AMD cutting deeply into Intel's market share across desktop, mobile, and server segments

[Toju Mikie]

Intel trashed for 5% IPC improvements...
AMD praised for 3% IPC improvement.
*smh*

what sources are you using to base these claims on for the 3% and the 5%? or did you just make up these numbers?

 

[wiyosaya]

Regardless of the fanboism on either side, competition is a good thing no matter what side of the tracks one is on.

IF it is true that there's a 5.1Ghz 16-core/32-thread Ryzen coming down the tubes for $499 (which I will believe IF it hits the market), I see this as a good thing for competition and the market in general. Gone will be the days of asinine $1,800 braggadoccio cpus that barely outperform cpus costing less than half the price and building an enthusiast PC will return as an affordable endeavor.

Let's hope that AMD finally gets their act together and brings out a competitive GPU.

 

[wiyosaya]

That's just as much Intel wishful thinking as the AMD fanboys with their still vaporware Ryzen2 and Navi parts. It's all just a river of internet blogorrhea until products are shipped and Steve trades sleep for blue bars.

 

[wiyosaya]

They were in serious trouble before Ryzen. Their stock was in the tank. Ryzen was likely make-or-break for them. The relative success of the RX GPUs helped too, at least compared to the R7/9 cards. But yeah, I think you're right, they may not have made it if Ryzen was a flop. It likely saved AMD.

IMO, the move that saved them was getting rid of the technically clueless Rory Reed and hiring Lisa Su.

 

[wiyosaya]

Who is panicking? My 2600K still does what I need it to do. When the time comes I will pick another build based on the market at that time. Oh and it will likely be Intel regardless of value. So does that at all sound like a panic?

How else could Intel not make it this far? That insinuates they no longer exist. It has been a ruff road for AMD, but they made it this far. Anyway for the most part I will agree with you.

So you are saying you are OK with sending your money to a sleezy dirt-bag company and thus encouraging them to remain sleezy dirt-bags? I suppose that at the very least, you are willing to uphold your principles. Its definitely your right!

 

[cliffordcooley]

So you are saying you are OK with sending your money to a sleezy dirt-bag company and thus encouraging them to remain sleezy dirt-bags?

I do not see Intel as sleezy. What I see is a company doing business like no other. They were caught and prevented from using the same methods. And to be honest it is no less sleezy that Apple's way of business. At least Intel does all their production at home. Or at least they try to. Intel also continues to produce the most efficient CPUs. Though they are loosing that advantage, they are still ahead.

Last time I had AMD was before they created their own socket design. During the next few years I wouldn't consider recommending AMD to anyone. I don't want AMD but I will recommend AMD to others. I bought heavily into Sandy Bridge platform. If I want I can switch hardware around. Mixing AMD would prevent compatibility unless I bought completely into AMD. I invest in the same platforms, not individual machines.

 

[hahahanoobs]

what sources are you using to base these claims on for the 3% and the 5%? or did you just make up these numbers?

LOL. CPU reviews and comment sections for Intel, and Zen+ reviews and AMD's own slides!
You didn't even try to do a search on my numbers? Don't read comments either? Oh wait, you read mine....

AMD tells us that L1 cache latency is 13% improved, L2 cache sees the biggest boost with a 34% improvement, and the L3 cache latency improves by 16%. Along with that, main system DRAM gets an 11% improvement. All of this is stated in "up to" terms, so it appears this isn't a global change but one that depends on the workload. The result is a 3% IPC improvement.
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Ryzen-7-2700X-and-Ryzen-5-2600X-Review-Zen-Matures

Overall, Skylake is not an earth shattering leap in performance. In our IPC testing, with CPUs at 3 GHz, we saw a 5.7% increase in performance over a Haswell processor at the same clockspeed and ~ 25% gains over Sandy Bridge. That 5.7% value masks the fact that between Haswell and Skylake, we have Broadwell, marking a 5.7% increase for a two generation gap.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/23

#sourcesmatter

 

[QuantumPhysics]

That's just as much Intel wishful thinking as the AMD fanboys with their still vaporware Ryzen2 and Navi parts. It's all just a river of internet blogorrhea until products are shipped and Steve trades sleep for blue bars.

That RTX TITAN and 2080Ti (which I have) are just unbeatable for the time being.

 

[Toju Mikie]

LOL. CPU reviews and comment sections for Intel, and Zen+ reviews and AMD's own slides!
You didn't even try to do a search on my numbers? Don't read comments either? Oh wait, you read mine....

AMD tells us that L1 cache latency is 13% improved, L2 cache sees the biggest boost with a 34% improvement, and the L3 cache latency improves by 16%. Along with that, main system DRAM gets an 11% improvement. All of this is stated in "up to" terms, so it appears this isn't a global change but one that depends on the workload. The result is a 3% IPC improvement.
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Ryzen-7-2700X-and-Ryzen-5-2600X-Review-Zen-Matures

Overall, Skylake is not an earth shattering leap in performance. In our IPC testing, with CPUs at 3 GHz, we saw a 5.7% increase in performance over a Haswell processor at the same clockspeed and ~ 25% gains over Sandy Bridge. That 5.7% value masks the fact that between Haswell and Skylake, we have Broadwell, marking a 5.7% increase for a two generation gap.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/23

#sourcesmatter

in your second link, they are comparing 4th generation Intel to 6th generation Intel. Haswell is 4th gen and Skylake is 6th gen, 2 generations apart. This is not the same as comparing Zen and Zen+

 

[captaincranky]

in your second link, they are comparing 4th generation Intel to 6th generation Intel. Haswell is 4th gen and Skylake is 6th gen, 2 generations apart. This is not the same as comparing Zen and Zen+

What part of this: "That 5.7% value masks the fact that between Haswell and Skylake, we have Broadwell, marking a 5.7% increase for a two generation gap"., would lead you to believe that already isn't in his post?

The fact that he didn't attach generation numbers to core code names, shouldn't, and IMO, doesn't matter.

 

[hahahanoobs]

in your second link, they are comparing 4th generation Intel to 6th generation Intel. Haswell is 4th gen and Skylake is 6th gen, 2 generations apart. This is not the same as comparing Zen and Zen+

No acknowledgment of the first link, or is that your way of saying I was right?

The point of the Intel comparison was to show little gains on an exhausted 14nm process, while AMD used a new process and managed only 3%.

 

[Toju Mikie]

in your second link, they are comparing 4th generation Intel to 6th generation Intel. Haswell is 4th gen and Skylake is 6th gen, 2 generations apart. This is not the same as comparing Zen and Zen+

What part of this: "That 5.7% value masks the fact that between Haswell and Skylake, we have Broadwell, marking a 5.7% increase for a two generation gap"., would lead you to believe that already isn't in his post?

The fact that he didn't attach generation numbers to core code names, shouldn't, and IMO, doesn't matter.

When you make a comparison, it would make sense to compare things that happen in the same amount of time... This is what I was meaning to say...

 

[captaincranky]

....[ ]....IF it is true that there's a 5.1Ghz 16-core/32-thread Ryzen coming down the tubes for $499 (which I will believe IF it hits the market), I see this as a good thing for competition and the market in general. ....[ ]....

Nah man, it's absolutely true!

I hear the core code name is "unicorn"....

 

[Toju Mikie]

in your second link, they are comparing 4th generation Intel to 6th generation Intel. Haswell is 4th gen and Skylake is 6th gen, 2 generations apart. This is not the same as comparing Zen and Zen+

No acknowledgment of the first link, or is that your way of saying I was right?

The point of the Intel comparison was to show little gains on an exhausted 14nm process, while AMD used a new process and managed only 3%.

I looked at both links. A 3 percent year-to-year IPC improvement is good. Your comparisons were misleading because you compared two things from two different companies that did not happen in the same amount of time.

 

[wiyosaya]

I do not see Intel as sleezy. What I see is a company doing business like no other. They were caught and prevented from using the same methods. And to be honest it is no less sleezy that Apple's way of business. At least Intel does all their production at home. Or at least they try to. Intel also continues to produce the most efficient CPUs. Though they are loosing that advantage, they are still ahead.

I am definitely not a crApple fan.

Intel does not produce all their products in the US. Trying to, IMO, really amounts to Intel doing what is best for business. Yes, they have several fabs in the US, but there are a number of them in other countries including China.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_manufacturing_sites

Yes, they are losing their lead. There is not that much difference between their CPUs and AMDs at this point.

Not all that long ago, they were showing off their latest and greatest CPU and they got caught using extreme cooling methods in an attempt to make it look like the product was better than it is. That, IMO, is the definition of sleaze. At the very least, it demonstrated that they are afraid of the competition that AMD is now giving them.

Last time I had AMD was before they created their own socket design. During the next few years I wouldn't consider recommending AMD to anyone. I don't want AMD but I will recommend AMD to others. I bought heavily into Sandy Bridge platform. If I want I can switch hardware around. Mixing AMD would prevent compatibility unless I bought completely into AMD. I invest in the same platforms, not individual machines.

I bought into Sandy Bridge, too. Right now, I have a Ivy Bridge in the system, however, I can go no further. Any upgrade would either be accomplished by buying a used CPU, or through a new build, unless, of course it is a new hard drive or GPU.

To a certain extent AMD socket designs tend to have a longer lifetime.

I don't think we will ever see a time where an AMD cpu would work in a Intel motherboard or vice versa. Historically, it has always been this way. It might be nice to dream about that, but it is unlikely to happen.

In the long run, having the competition is good for the marketplace. If you do stay with Intel, maybe when you do another build, Intel will have adjusted their prices downward because of the competition AMD is giving them.

 

[hahahanoobs]

I looked at both links. A 3 percent year-to-year IPC improvement is good. Your comparisons were misleading because you compared two things from two different companies that did not happen in the same amount of time.

You asked how I got the numbers I did and you are now in damage control mode...
AMD used a new process and it wasn't enough to get any closer to where they were prior.

Zen is for creators, not gamers or the average consumer. They don't benefit from 16 cores and slow clocks to game, browse and stream audio and video.

 

[hahahanoobs]

Yes, they are losing their lead. There is not that much difference between their CPUs and AMDs at this point.

I don't think Intel minds "losing" at the time being...
https://newsroom.intel.com/news-rel...d-quarter-2018-financial-results/#gs.UVms8Dk6

To a certain extent AMD socket designs tend to have a longer lifetime.

AMD fails to make sufficient changes to their chipsets to warrant paying for a new socket. It's been like that for years. Don't get it twisted.

 

[captaincranky]

I looked at both links. A 3 percent year-to-year IPC improvement is good. Your comparisons were misleading because you compared two things from two different companies that did not happen in the same amount of time.

The original "Ryzen" certainly didn't happen in the time frame of an Intel "generation". In point of fact, AMD foundered for damned near a decade before they had this product brought to market. Or are we forgetting, or simply ignoring that?

For AMD it was bring this product to market successfully or go belly up. period. Kudos to them they did. But, they also had the same decade to develop the eventual tweaks to the original, which I think we're calling "Ryzen +".

I keep posting what is to follow, and everyone chooses to ignore it. First off, everyone who is running their mouth about how Intel is screwing them, couldn't design or build anything as "simple" as a 286 CPU, if some fool dropped the money to do it in their laps to try.

Second, it's really easy for some corporate talking head to shoot his mouth off about "process road maps", and how we'll be at 10 nm 6 months from now to satiate investors. It's another thing for the people in the trenches to pull it off. When processes run up against pathways as tiny as 10 nm, as simple a thing as a minor earth tremor, could conceivably run an entire fab full of wafers.

All of that notwithstanding, it's Intel's job to produce profits for its shareholders, which they have done admirably.

Now when we have people running their mouths here at high volume about "how companies are in business to make money, and there's no such thing as a free lunch", when Intel's business practices fall under the same guidelines, it seems the height of hypocrisy and duplicity to b!tch about it.

Now if competition forces Intel to revamp their pricing structure, that's good news.

Those things said, I kind of have to agree with @wiyosaya comments when he talks about being ripped off on supposedly super duper elitest CPUs as well.

But keep in mind that, "once upon a time", a crappy top of the pack P-4 pulled in a grand. Just think about how badly the fools who were willing to buy those were getting ripped off, compared to what you're being "ripped off on", these days".

 

[hahahanoobs]

Everytime AMD releases a new Ryzen product, there seems to be a 'leak' that the new architecture will be released soon.

Everytime AMD releases a new Ryzen product, the average consumer still doesn't need it.
Everytime NVIDIA announces a new GPU, AMD announces a rebrand.

 

[quadibloc]

At the moment, AMD has to use more expensive hardware to compete with Nvidia on performance. Supposedly, a new AMD patent may mean they've found a way around the bottlenecks that have led to this situation, and then, with a new architecture for GPUs based on this, they might make headway. In any case, their performance in CPUs is keeping the company afloat, and leading to competition where it's most badly needed.

 

[Lew Zealand]

Of course Sausagelover liked this comment as well. If Ryzen 2 is vaporware, what the hell would you call Icelake. Wasn't that CPU suppose to launch early 2018 or something? Everytime AMD releases a new Ryzen product, there seems to be a 'leak' that the new architecture will be released soon.

Instead, we got more Skylake.

Yup, all wishful thinking until shipped. Intel is currently the king of this with 10nm when all they can ship is recycled Skylake. Though it is interesting to see what that has forced Intel to do with 14+++++++nm. The current chips are impressively more power efficient when compared to Broadwell and can sustain much higher frequencies with the same core count. One engineering ultra-fail begets another engineering modest success.

 

[jpuroila]

Intel trashed for 5% IPC improvements...
AMD praised for 3% IPC improvement.
*smh*

You mean 2% and 15%, respectively.

 

[hahahanoobs]

You mean 2% and 15%, respectively.

Who is your credible source again? I missed it.

 

[wiyosaya]

Second, it's really easy for some corporate talking head to shoot his mouth off about "process road maps", and how we'll be at 10 nm 6 months from now to satiate investors. It's another thing for the people in the trenches to pull it off. When processes run up against pathways as tiny as 10 nm, as simple a thing as a minor earth tremor, could conceivably run an entire fab full of wafers.

Got that right, @captaincranky
Back in the days of silver halide holograms, as much as a truck going by outside was potentially enough to ruin a hologram - and those wavelengths are a factor of 40 or more longer than 10nm. The smaller the wavelength, the worse it gets in terms of tolerable disturbances. "Visible" light starts around 400nm, and in the early days of holography, the HeNe laser at 633nm was the tool of choice. I suspect that a truck going by some fab would likely have the same ruinous effect, and that all fabs have invested millions of dollars if not more in vibration isolation equipment to mitigate the effect. It is by far not an easy task.

I don't think Intel minds "losing" at the time being...
https://newsroom.intel.com/news-rel...d-quarter-2018-financial-results/#gs.UVms8Dk6

More corporate hubris. sintel will get caught with their pants down if they do not watch out. And why would they erroneously claim their cpus are the cat's meow when they need asinine cooling? https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...anic-reaction-to-32-core-threadripper.245041/

You can be sure that if sIntel was not working on an architecture that is better than the core series, they are now. I bet sIntel is taking AMD seriously. AMD's gains in market, though one might think them small, are substantial. If they follow typical growth processes, they will become exponential if sIntel continues to sit on its core architecture.

AMD fails to make sufficient changes to their chipsets to warrant paying for a new socket. It's been like that for years. Don't get it twisted.

Twisted? Really?
And I suppose that you think that a tiny incremental improvement, like, for instance, usb 3.1 from usb 3.0 is worth buying a new motherboard?

IMO, the incremental improvements in supporting hardware on motherboards are plateauing at this point - decreasing the value of subsequent upgrades.

 

[wiyosaya]

Nah man, it's absolutely true!

I hear the core code name is "unicorn"....

I heard that rumor, too. I also heard that the code name is "effluvium".