. Improvements in their memory controllers in performance without needing ridiculous memory frequencies (Intel Ivy Bridge has something like 40% more bandwidth and considerably lower latency than Trinity with the same memory configuration and since Trinity needs it more, that's even worse than the number looks) should also be considered.


    No arguing about that, man.
    As an AMD guy, I have to recognize when they screw up. What you mention is so true, specially with the cache issue. But again, it is good to recognize that kind of things. Im no IT professional, but those problems are evident when you start reading through the testing data in this kind of sites.

    Are you in IT? Have you ever tried to get into a giant as technician? Dude, everytime I read your comments I really enjoy them, you do know what you talk about, unlike the majority here. AMD sure needs guys with your kind of criticism.
  • 0 Hide
    SteelCity1981 , December 31, 2012 8:33 PM
    speaking of which intel needs to do some serious cpu lineup cleaning i mean they have the core i7 core i5 core i3 pentuim celeron and atom. there is no need for a pentuim and celeron branding on their cpu's instead they should get rid of them altogether and replace them with lower model core-i3's.
  • 2 Hide
    memadmax , December 31, 2012 8:49 PM
    AMD Needs to do alot more advertising and simplifying the naming of the tiers of their CPU and video cards.

    I see Intel churning out commercials all the time, but AMD is no where to be seen....
  • 3 Hide
    iam2thecrowe , January 1, 2013 12:22 AM
    the problem is the general public are still unsure about AMD. I dont think i have ever seen an AMD TV advert, not here in australia anyway. And the stupid salespeople selling prebuild HP, Acer, Dell etc have no idea how to explain cpu performance to the customer.
  • 0 Hide
    blazorthon , January 1, 2013 6:50 AM
    azraaNo arguing about that, man. As an AMD guy, I have to recognize when they screw up. What you mention is so true, specially with the cache issue. But again, it is good to recognize that kind of things. Im no IT professional, but those problems are evident when you start reading through the testing data in this kind of sites.Are you in IT? Have you ever tried to get into a giant as technician? Dude, everytime I read your comments I really enjoy them, you do know what you talk about, unlike the majority here. AMD sure needs guys with your kind of criticism.


    I've been working on GPUs lately, but I'd like to get into CPU design work sometime. Thanks for the words of praise and confidence!
  • 1 Hide
    demonhorde665 , January 1, 2013 9:17 AM
    memadmaxAMD Needs to do alot more advertising and simplifying the naming of the tiers of their CPU and video cards.I see Intel churning out commercials all the time, but AMD is no where to be seen....



    that because AMD has no where near the resources to throw money at advertising that intel does.

    to put it in perspective , AMD is a multi million dollar company , while intel is a multi billion dollar company

    to sum up the enormity of this difference , consider this fact .. 1000 million = 1 billion

    example (not accurate just an example)
    while amd has say 1 milion to spend on advertising with out cuting into profits , Intel has several hundred million to throw at advertising with out cutting into theirs. differences in ammounts of money is enormous . the fact AMD has beaten intel to the punch twice in teh past is a freaking miracle ( AMD beat intel to 1 ghz barrier back in 2000, and then beat them again by having the first 64 bit chip that was also much faster than any intel opffering at the time in about 2004-5)
Display more comments