AMD hands TSMC its entire 7nm portfolio: Vega 20, Zen 2 and Navi right around the corner

[Evernessince]

People will pay top dollar for those 7nm EPYC and Vega 20 chips - so that's not an issue. The issue will be fending off Nvidia so they can make enough Navi and Ryzen 3.

But I have said this before - GF is ramping up a true 12nm (non-finfet!) for mobile and laptops. It's not crazy to think that AMD might use GF's 12nm-Plannar for their low cost Ryzen 3 laptops, APU's, and $100 Navi 11 cards.


https://www.globalfoundries.com/technology-solutions/cmos/fdx/12fdx

^15% higher clocks than existing 14nm, and half the power usage. Directly comparable to 10nmFF. That's perfect for an RX 660/650 and cheap Ryzen 3/5 APU's.

I don't think who gets prioritization is a problem for AMD. Nvidia's going to be doing large die GPUs which is going to require a more mature process and most likely will have it's own custom node. AMD on the other hand will be doing smaller die GPUs and CPUs. AMD will move more volume simply on the virtue that everyone buys a CPU but not always a dGPU.

No idea about Navi, pretty much nothing is known at this point.

 

[m3tavision]

The math is simple really:

1) Navi is rumored to be a ~250-300mm^2 chip

2) 7nm allows 2.8x the density of 14nm.

3) It also allows for 40% higher clocks OR 65% less energy usage.

Thus one can conclude that at a minimum Navi should be in-between the 1080 and 1080 Ti (RTX 2070), and at best it could actually compete with the 2080 Ti (not a joke). It should also do so while using at most 100-200w (RX 580 power usage).

We also know that Navi is the last version of GCN, and it is built for gaming first unlike the compute-focused Vega. So there could be extra dividends paid in gaming perf/watt.

I really don’t think it is that simple. As far as I am aware 7nm isn’t even ready yet, it’s just on course to be ready. And when it is I don’t think we will see 40% clock speed improvement. Clock speed clearly isn’t just down to the size of the process node as if it was then AMDs 12nm parts would be able to clock higher than Intels 14nm parts but the real story is that Intels 14nm parts can clock much faster than AMDs 12nm stuff and are more energy efficicient clock for clock too. My prediction is that AMDs next major GPU architecture will be a mid range competitor at best.

It will be interesting to see how things play out. Personally I can’t see the loss of global foundries from production of cutting edge silicon to be anything but a bad thing for its partners and the industry as a whole.

Correct^^ "As far as you are aware...."

And that is the problem with almost all of your posts here. You are not aware, or even remotely educated on company news & press releases. Might want to read TSMC's reports once and a while.


7nm is ready.
It is only AMD's architecture and tape-out (sitting on 7nm node) that is not quite ready for production, but is being tested now and in certain people's hands. But again, the actual 7nm process isn't an issue here.

AMD's CEO (Dr Lisu Su), penned a deal with TSMC about 16 months ago, for first use of TSMC's 7nm tech. So they can compete with Intel in the Server market with EPYC/Threadripper… and also their new GPUs.

Subsequently, the people who our left out of 7nm TSMC production (& sitting on the sidelines waiting) is Nvidia...! (Nvidia is expected to wait an additional 6 months, before they get their 7nm products out.)


Seriously though, You seem horrified by actual news that there is working 7nm AMD GPU's in the hands of tester... and are attempting to spin things off in another direction...

 

[CaptainTom]

Correct^^ "As far as you are aware...."

And that is the problem with almost all of your posts here. You are not aware, or even remotely educated on company news & press releases. Might want to read TSMC's reports once and a while.


7nm is ready.
It is only AMD's architecture and tape-out (sitting on 7nm node) that is not quite ready for production, but is being tested now and in certain people's hands. But again, the actual 7nm process isn't an issue here.

AMD's CEO (Dr Lisu Su), penned a deal with TSMC about 16 months ago, for first use of TSMC's 7nm tech. So they can compete with Intel in the Server market with EPYC/Threadripper… and also their new GPUs.

Subsequently, the people who our left out of 7nm TSMC production (& sitting on the sidelines waiting) is Nvidia...! (Nvidia is expected to wait an additional 6 months, before they get their 7nm products out.)


Seriously though, You seem horrified by actual news that there is working 7nm AMD GPU's in the hands of tester... and are attempting to spin things off in another direction...

I think a lot of people around here (everywhere?) simply have abnormally short memories.

1) The amount of time we were on 28nm was ABNORMAL! Node upgrades are supposed to be every 1-2 years, but most people don't seem to get that. Most people seem to think that it's insane to be talking about new nodes so soon, it isn't.

2) Furthermore people need to stop acting like it's weird for AMD to release newer tech before Nvidia - this is ALSO the norm. First GDDR4, First GDDR5, First HBM, First 55/45nm, First 28nm, and on and on! AMD innovates way more often than Nvidia classically. This long winter of AMD being substantially behind the competition in efficiency is not normal.

 

[Rukubira]

I hope GF can pull it together and work with AMD. TSMC is too close to China for comfort.

Xenophobia mentality is detrimental to technology advancement. The whole world is depending on each other. Other countries are heavily dependent on a myriad of US products and technologies (CPU, medical devices, automobile, etc.) I am not suggesting a naïve utopia. Everyone is sure to keep an eye out for self-protection, but our observation should be based on facts rather than sentiment alone.

Nonetheless, the US did threaten to ban exporting Qualcomm ARM chips to Chinese company ZTE a couple months ago, sending them into panic mode. So, who knows, maybe others are just as wary of us now.

Maybe you should brush up your knowledge of the area instead of simply attributing it to xenophobia. TSMC is Taiwanese company with factories in China. China still regularly threatens to invade Taiwan, and has used state power to pressure and control foreign companies. If China decides to threaten or boycott Taiwanese companies like they did with Korean companies over missile defense dispute, then TSMC out of luck and everyone suffers due to TSMC investments in the mainland.

 

[Tokey]

Assumptions of future performance are no more than pipe dreams, like sports teams at the beginning of the season. Performance is almost always lower than assumed and cost is almost always higher for that performance. It seems that AMD fans engage in a bit more of this, which is of course understandable as AMD had been behind in CPU performance and is still behind in top end GPU performance.

I'm willing to give AMD the business if they deliver but all this talk about AMD will do this while Intel can't? Still wishful thinking. Product names next to Steve's blue bars or it didn't happen.

This
Sorry guys I'm more than happy to switch to AMD this upgrade if they can give performance for dollar value. Dont want to be negative but I feel like if their cards really do push as much horsepower as you guys are dreaming and takes less energy....then AMD is definitely gonna make customers pay up.
It's just how it works, in their eyes they are releasing God Tier tech that is made from blood sweat and tears. You think they are gonna let it go for a Measly 400 dollars? Lol

I'll end with this. I've been lurking 4chan and places alike for the past year , crypto related stuff. 90 percent of the people were deluded, thinking they are certain that this coin is gonna go 100x this year and beyond next. Everyone got rekt with their predictions, In fact a coin they bought for 4 or 5 dollars each is now worth 30 cents each.

 

[Sausagemeat]

This
Sorry guys I'm more than happy to switch to AMD this upgrade if they can give performance for dollar value. Dont want to be negative but I feel like if their cards really do push as much horsepower as you guys are dreaming and takes less energy....then AMD is definitely gonna make customers pay up.
It's just how it works, in their eyes they are releasing God Tier tech that is made from blood sweat and tears. You think they are gonna let it go for a Measly 400 dollars? Lol

I'll end with this. I've been lurking 4chan and places alike for the past year , crypto related stuff. 90 percent of the people were deluded, thinking they are certain that this coin is gonna go 100x this year and beyond next. Everyone got rekt with their predictions, In fact a coin they bought for 4 or 5 dollars each is now worth 30 cents each.

100% agreed. When AMD were dominating Intel in the CPU performance graphs in the mid 2000s their prices went through the roof. Over $1000 for a single core Athlon 64-FX chip (although worth noting that Intels pricing didn’t fall down that much). And people happily paid it because it was the best. It’s how this industry works and always has been.

 

[CaptainTom]

This
Sorry guys I'm more than happy to switch to AMD this upgrade if they can give performance for dollar value. Dont want to be negative but I feel like if their cards really do push as much horsepower as you guys are dreaming and takes less energy....then AMD is definitely gonna make customers pay up.
It's just how it works, in their eyes they are releasing God Tier tech that is made from blood sweat and tears. You think they are gonna let it go for a Measly 400 dollars? Lol

I'll end with this. I've been lurking 4chan and places alike for the past year , crypto related stuff. 90 percent of the people were deluded, thinking they are certain that this coin is gonna go 100x this year and beyond next. Everyone got rekt with their predictions, In fact a coin they bought for 4 or 5 dollars each is now worth 30 cents each.

I will actually play Devil's Advocate to a couple things you have said:

1) "God Tier Tech". I assume you mean the 2080 Ti? I assume you are saying if AMD can match this "God Tier Tech" they will charge similar pricing?

They might because they can, but it's not God Tier Tech. It's peasant tech in 1 year too btw. P100 is 2 years old, and thus I do not consider a 20% performance increase as "God Tier" unless you considered the 290X "God Tier" in 2016 lol. Now IF the 2080 Ti turns out WAY better than expected, then this will change how I think of things.

But as it stands Nvidia is increasing die size by 50% for a minuscule increase in performance, and it's because Turing is an answer to Professional Vega cards, not to gaming. Gaming was an afterthought (and for good business reasons). AMD might match this with a 250mm^2 die on 7nm, and if they do it is not a $1200 card. Period. I will leave you with this:

-GV100 Tesla cards with biggest die.
-xx100 Actual High-end - GTX 580
-xx102
-xx104 GTX 560, RTX 2080
-xx106
-xx108

The RTX 2080 is what would be a mid-range $300 card if Nvidia was sweating under pressure. The 2080 Ti is nowhere near God Tier lol.


2) Your crypto currency example is funny. It is correct that many people were talking up Bitconnect, but others were not - and they (me) made a lot of money.

Go ahead and point out the fact that 90% of speculators are *****s, the other 10% agrees and is quite happy to take their money.

 

[TheBigFatClown]

Please be worthy cheaper graphic card! I want a good 300 400 upgrade!

That's the market AMD is targeting so you should get your wish.

You do realize that they "Target" markets based off performance. The Vega cards were actually over priced based off the performance. If they beat the comparable Nvidia competition, they will be priced higher than the competition. AMD Fanboys think this company is acting in their best interest. Believe me, they're acting in the share holders best interest.

I think you expose your fan boy bias by throwing out these accusations. I am a fan boy of whichever company gives me the best bang-for-the-buck. My last 5+ CPU's were Intel chips. But the Ryzen AMD APU's were a game changer for me.

If your a gamer who wakes up in the middle of the night screaming, "OMG. My FPS dropped below 60. What a nightmare that was." then your going to be an Intel fan boy. Because they are the performance kings for gaming. But I still don't think they are the best value, definitely not for me personally, as a casual gamer.

I guess I should modify my comment above to say that Intel wasn't the best value in the most recent Pre-Ryzen days. Of course, now they are scrambling left and right and providing better value because their hand has been forced.

Of course, if AMD ever reclaims the performance crown then they should charge higher prices. Why not? I'm a fan boy of AMD "at the moment" because they're giving great value for the money and keeping Intel on their toes.

Who gets my money at the end of the day? Whoever gives me the most for my money. There is no team loyalty. I jump fences in the blink of an eye.

I guess I'm just tired of hearing that same old comment, "If you think AMD loves you blah blah blah". It's a bit of a silly comment.

Your comments suggest you feel threatened by AMDs success versus being happy that in the end it's us consumers that win.

My dream is that these 2 companies run at breakneck speeds to the death, always within arms reach of each other.

 

[Sausagemeat]

I think you expose your fan boy bias by throwing out these accusations. I am a fan boy of whichever company gives me the best bang-for-the-buck. My last 5+ CPU's were Intel chips. But the Ryzen AMD APU's were a game changer for me.

If your a gamer who wakes up in the middle of the night screaming, "OMG. My FPS dropped below 60. What a nightmare that was." then your going to be an Intel fan boy. Because they are the performance kings for gaming. But I still don't think they are the best value, definitely not for me personally, as a casual gamer.

I guess I should modify my comment above to say that Intel wasn't the best value in the most recent Pre-Ryzen days. Of course, now they are scrambling left and right and providing better value because their hand has been forced.

Of course, if AMD ever reclaims the performance crown then they should charge higher prices. Why not? I'm a fan boy of AMD "at the moment" because they're giving great value for the money and keeping Intel on their toes.

Who gets my money at the end of the day? Whoever gives me the most for my money. There is no team loyalty. I jump fences in the blink of an eye.

I guess I'm just tired of hearing that same old comment, "If you think AMD loves you blah blah blah". It's a bit of a silly comment.

Your comments suggest you feel threatened by AMDs success versus being happy that in the end it's us consumers that win.

My dream is that these 2 companies run at breakneck speeds to the death, always within arms reach of each other.

I would say that choosing Intel if you only care about gaming performance doesn’t really make you a fan boy. To me a fan boy is someone who chooses chips from a specific brand, even if they perform worse than another manufacturer for what you are using them for. I’m one of these users, for my home rig the most demanding thing I do outside of gaming is run a browser with a small handful of tabs open. For my needs, if I chose AMD then I feel that would make me more of a fanboy, even if that AMD chip offers better performance in other apps, I’m not using those apps. On the other hand if someone as using a machine to mostly render videos with, then buying Intel would make them a fanboy as AMD are clearly better for the money in this area. It’s all about what you will actually be doing with those chips. I agree with you though, I think AMD chips do offer better value for money for most applications. But we also have to consider that not everyone is looking for value for money, some users, typically hardware enthusiasts, want to pay more to have better or the best, even if it’s poor value. I don’t think those users are generally fanboys either.

 

[TheBigFatClown]

I would say that choosing Intel if you only care about gaming performance doesn’t really make you a fan boy. To me a fan boy is someone who chooses chips from a specific brand, even if they perform worse than another manufacturer for what you are using them for. I’m one of these users, for my home rig the most demanding thing I do outside of gaming is run a browser with a small handful of tabs open. For my needs, if I chose AMD then I feel that would make me more of a fanboy, even if that AMD chip offers better performance in other apps, I’m not using those apps. On the other hand if someone as using a machine to mostly render videos with, then buying Intel would make them a fanboy as AMD are clearly better for the money in this area. It’s all about what you will actually be doing with those chips. I agree with you though, I think AMD chips do offer better value for money for most applications. But we also have to consider that not everyone is looking for value for money, some users, typically hardware enthusiasts, want to pay more to have better or the best, even if it’s poor value. I don’t think those users are generally fanboys either.

I have no problem at all with those people who spend more money for the best performance. If that's what they want, that's fine. What I don't understand is the anger directed at consumers who do choose bang-for-buck over best performance.

I guess in the end, as a consumer, I'm a fan boy of the underdog-of-the-moment so that we all end up winners. If AMD surpasses Intel when they go to 7nm and AMD starts getting greedy, I might feel a certain obligation to even things out by my choices. But ultimately, it's the best-bang-for-buck that becomes my decision (all other things being mostly equal). Most of the time anyway. These two companies need to balance each other out.

No, I do not think AMD loves me. I don't think any of their employees will be attending my funeral.

 

[i3kingwizardop]

AMDs gamble to go all in for 7nm might be backfiring. Global foundries announcing that they are discontinuing 7nm forcing AMD to shift all orders to TSMC who now have huge pressure on them to meet AMDs demand and replace their largest foundry. Looking at the AMD share price and the fact that yet another AMD executive is leaving, Papermaster’s blog post looks to be more like damage control more than anything else.

So from what I can see, 2019 could be a very good year for AMD if TSMC can actually meet AMDs now enormous 7nm orders. However it if doesn’t, 2019 could be a very bad year indeed with no further 12nm or 14nm development in the company as far as I am aware.

Or TMSC is on point and is poised to own 2019 with AMD, who is also doing the PS5 which is going to own consoles for the next five years after that.

 

[Evernessince]

I would say that choosing Intel if you only care about gaming performance doesn’t really make you a fan boy. To me a fan boy is someone who chooses chips from a specific brand, even if they perform worse than another manufacturer for what you are using them for. I’m one of these users, for my home rig the most demanding thing I do outside of gaming is run a browser with a small handful of tabs open. For my needs, if I chose AMD then I feel that would make me more of a fanboy, even if that AMD chip offers better performance in other apps, I’m not using those apps. On the other hand if someone as using a machine to mostly render videos with, then buying Intel would make them a fanboy as AMD are clearly better for the money in this area. It’s all about what you will actually be doing with those chips. I agree with you though, I think AMD chips do offer better value for money for most applications. But we also have to consider that not everyone is looking for value for money, some users, typically hardware enthusiasts, want to pay more to have better or the best, even if it’s poor value. I don’t think those users are generally fanboys either.

Hardware enthusiasts are the biggest fanboys. They spend the most money on their rig and they feel the most entitled to defend that purchase. I don't know how you can make a statement like this, it's like you've never been to the AMD or Nvidia forums / reddit before.

 

[Gimp65]

I really don’t think it is that simple. As far as I am aware 7nm isn’t even ready yet, it’s just on course to be ready. And when it is I don’t think we will see 40% clock speed improvement. Clock speed clearly isn’t just down to the size of the process node as if it was then AMDs 12nm parts would be able to clock higher than Intels 14nm parts but the real story is that Intels 14nm parts can clock much faster than AMDs 12nm stuff and are more energy efficicient clock for clock too. My prediction is that AMDs next major GPU architecture will be a mid range competitor at best.

It will be interesting to see how things play out. Personally I can’t see the loss of global foundries from production of cutting edge silicon to be anything but a bad thing for its partners and the industry as a whole.

1. They have already showed off 7nm Vega, and it is set to launch by Q1 2019 (Rumors of Q4 happening too).
2. You seem to misunderstand 7nm in general. TSMC's own slides show you can get either 40% higher clocks OR 65% less power usage per transistor. That means AMD will likely pick something in the MIDDLE - like a 10% faster clock and 50% less power usage. However they can also fit 2.8x as many transistors in the same space, and thus a 250mm^2 Navi card would have more SP's than Vega 64! Clock that a little faster and you have a 1080 Ti/2080 competitor using 150w. Anything less and Navi is a failure.
3. I have no clue what you are talking about regarding your CPU statements. Ryzen is substantially more efficient than the chips Intel is currently making on their superior process (Intel's 14nm is ~30% better than GF's 14nmFF). The only thing Intel has is a raw performance crown in single threaded apps. That is literally it.

To much simplifiying and guess work. Tell me why you believe so much one the TSMC slides are facts. I have seen slides just like from TSMC and other foundries before, and more than often they are overrated by a large margin, especially the ones from TSMC. Im sure 7nm will be good, but believing the 40/65 thing, no way.

 

[bkkcanuck]

AMDs gamble to go all in for 7nm might be backfiring. Global foundries announcing that they are discontinuing 7nm forcing AMD to shift all orders to TSMC who now have huge pressure on them to meet AMDs demand and replace their largest foundry. Looking at the AMD share price and the fact that yet another AMD executive is leaving, Papermaster’s blog post looks to be more like damage control more than anything else.

So from what I can see, 2019 could be a very good year for AMD if TSMC can actually meet AMDs now enormous 7nm orders. However it if doesn’t, 2019 could be a very bad year indeed with no further 12nm or 14nm development in the company as far as I am aware.

Actually, AMD had their chips designed and taped up using TSMC already. They obviously knew that the other foundry could not deliver ... this just saves them the cost of having to pay penalties for using another fab.

 

[bkkcanuck]

I would say that choosing Intel if you only care about gaming performance doesn’t really make you a fan boy. To me a fan boy is someone who chooses chips from a specific brand, even if they perform worse than another manufacturer for what you are using them for. I’m one of these users, for my home rig the most demanding thing I do outside of gaming is run a browser with a small handful of tabs open. For my needs, if I chose AMD then I feel that would make me more of a fanboy, even if that AMD chip offers better performance in other apps, I’m not using those apps. On the other hand if someone as using a machine to mostly render videos with, then buying Intel would make them a fanboy as AMD are clearly better for the money in this area. It’s all about what you will actually be doing with those chips. I agree with you though, I think AMD chips do offer better value for money for most applications. But we also have to consider that not everyone is looking for value for money, some users, typically hardware enthusiasts, want to pay more to have better or the best, even if it’s poor value. I don’t think those users are generally fanboys either.

I have no problem at all with those people who spend more money for the best performance. If that's what they want, that's fine. What I don't understand is the anger directed at consumers who do choose bang-for-buck over best performance.

I guess in the end, as a consumer, I'm a fan boy of the underdog-of-the-moment so that we all end up winners. If AMD surpasses Intel when they go to 7nm and AMD starts getting greedy, I might feel a certain obligation to even things out by my choices. But ultimately, it's the best-bang-for-buck that becomes my decision (all other things being mostly equal). Most of the time anyway. These two companies need to balance each other out.

No, I do not think AMD loves me. I don't think any of their employees will be attending my funeral.

I think it funny at the fanboyism of what is after all just a chip. I am a fan of competition... I will cheer for the underdog because we really do need more competition -- especially in the GPU market.

 

[Sausagemeat]

I think it funny at the fanboyism of what is after all just a chip. I am a fan of competition... I will cheer for the underdog because we really do need more competition -- especially in the GPU market.

Cheer the underdog? What does that mean exactly? I like competition too, in fact we notice in these industries that when both companies are competing hard it’s the consumer that benefits, as soon as one maufacturer stops producing decent chips then the consumers suffer so we need to ensure both of all manufacturers can produce competing chips consistently. But I think it’s hugely important that competition benefits the consumer and not the manufacturer. I think it’s self defeating to buy or recommend a chip that performs worse for your needs from a specific manufacturer because they aren’t selling as much as the other manufacturer.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Amazing how fast the comment section becomes a fanboi flame war.

 

[CaptainTom]

Cheer the underdog? What does that mean exactly?

Who is the Underdog? Hmmm, well there is are three major players in this space: A 226B company, a 171B company, and a 25B company. The 25B is competing against BOTH of the other companies.

It is a MIRACLE that AMD scrapes by at all lol. Look I own 2 Intel CPU's, a Nvidia GPU, and an AMD GPU - so I am clearly no fanboy. But I do get why some people cheer for AMD, and I will never understand the fanboys like you that cheer for mega companies trying as hard as possible to stagnate this industry for their own gain.

I mean your statements about Intel dominating gaming performance are HILARIOUS! Are you a 240Hz 1080p gamer? If not, you have no reason to buy an 8700K over a 2600X. Techspot already showed the 2600X matches the 8700K most of the time if fast ram is used, and the 2600X is substantially cheaper (even with the super ram) and more efficient. Anyone buying Intel right now (on desktop) is either woefully misinformed, or a fanboy. Period.

 

[EndRessentiment]

And you think leather jacket doesn't have any info on 7nm? I'm betting the fact that 7nm isn't as good as you think, or the fact that GF is now out off the race the price will surely surprises you, is the reason behind ginormous RTX cards pricing. Especially when AMD needs TSMC for both CPU and GPU, expect your wonderful Navi to be >$500, maybe $800 more like it.

Also the fact that NVIDIA raised the GPU pricing in general just means AMD will take advantage of it, but not the way you want. AMD GPU will also rise in price. An RTX 2080 Ti competitor in 2019 will be $800 MSRP, welcome to the screwed up future.

Wait, do you really think RTX's high pricing is mostly due to TSMC? Did you really forget about NVIDIA's very fat 35% profit margin? I'm pretty damn sure NVIDIA is raking in the profits with selling Ray Tracing GPU's (RTX) with high prices. Obviously TSMC may have raised their prices, but nowhere near the premium that you pay for RTX.

I don't think AMD can get away with such a price hike, a raise similar to price raise NVIDIA introduced. I think for most customers AMD doesn't have the reputation of being capable of delivering such high premium products. We'll see though.

Let's just hope people won't reinforce NVIDIA's dominant position, as in the end it will hurt everyone buying consumer desktop GPUs in the wallet.

 

[Sausagemeat]

Who is the Underdog? Hmmm, well there is are three major players in this space: A 226B company, a 171B company, and a 25B company. The 25B is competing against BOTH of the other companies.

It is a MIRACLE that AMD scrapes by at all lol. Look I own 2 Intel CPU's, a Nvidia GPU, and an AMD GPU - so I am clearly no fanboy. But I do get why some people cheer for AMD, and I will never understand the fanboys like you that cheer for mega companies trying as hard as possible to stagnate this industry for their own gain.

I mean your statements about Intel dominating gaming performance are HILARIOUS! Are you a 240Hz 1080p gamer? If not, you have no reason to buy an 8700K over a 2600X. Techspot already showed the 2600X matches the 8700K most of the time if fast ram is used, and the 2600X is substantially cheaper (even with the super ram) and more efficient. Anyone buying Intel right now (on desktop) is either woefully misinformed, or a fanboy. Period.

My comments about Intel dominating gaming performance are based on independent tests which show Intel chips dominating gaming performance. Like in the reviews on this site, Intel chips are faster in almost every game. I mean it’s simply not true to claim a 2600X matches an 8700K in gaming, even at stock speeds. If you like, I can spam links from multiple review sites that back this claim up? You probably find the fact that Intel dominates gaming a hard pill to swallow but it’s the cold hard truth.

To quote this very site on the 2600 and 2700 review;

“In a lot of the gaming benchmarks we see that when the 2700X is overclocked to 4.2GHz, which I also feel is a best case scenario for AMD, second-gen Ryzen struggles to hang with even a stock 7700K.”

I would say that anyone who claims anyone shouldn’t buy a specific brand regardless of usage scenario is “misinformed” or are a “fanboy” are usually misinformed fanboys themselves.

 

[Danny101]

Xenophobia mentality is detrimental to technology advancement. The whole world is depending on each other. Other countries are heavily dependent on a myriad of US products and technologies (CPU, medical devices, automobile, etc.) I am not suggesting a naïve utopia. Everyone is sure to keep an eye out for self-protection, but our observation should be based on facts rather than sentiment alone.

Nonetheless, the US did threaten to ban exporting Qualcomm ARM chips to Chinese company ZTE a couple months ago, sending them into panic mode. So, who knows, maybe others are just as wary of us now.

It's never xenophobic to be wary of kings out of the east. Especially those who subscribe to communist ideals. If they win, you will be singing a different tune. This is by no means a nod to the corporatism coming from the west, which is just as threatening to freedom as communism is.

 

[BigBoomBoom]

Wait, do you really think RTX's high pricing is mostly due to TSMC? Did you really forget about NVIDIA's very fat 35% profit margin? I'm pretty damn sure NVIDIA is raking in the profits with selling Ray Tracing GPU's (RTX) with high prices. Obviously TSMC may have raised their prices, but nowhere near the premium that you pay for RTX.

I don't think AMD can get away with such a price hike, a raise similar to price raise NVIDIA introduced. I think for most customers AMD doesn't have the reputation of being capable of delivering such high premium products. We'll see though.

Let's just hope people won't reinforce NVIDIA's dominant position, as in the end it will hurt everyone buying consumer desktop GPUs in the wallet.

So you think AMD will do charity huh? NVIDIA enjoy MORE than 35% profit margin, there is absolutely NO reason for AMD not to partake that FAT profit margin themselves. NVIDIA already did the hard work of raising prices, AMD will follow and even Intel will follow in 2020 with their GPU. Just like phone markets, Apple made $1,000 phone and now everyone is upping their flagship so $1,000 is no longer weird. People who think AMD's RTX 2080 Ti equivalent selling for $300 is delusional. I'm 99% positive, in 2019, AMD's RTX 2080 Ti equivalent will be priced $800 MSRP. A whole $200 less than NVIDIA MSRP (which will not exist until several months after release). Wanna bet?

Remember what happened in 2017? AMD released a GTX 1080 competitor for a whooping $100 MSRP cheaper (1080 MSRP was $599 on release and $499 when 1080 Ti was released). That was 16 months later than the 1080. People tends to be blinded when it comes to their favourite brand. And no I'm not even about to comment on the fact that Vega 64 at MSRP was bloody hard to buy in 2017 and early 2018. Did you forget every mofo out there are buying up 7nm like Apple, Qualcomm and Huawei? Qualcomm could even launch their 7nm SoC because not enough 7nm and let Huawei stole their thunder with Kirin 980. Apple new iPhone being 7nm forcing NVIDIA to go with 12nm Turing. If anything this 7nm rush means we will see higher MSRP of everything.

 

[EndRessentiment]

So you think AMD will do charity huh? NVIDIA enjoy MORE than 35% profit margin, there is absolutely NO reason for AMD not to partake that FAT profit margin themselves. NVIDIA already did the hard work of raising prices, AMD will follow and even Intel will follow in 2020 with their GPU. Just like phone markets, Apple made $1,000 phone and now everyone is upping their flagship so $1,000 is no longer weird. People who think AMD's RTX 2080 Ti equivalent selling for $300 is delusional. I'm 99% positive, in 2019, AMD's RTX 2080 Ti equivalent will be priced $800 MSRP. A whole $200 less than NVIDIA MSRP (which will not exist until several months after release). Wanna bet?

Remember what happened in 2017? AMD released a GTX 1080 competitor for a whooping $100 MSRP cheaper (1080 MSRP was $599 on release and $499 when 1080 Ti was released). That was 16 months later than the 1080. People tends to be blinded when it comes to their favourite brand. And no I'm not even about to comment on the fact that Vega 64 at MSRP was bloody hard to buy in 2017 and early 2018. Did you forget every mofo out there are buying up 7nm like Apple, Qualcomm and Huawei? Qualcomm could even launch their 7nm SoC because not enough 7nm and let Huawei stole their thunder with Kirin 980. Apple new iPhone being 7nm forcing NVIDIA to go with 12nm Turing. If anything this 7nm rush means we will see higher MSRP of everything.

How is half of this even a response to what I was saying? Don't fantasize so much... I'm not pretending AMD's great. You're just making up on the spot that I think AMD is great. I don't. If you care about comparisons: NVIDIA treats customers in a really shitty way. One example would be artificially preventing SLI with the same chips (in "different" GPU's, I.e. rebrands). I could list more if you want, but not going to take the time for that now. AMD doesn't do that. They're no saints, it's just that they are not half as bad and obvious in their contempt for the customer.
It's intellectually dishonest to project an entire position I never took. I would almost say you owe me an apology, but it's not that bad. But it is terribly annoying.

I'm emphasizing the need for proper competition. There is no proper competition when one of two, basically the only two, GPU companies dwarfs the other. Competition is good for us customers.

I'm not saying TSMC's chips are cheap. Now that I check, they have fat profits as well (36% if I'm not mistaken). But that doesn't NVIDIA is off the hook.

 

[BigBoomBoom]

I'm referring to people who think that RTX 2080 Ti competitor can be had for $300-$400 in 2019. Simply put, zero incentive for AMD to do that. Unlike CPU, AMD has no trouble selling their GPU, they couldn't even make them as fast as people buy them up.

On your statement, you thought that AMD couldn't get away with a price hike? Well they already did. $699 LC Vega 64 MSRP, 16 months later to compete with GTX 1080, and I'm talking about MSRP not about inflated retail prices. People still buy them up. I said $1,000 phones becoming the norm, looks like $1,000 GPU is becoming the norm as well and AMD isn't going to let go of such chances. Everyone loves fat profit, and believe me if NVIDIA didn't release GTX 1080 Ti 5 months before Vega 64, AMD would have priced LC Vega 64 $799 or more. In fact, the only reason why AMD GPU has "good" prices is because of NVIDIA.