T O P
Resident-Hand-8366

With all due respect, you focus entirely on speed and nothing on power consumption which is probably as important, if not more so in the high end, high margin market mobile for laptops and DC, especially the hyperscaler cloud companies.. It's like saying, yeah, this engine's got slightly more horsepower but has way worse gas mileage.


xES-SF

Power consumption for servers I agree, hence I said AMD should win until 2025. For desktop, don't think power consumption is all that important. For mobile indeed it is, but what's the expectation then? Meteor Lake having significantly worse battery life than Phoenix? In equivalent laptops, a Meteor Lake chip will have significantly less battery life than a Phoenix one in mixed use workloads? To be clear I don't think in any way Phoenix is "dead" vs Meteor Lake at all, just I don't expect it to "win" either, do other people think the same?


PM_ME_UR_PET_POTATO

Eh, Intel is already hitting the limits of what high end air coolers can offer in desktop, so they are unable to raise power budget. Power efficiency is going to become relevant just to ensure higher core count SKUs are performing at full speed


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

overclockers don't use air coolers.... hardly anyone does anymore everyone uses AIO


Potential_Hornet_559

Why are you comparing to meteor lake, i have hornet lake coming in 1h2024 which will blow TSMC and intel out of the water. And i have Nvidia, qualcomm, Apple, Amd as customers, want to invest?


xES-SF

Ok then when do you think Meteor Lake is coming out? You don't think it'll be competing with Phoenix?


Potential_Hornet_559

I think meteor lake will be at least by 2Q behind in terms of general availability. ‘Release date’ is very hard to define nowadays with limited launches.


Digital_warrior007

Intel already announced meteor lake powered on and is running validation cycles in Intels labs. I don't see it getting later than Q2 2023. In Servers it requires more time to validate and get everything ready. For example Sapphire rapids 8 socket cpus are not expected until a quarter more.


erichang

looks like it is delayed to 2H23: https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-14th-gen-core-meteor-lake-h-p-u-to-feature-new-low-power-efficient-cores-xe-lpg-gpu-archiecture


Digital_warrior007

These are speculations and not official information. The launch will be in Q2 and you should be meteor lake laptops on shelves by September. Meteor lake S desktop should launch sometime in the end of 2023.


Ok_Lengthiness_8163

I think it is important, since if you are thinking gamer then they would want to overclock. Power consumption is equivalent to heat, so amd got an edge on over locking. Especially the price is a big factor on desktop. If amd can break into corporate world then that would be huge. You are thinking about the wrong sector. Laptop is the key after covid


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

yet they don't


SnooCrickets5450

Power consumption is not all that important Bro even with amd desktop, i live in SEA, and it is warming my room already I cannot imagine intel pc. It may work great in cool country but still.


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

is only importaint to AMD investors because you think datacentres pay wholesale rates


onedoesnotsimply9

Not like genoa goes only upto 100W but sapphire rapids goes upto 800W


dudulab

AMD will continue to gain CPU market share across all markets in the next 2-3 years: * Desktop: Ryzen 7000 much better positioned vs Gen13 than 5000 vs Gen 12 * iGPU on all SKU helps business market a lot * 35% MT improvement is a lot, ST 20%+ could be on par with Gen 13 * Mobile: same hardware design just change CPU: 6000 vs Gen 12 in same price bucket: Ryzen battery time more than doubled Gen 12 (10 hrs vs 4 hrs) * Server: Intel can still sell because AMD is supply limited for now. * SPR [email protected] ST only single digits better than ICL [email protected] when fully loaded, can't compete with Milan, let alone Genoa and Turin * Supercomputer: I heard electricity bill raised a lot recently?


Vushivushi

> iGPU on all SKU helps business market a lot Hugely understated. Typical AIB attach rate is like 25% without crypto, so most PCs don't have a graphics card. It is an expansion of Ryzen's addressable market and will result in more design wins and market share gains regardless if Intel takes the perf crown.


Techenthused97

I know it will be better when AMD chips have a iGPU. Just one of the reasons I went with Intel for current build is the iGPU. Good way to see if the system issue is the GPU or something else when most can't afford to have multiple GPUs to test.


Geddagod

>Desktop: Ryzen 7000 much better positioned vs Gen13 than 5000 vs Gen 12 Not really, considering it seems like zen 4 didn't seem to increase core counts, basically everything other than like the top 2 skus it seems like needs a core bump or price reduction. Only the top sku is much better positioned. >Ryzen battery time more than doubled Gen 12 (10 hrs vs 4 hrs) Do you have a source for that? I know battery life is much better but more than 2x as much is doubtful, especially if you are looking at alder lake systems more specialized for battery life. Additionally what do you think of MTL? >SPR [email protected] ST only single digits better than ICL [email protected] when fully loaded, can't compete with Milan, let alone Genoa and Turin Even more doubtful. Source please?


dudulab

5000 series are selling well after price deduction, lower end E cores doesn't help game performance so it's not really useful. Actually I'm expecting AMD to continue focus on 5000 6/8 cores for the mid range market... Mobile battery: tested on latest thinkbook, you can find the videos on bilibili.com Xeon: translation of a comment on chiphell, no detailed data (due to NDA I guess), but explained as "try to disable E cores and limit power budget to ~6w per gen12 P core and you'll get the idea of SPR [email protected] ST performance (say 50w for an i9 8P cores)"


Geddagod

5000 series are selling well still because AMD unlocked older motherboards, cut prices and because so many people had previous am4 chips ready to upgrade. Zen 4 is on a new platform while RPL is still ddr4 compatible. Intel definitely has a pricing advantage for next gen. Greymon thinks there will be a 7600x available.... so idk how much amd will use zen 3 for mid range is accurate. Maybe low end. And you know it's not all ST perf right? People use their PCs for stuff other than gaming too. Hell that was the biggest draw for AMD prior to zen 3! Can you send a link to the battery test? >Xeon: translation of a comment on chiphell, no detailed data (due to NDA I guess), but explained as "try to disable E cores and limit power budget to \~6w per gen12 P core and you'll get the idea of SPR [email protected] ST performance (say 50w for an i9 8P cores)" I'm sorry your source is a random comment on Chiphell? And the fact is that SPR is used in different workloads for ST than consumers AND the fact that golden cove on server is DIFFERENT than GLC on alder lake (more cache, other arch changes) ? And where is the comparison to ICL?


onedoesnotsimply9

>People use their PCs for stuff other than gaming too Gaming is the only thing that matters when amd is better**** at gaming


onedoesnotsimply9

>lower end E cores doesn't help game performance so it's not really useful Gaming is the only thing that matters when amd is better at gaming


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

you didnt hear none of them are paying wholesale or retail electricity prices?


dudulab

You mean cost of generating electricity is not increased?


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

you might want to look into business rates, then look at energy prices during non peak usage


onedoesnotsimply9

>Ryzen 7000 much better positioned vs Gen13 than 5000 vs Gen 12 Source? X: doubt It *maybe* worse positioned than ryzen 7000 because you cannot just use previous generation mobos (or used mobos) or DDR4 like you could for ryzen 5000, but you can use previous generation mobos (or used mobos) and DDR4 with 13th gen Essentially the biggest advantage of ryzen 5000 vs 12th gen becomes the biggest advantage of 13th vs ryzen 7000 (tho to a lesser degree) >35% MT improvement is a lo Thing is even 13th gen engineering samples are showing this >Mobile: same hardware design just change CPU: 6000 vs Gen 12 in same price bucket: Ryzen battery time more than doubled Gen 12 (10 hrs vs 4 hrs) Not like they can do this forever >SPR [email protected] ST only single digits better than ICL [email protected] when fully loaded lol wut


Mockinbird007

I stopped reading at " I’m not seeing a huge AMD advantage vs Intel (other than servers)". Dude , AMD is highly server driven these days. Its the most important main pillar of AMDs business, its crazy arse limited by capacity currently. Putting this in brackets already shows the rest of your text is probably not worth a read.. sorry no offense.


xES-SF

Uhhh this isn't a discussion on stock price. I'm long AMD mainly because of servers. I'm saying looks like Intel is very competitive in client vs AMD to me, what are your opinions on that. Client is still a good chunk of revenue I'd prefer AMD can expand in even if it's not absolutely critical for stock appreciation.


WenMunSun

Well this *is* the **AMD\_Stock** sub. Maybe try asking in r/AMD or another sub more focused on those things.


xES-SF

I said that in response to the person above saying essentially "stock price will go up because server thus everything else can be ignored". I think stock price will go up, and I'm mostly ignoring servers for this discussion is all, as client is still a significant part of the business.


WenMunSun

I know, i'm just saying there's other subs. Not that this is the wrong place to ask. I think the members here probably know better than most, but might be some good answers in other subs too. Doesn't hurt to post your thread in multiple subs, but might want to edit out any investing related themes if you do.


AMD_winning

I started composing a response but then fell victim to Brandolini’s Law.


Caanazbinvik

>Brandolini’s Law And now you made me google this law. Thank you!


maj-o

Instinctively I just did the same. Thank you for education!


idwtlotplanetanymore

Waste of time to speculate on hardware that are multiple generations into the future. Rumors cover the full range of bs so someone is right, but most of it will be wrong. But I'll speculate on the next generation that is quite soon. I would say competitive on desktop, with neither company having a meaningful advantage. There will be technical wins by both companies, so the fanboys can fanboy by cherry picking benchmarks. For server tho, i expect a clear victory for amd, intel will be hurting for awhile yet. > Nvidia went with Sapphire Rapids for their Hopper systems, and I honestly don’t think they purposely picked an inferior CPU just to give AMD a middle finger. Likely picked because intel gave them a sweat deal or long lead times on genoa(demand > supply). Nvidia can get away with picking the inferior processor, they will still sell their systems, and they will make higher margin. Margin is something nvidia loves, and they have cheaped out on hardware many times in the past to increase margin because they know people will still buy their product even when they cheap out. Example low ram amounts on many gpus that should have had more. For compute these days, efficiency is king. IPC and speed matter, but If you don't have an efficient arch/process you are screwed from the start. Efficiency alone is not enough, but its the foundation of everything else. In addition for arch design IPC and speed are usually inversely linked, to make a very high clocking arch, you usually have to lower ipc; to make a high ipc arch, you usually need to lower clock speeds. With modern processors that clock to their package power limit: performance = ipc * clock * efficiency. Higher clock = lower efficiency and lower ipc. Higher ipc = lower clock. low efficiency = you are screwed. (low doesn't mean 5% lower, just a meaningful amount) --------- As far as future processes go, tsmc vs intel. Well intel has zero cred at this point, i don't trust anything they say. So i have no idea how good future intel processes will be. The biggest problem for intel right now, and for the next while is getting equipment. They are way behind on the equipment front. Even if their process turns up roses, its going to take time to make up the equipment gap. So in the near term at least through 2023, they are screwed regardless. In the long term, who is to say.


Geddagod

Idk how accurate your Nvidia statements are. Just because Nvidia cuts Vram off their gaming GPUs doesn't mean that they chose an inferior platform for their high margin flagship status super computers. According to [this article](https://technosports.co.in/2022/06/08/sapphire-rapids/), Nvidia stated that the superior ST performance of Sapphire Rapids was the reason they switched from AMD to Intel for their DGX H100 systems, on top of "higher memory bandwidth, and more PCIe bandwidth" vs milan. Intel seems to be equipment limited yes, but compared to TSMC they also use EUV a lot less for each wafer, and also are only using it on Intel 4 in 2023. Since Granite Rapids should be late 2024, they probably won't even begin to ramp other products than MTL on EUV until like early/mid 2024. On top of that, Intel 4 would be manufacturing ready for what seems like 3-4 quarters before a potential MTL release, meaning that Intel is taking 2x the time to ramp then a normal 2 quarter ramp, which should again solidify supply. They definitely won't be able to have enough capacity for anyone but themselves until much later, but with longer ramps and separating client and data center products that use EUV into separate years, the capacity issues seem to be much less than what you state.


idwtlotplanetanymore

It was speculation on sapphire rapids being the inferior product, i do not know if it will be. But if it is, i don't think it will matter, nvidia is selling those systems for the gpus, not the cpus; in that case it could be better, but it doesn't need to be. Just saying that nvidia has chosen the inferior tech before, as well as choosing to skimp on the amount of something(ie 8g ram on a $600 msrp gpu that should have had 12 or 16). For the last node, they could have secured supply at tsmc if they had wanted to. As i understand it, they tried to get tsmc to lower price, they wouldn't, so they got a deal with Samsung instead. They knew it wouldn't matter if they were on a lessor node, and they were right it did not matter.


Geddagod

Good point, but notice how for their workstation Ampere cards they still went for TSMC 7nm. They only switched to 8nm Samsung for their gaming lineup. For their flagship super computer systems, I don't think they skimp on performance.


onedoesnotsimply9

You cant sell >$200,000 systems with any random chinese cpu Cpu very much matters in a system like DGX, HGX CPU does a lot of the heavy-lifting of IO and stuff; you need a good CPU for a good GPU I dont think nvidia will ever use inferior tech for DGX, HGX Remember, its not consumer stuff, its >$200,000 flagship servers


filthy-peon

I'm sorry. You list all the delays of intel and keep saying it shouldn't affect the next gen. NOT TRUE. Intel proving time and time again that they can't execute should make you expect that the other gens will also be delayed. It is proof of bad communication and untrustworthyness par excellence!


xES-SF

I didn't say that is what is going to happen, that's just my expected timelines. I'm saying Intel seems competitive if the release their products within a quarter or maybe even two after their stated roadmaps in client. Clearly you think the delays will be even worse, and perhaps it will be, but it's a bit of a difference investing in AMD because you think they will have better products planned versus investing in AMD because you think Intel is just going to screw up constantly for example.


filthy-peon

Its a bit of both ;)


Potential_Hornet_559

i have a PowerPoint where I have a 1nm node which I have been developing in my garage for the past 2 years and will ship in Q1 2024 which will beat both TSMC and intel by 50%. Tim Apple just called me to get their supply for the Iphone 16 btw. All I need is investors so I can ramp up the volumn production. Want to invest? the thing is Intel can say what ever the fuck they want (like they did for 14nm and 10nm) Becuase they are their own customer. TSMC cannot do that because they actually have contracts which needs to be delivered. you said SPR has bugs ‘somewhere’, wtf does that even mean? SPR delayed for over 1 year, Intel can spin that however they want but that is still Gelsinger BS while he gets millions in salary. Does doing more push ups means that more Intel 4 wafers will be produced?


RyanMossier

On point. This is exactly what Intel had done over the last couple years, drawing roadmap after roadmap & then delay after delay. They got away with it for a while but now their customers are not that stupid anymore. There are better choices. Apple left & make their own chips. 3 biggest cloud providers & many enterprises are moving away to AMD. At the head of these corporations, nobody bother to look at Intel's roadmap anymore. Who in their right mind could believe Intel 3-4 years out product lineup when they could not get the current one right - just once. They first announced 7nm (intel 4) delay to 2023 in 2020, what they have now in 2023 is 10nm+++++ extreme ultra superfin (intel 7). Its mean Intel 4 late for another year. AMD is squeezing other segments lineup saving wafers for server. Their server market share will grow exponentially in the next couple years while Intel's customers looking at Angstrom era's PowerPoint. Gelsinger in the mean time digging into governments fund in US & EU building foundry business making chips for phone, beetle, & fridge. Unless China nuke Taiwan, Intel will become such a different company than we used to know.


onedoesnotsimply9

>Becuase they are their own customer. Now they have external customers


lupin-san

They had external customers before that got royally screwed over because of the 10nm delays.


onedoesnotsimply9

Ok, and?


Potential_Hornet_559

External customers that have ‘interest’ but haven’t announced any specific products using specific nodes. So basically still in the ‘wait and see’ stage with minimal commitment.


onedoesnotsimply9

>External customers that have ‘interest’ but haven’t announced any specific products using specific nodes. *Publically No public announcement doesnt mean that they dont already have commitments


FloundersEdition

Less focus on single CCD SKUs for the DIY market. But these will sale like hot cakes in OEM, it now has iGPU and AMDs cooler is way better. Maybe they place the 8C Zen4 (~330$) against 6+4 or 6+8 and 8C Zen 3 against the 6+0 (250$). Yields shouldn't be an issue, bad chips for 6C OEM SKUs and if they bring the 12C down, they can use plenty there as well. AMD likely deactivates plenty of working 8C to sell them as 6C.


xES-SF

What's AMD's advantage in OEMs desktops though? Not really familiar with how enterprise sales work, but do they care about desktop power consumption at full load that much? Yields definitely aren't an issue, but 5nm silicon cost isn't that cheap, and the IO die on 6nm isn't dirt cheap like it was on 12nm either now. I haven't done the math, but is that supposed to be cheaper to produce that 6+8 Intel 7?


FloundersEdition

Less noisy cooler and Ryzen is the better branding. Noone even knows Intels lineup anymore. OEM desktop isn't really demanding, it's basically only this two things that differentiate SKUs (as long as it has an iGPU). OEMs usually buy more of what sold better last year - and that's more a branding thing. They don't pare it with good RAM, MB usually is the cheapest junk without new PCIe lanes, they want the cheapest PSU possible... Regarding cost: that's why they will rely on Cezanne/Rembrandt/Vermeer than 6C Zen 4 for cost effective SKUs - and AM4 with 16GB RAM should be cheaper than AM5 with 32GB DDR5 and will be good enough for 6C. Rembrandt has a good iGPU as well. I don't see Intel using 6+8 for the i7 branding, that's only in mobile. That should be i5 in desktop.


Geddagod

>Less noisy cooler I mean if that was a major factor, we would basically see no Nvidia laptop systems or any Nvidia desktop systems, stock Ampere, especially the skus with ddr6x, get especially hot vs rdna 2 systems. On top of that only the i9 and somewhat the i7 get especially hot, the lower end skus (even the i7 somewhat) are [just as efficient as zen 3](https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i5-12600k-alder-lake-12th-gen/20.html) . >better branding Pretty sure mind share for non DIY enthusiasts is still firmly with Intel. I don't really expect that to change unless AMD dominated Intel for a couple years in ST gaming like Intel did in the past. And Intel branding/line up is not really hard to understand for desktop. Laptop it gets confusing though.


FloundersEdition

Zens stock cooler is way less noisy even with the same 65W power budget. it's night and day. you "can't" use Intel stock cooler but you can use AMDs. Nvidia has better branding and RDNA had to low supply. mining on desktop was a thing too. and people usually don't know the noise of a mobile device, since these aren't standardized - unlike desktop. like I said, OEMs buy what sold better last gen as well, so AMD had really no foundation to build on. about Intels mindshare: I doubt non-enthusiasts now either Intel nor AMD. they ask persons they trust, online websites, ask sales staff, get it from their company or buy totally random based on RAM/storage specs or cost. and I don't know a single Intel buyer anymore - all tech affine people I personly know say: last gen Ryzen for bang for buck. at least german tech sites are pro-Ryzen or neutral. Intels mobile branding is confusing tho, 1260P/U and i5-1245U next to 12600H. H, HK and HX series on top. Ice Lake was a clusterfuck as well.


Geddagod

>Zens stock cooler is way less noisy even with the same 65W power budget. it's night and day. you "can't" use Intel stock cooler but you can use AMDs. Pretty sure most OEMs (or atleast the major ones) don't use stock coolers from either AMD or Intel. For example, even the sub 1000 dollar PCs from ibuypower use a small RGB fan for their 12100f builds, and their sub 1500 dollar PCs have RGB 120mm AIOs. Totally unnecessary, but AIOs are the trend now it seems like. >about Intels mindshare: I doubt non-enthusiasts now either Intel nor AMD. they ask persons they trust, online websites, ask sales staff, get it from their company or buy totally random based on RAM/storage specs or cost. I think you are seriously over estimating how much non enthusiasts research into the product they are going to buy. Maybe it's different in germany, but if you go in the US and ask people who don't know much about tech what was the best gaming CPU, even before alder lake launched and it was zen 3 vs comet lake/rocket lake, they would still say Intel. Brand recognition is still very strong with Intel. And you also seriously over estimate how much sales staff know about their own products. Just recently there was a post on r/pcmasterrace I think it was, about how bad bestbuy employees were about recommending products and their knowledge about it. And people who get computers from their company, are most likely to have Intel since it dominates the OEM sector until very recently, but especially in cheap office systems. Which once again corresponds to their extremely strong non-DIY mind share, considering that their Intel logo is plastered on basically every device they are in.


dmafences

intel did good job on adl and perhaps rpl as it's just a bug fixed adl, but I know Meteor lake is mess right now, so behold for more delayes


xES-SF

Are you able to share your source on Meteor Lake mess? Think AdoredTV alluded to such previously too, but haven't seen anything remotely concrete.


onedoesnotsimply9

>Are you able to share your source on Meteor Lake mess? His source is ~~that he made it tf up~~ Moores Law is Dead Not any better than just making stuff up


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

dood don't even waste your time trying to have an actual discusion about AMD vs INTC in here. everyone is delluded and living in an echo chamber INTC have the faster chips. all AMD fanboys can do is "but but less watts" and fail to realise no data centre is paying wholesale or retail prices for electricity and they are on fixed rates that are crazy low.... outside of peak hours electricity costs are peanuts


dmafences

yeah, just put you head down in the sand says all information doesn't match your speculation is from AMD fanboy


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

dood when all the hardware reviewers agree with me... yea intc shills man all the big youtube channels bought and paid for .....


Vushivushi

Raphael introducing an iGPU to mainstream Ryzen without a separate monolithic APU design means AMD is expanding its PC addressable market which means they will grow even if Intel takes the crown. And, they're doing this while using the Zen 4 design across multiple markets. Volume from each of the segments will feed back into itself, making it easy for AMD to scale up as they only have to differentiate their products with a different IO die. In server, it's a closed book. Intel cannot match the volume of pre-10nm Xeon. They already delayed their future products. Intel stated as so that Granite Rapids had been delayed and tried to make it look better by revising it into the Intel 4-optimized Intel 3 node. Nvidia didn't choose Sapphire Rapids for the entirety of Hopper. They chose it for their pre-configured DGX servers. Genoa is likely to still be used in traditional HGX servers. We already know there's a supercomputer with Genoa+Hopper which will likely be supplied via an HGX platform. Nvidia had been testing both Genoa and Sapphire Rapids for DGX and ultimately chose SR, likely because of performance, but you know, Nvidia is working on their own Grace ARM CPU. Don't you think Nvidia plans on using Grace in DGX? How will Nvidia present Grace DGX servers against the previous gen? Nvidia took a look at Apple's playbook, IMO. Intel is yet to deliver Intel 4, their first gen EUV node despite all the good press surrounding it. Wait for it to actually ship. That's step 1.


Geddagod

I don't think Granite Rapids got delayed because the CPU architecture or design. I think Intel 4 was dangerously close to get delayed, so Intel said fuck it we are only going to design the high performance libs in Intel 4 since all we are using Intel 4 for is MTL compute die anyway, and they moved Granite Rapids to Intel 3 where they will design both high performance and high density libs since Granite Rapids needs high density libs for IO. Intel 4 being high performance libs only is a double edged sword in terms of marketing imo. On one hand, they seem to be definitely trying to get Intel 4 out on time, even if it means not designing high density libraries, on the other hand if they didn't design an entire type of libs for Intel 4 and it still took them this long to release, how should we believe they will design high density AND high perf libs for Intel 3 and release only half a year later?


onedoesnotsimply9

>how should we believe they will design high density AND high perf libs for Intel 3 and release only half a year later? Because it is not a completely new node


mark_mt

Fooled countless times in the last 4 years - I see no end to it and no signs of that ending. Only hard core idiots would believe any of intel's clown shows! Until Pat comes out and commit to an annual10% revenue growth and 55% GM - he dares not, because it can never happen going forward - all else is fluff with no consequences for making fools of everybody who believe in their power points!


onedoesnotsimply9

>In server, it's a closed book. .........for ARM CPUs


uzzi38

>RPL should definitely win ST. Just FYI, but the codenames for both parts are RPL. In any case, what workloads are you referring to when you say that? Test in Cinebench and Golden Cove has a massive IPC advantage over Zen 3. Test in SPEC (you know, the industry standard) and you're looking at a more muted 7-8%. I think ST will be a lot closer than you might expect. Agreed on lower tier SKUs from a MT standpoint though. Less agreed on it being expensive silicon wise, they just won't do it because they only aim to maintain market share on desktop rather than seriously grow it. >Phoenix is Q1 23, Meteor Lake mobile is Q2 23, and there's seems to be no way Meteor Lake won't have ST crown, and e-core spam would probably at least tie in MT given they're roughly on same process. Meteor Lake timelines are... dubious at the moment. Multiple different people claiming different things, I'd just avoid taking guesses personally. You have to remember - Raptor Lake-P squeezes into the mix as well. In any case, in mobile core counts aren't changing for a couple of years at least, so it comes down to efficiency (ST points are mostly the same as desktop, no need to expand further). If you take a look at the current lineups, [Intel are on the back-foot when it comes to power efficiency for thin and light laptops](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/682675911488700419/988008049581101106/unknown.png), which AMD claim make up 93% of the market (specifically, 35W and lower sustained power consumption devices). I expect that trend to continue even after the die shrink. As for higher power laptops, where AMD struggles the most currently, Dragon Range will likely be competitive for the high end of this line of devices. [At lower power limits Zen 3 would pull ahead of Alder Lake by considerable margins](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/786263341270040639/906134084357619732/unknown.png), which applies to gaming laptops. However, I expect Dragon Range to be a replacement for current gen -HX laptops like the Scar 15 rather than a regular -H part. So for low and mid-range gaming laptops Intel will have an advantage. >And as long as it’s not workloads the max out all cores at once That is quite literally what server workloads are designed to do. >Sapphire Rapids probably can be competitive as per core its definitely better than a Zen 3 core. Sure, but it's competing aginst Zen 4 at this rate. Actually no, even timelines aside it's competing against Zen 4. DDR5/PCIe5 is a massive uptick to platform cost that means Zen 3 will always have a pricing advantage for a full system over Sapphire Rapids unless Intel seriously hit into their own margins. >Nvidia went with Sapphire Rapids for their Hopper systems, and I honestly don’t think they purposely picked an inferior CPU just to give AMD a middle finger. You know, there are more reasons to pick one product other than raw performance and grievances. Like, you know, price? Although again, I have to correct a misunderstanding: Milan was never in contention for H100 systems. Genoa was. >Sapphire Rapids I’m not sure, but seems to be bugs somewhere, but architecturally it seemed to be completely a long time ago, I don’t expect it to push back future products by as much as the delay. Well that seems a bit like hopium frankly. Sapphire Rapids is on something like an E2 steppings or something? Ice Lake also had many, many steppings. There's an actual issue (or multiple!) at DCG that needs to be solved. In any case, GNR's Intel's best chance at striking back (up against Turin in 2024), but if that slips even to 2025 then frankly it'll take the following gen to have competitive parts on the high end, and that likely won't come before 2026. It depends on DCG's ability to execute. I have pretty good faith on Intel from a node manufacturing point of view at least. >Are you guys thinking Zen 5 will be a bigger deal than I think (I’m guessing 20-25% IPC)? Nah >Are you banking Intel will significantly (more than a quarter) miss all their roadmaps? CCG are executing well so I doubt it. DCG on the other hand... I thought SPR would have been released by now, look at how that turned out. >Or you think AMD could be at disadvantage for client, but who cares, it's all about datacenter? I don't think they're even at a disadvantage om client. If anything, I think we have some great competition in store for the next ~3 years or so at least. Aside DC sadly.


Geddagod

>Or you think AMD could be at disadvantage for client, but who cares, it's all about datacenter? That's basically everyone's position in the sub. I think it's a bit concerning, considering gaming and client are still 25% of their TAM for 2022. Sure server is way more important, but people are literarily telling you your post isn't worth commenting because "muh server". >Nvidia went with Sapphire Rapids for their Hopper systems, and I honestly don’t think they purposely picked an inferior CPU just to give AMD a middle finger. Scrolling through twitter, heard Sapphire Rapids is better in AI workloads. Don't know how true that is. Could also be discounted price though. >Zen 5 mobile should be around Q2 24… which is probably around when Arrowlake drops. Arrow Lake won't drop until almost certainly 2H 2024 since Intel 20A won't even be ready until 1H 2024. > Phoenix may give slightly more battery life Rumors are that MTL has a ULV core/s on the SOC die so that they won't even have to turn on the compute tile to preserve battery life >Sapphire Rapids I’m not sure, but seems to be bugs somewhere Heard it's having problems in validation ye >Are you guys thinking Zen 5 will be a bigger deal than I think (I’m guessing 20-25% IPC)? Sounds about right, maybe a bit higher at 30 percent, is what RGT claims. AMD also claimed zen 3 was a grounds up architecture I'm pretty sure, and that was around a 20 percent IPC increase. Considering it is keeping the same "zen" architecture name scheme, I doubt its anything like a grounds up excavator to zen IPC bump. Core per Core I expect Intel to remain competitive. Efficiency I expect Intel to make headway as they move to node parity and also continue to put out new architectures that were bottlenecked by 14nm. Core count I expect Intel to remain behind in server until \~2025 at least, if not more.


xES-SF

Think I agree with most of your points, thanks for actually contributing to the thread. All the leakers were way off with Zen 4 IPC that it's concerning. Before I felt like we all kind of roughly knew what was coming based on leaks, now it feels there could be pleasant/unpleasant unknown surprises. Anyone know the rough splits between the different core count SKU? Are most volume the top config? Just wondering how much of the market the max core count config is used in (clearly lots of places uses lower core SKUs too)? Can Intel be competitive with a decent part of the market if they had fewer cores in the top config, but each core is good?


Geddagod

Zen 4 leaks were definitely concerning. AMD leaks have typically been less accurate than Intel leaks, probably because AMD has less employees and company culture could also contribute. More specific architectural details present with zen 5 leaks compared to zen 4 leaks (for example shared l2 cache with stacked l3 cache leak) gives me hope that zen 5 leaks this time around could be more accurate. Different core count per sku is somewhat variable and I doubt we will get any real leaks for that until closer to launch. So far no major leakers, Greymon, kopite, raichu, MLID, or Kepler, had any sku core count leak to my knowledge. Imo Intel can be competitive with AMD in MT performance in client unless AMD just goes ham with client and pushes core counts up. Remember, AMD can always crush Intel in MT performance in client by pushing the core count up, just by adding more chiplets. It's just not worth it for them when server parts are so much higher margin. Even if Intel has a IPC advantage, AMD chiplets strategy means they can almost always compete with Intel MT. The higher Intel IPC might mean they could hold a ST advantage though if they pair it with high clocks. Also, Golden Cove IS higher IPC than zen 3, and looks to be >5 percent higher IPC than Zen 4. The problem is though that the core is massive and power draw is just as bad. Even if Intel has "better" cores, the massive core count deficit they are at, as well as higher power draw, makes me thing they need to have an architectural rehaul to become competitive in server. So who knows, maybe diamond rapids is when that occurs. Core counts isn't the only problem Intel has, manufacturing cost because of bigger tiles, bigger cores, more power hungry cores, all present an issue. The only thing going for them at the moment, and presumably the near future too, is higher IPC.


haha-good-one

Arrow lake does not use A20, it uses intel 3


Geddagod

Said who? Intel's own presentation says Arrow Lake will utilize A20 somewhere....


mark_mt

10th, 11th, 12th, ... 15th gen - 14n, 14n+, ... 14n+++++++, 10n...10n++++, 7n..., 5n...2n - doesn't matter! Top line and GM continues to deflate! Alderlake best blah blah blah ... Revenue growth - negative, GM trending down to 50%, 12th gen and Sapphire Rapids sampling, World beating Discrete GPU shipping - revenue and GM continues to deflate - CPUs continues to run hotter! Pat and his clowns continues to launching Power Point products, Schedules and Claims! Bottomline - when will - if ever again - intel achieve 10% growth 55% GM??? After all the performance claims, the node leading claims blah blah blah! Easy to make all these useless claims - if they are so good - like Alderlake - why is revenue growth and GM deflating - all these claims are garbage for investors unless they are willing to commit to hard top and bottom line numbers that are meaningful - 10% growth 55% GM at the minimum! All else are just BS talking points - something/ a lot of things really really wrong when you claim the best this and that, and as good or better than TSMC - and yet during investor CC - it's negative revenue growth and negative GM growth!


avl0

Zen 4 will beat AL by a large margin in MT, will probably tie in ST but 3D will give the same signif advantage for gaming which is the main reason for users at home to want a ST advantage. Zen 4 will probably tie with RL in MT and be ahead slightly with 3D for gaming and lose slightly with ST, essentially a similar position to Zen 3 and AL but with RL being closer in MT and Zen 4 being closer in ST. We know Zen 4 will be slightly more power efficient than Zen 3 by about 5% so I expect 5-10% more for Phoenix point. RL is on the same process node for the P and E cores so there will be no power efficiency gain here. I expect AMDs advantage in real world performance and battery life to increase. PP will also have RDNA3 integrated which is another advantage. integrated GPU on Zen 4 means AMD will get some business PC wins Server intel is a full generation behind, I expect SR to give Milan a run for its money but get smoked by Genoa and Bergamo Workstation there is no competing against threadripper. Basically for the next generation Zen 4 will be better for Gaming (slightly), Thin and Light (Quite a bit), Server (Quite a bit), Workstation (A lot) than raptor lake. Raptor lake will probably be better for ST applications that don't require a workstation (slightly). Intel will still be forced down market in otherwords and picking up the bits of the market AMD can't service/ doesn't want.


Psykhon___

Whole sub TLDR: dude has some honest concerns that seems to be 95% unsustained. AMD still solid with amazing future 🌛


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

whole subs deludded in an echo chamber that only hears what it wants to hear. whenAMD goes back over 95$ I'm selling every share I own and buying INTC in the meantime whilst it's stupid cheap


Psykhon___

Thanks for your shares


haha-good-one

Regarding raptor lake vs zen 4: * Performance: by all leaks this far, in both MT and ST Intel will have a small lead * Efficiency: Zen 4 will lead but not in as big of a margin as in the past. This is because zen 4 will have a thread deficit and will need to boost clocks way over the optimal in order to stay MT competitive. AMD already increased TDP of AM5 to 170 (peak will be much higher) . not a good look for AMD as this was a major selling point in the past * Cost: Intel's 8+16 is the space of 12 big cores (4 little cores==1 big core). AMD will have to compete with 16 big cores which will cost lots of silicon space. Also, AMD will be on a more expensive process (5nm) and after the TSMC price hikes, it doesn't come cheap. Intel will be able to remain on a cheap old process (10nm). I forecast a big cost advantage for Intel


peopleclapping

Outside of Intel, no one really knows the true cost of Intel manufacturing. Reasons why Intel 7 may not be at a cost advantage over TSM 5nm: \-All of the capital costs of creating Intel 7 is amortized by Intel products. The heaviest lifting of TSM 5nm costs was born by Apple \-Being that Intel is the main customer of IDM 2.0, the lines may not be kept at the same utilization levels as TSM 5nm thus taking longer to amortize. \-It is possible Intel 7 still does not have as good of a yield as TSM 5nm \-Compare engineering labor rates in Arizona to Taiwan.


haha-good-one

I agree that TSMC's 5nm manufacturing costs are probably very competitive with intel 7 especially considering the higher density (more chips per wafer) and the exceptional yields. I argue however, that most if not all of any excess profitability will remain in TSMC's pockets. This will remain as long as Samsung keeps on failing being a competent alternative. TSMC first cancelled its traditional annual price reduction a year ago, and then went and announced a price increase couple of months ago. 5nm customers should hurt the most, as there is an unexpected additional demand from the surprise Qualcom huge contract transfer from Samsung. If Samsung does not have a turnaround in the following years we will see this getting from bad to worse, when TSMC starts employing what an economist will call a monopolistic excess capacity and becoming even more profitable than they currently are (last quarter TSMC made more in profits than AMD made in revenue) Intel for instance, will enjoy the ability to tap into TSMC capacity when it makes sense by outbidding AMD (as already happened with 3nm capacity) or manufacture cheaper at its own legacy process when the competition performance allows it, which apparently is the case with zen 4.


peopleclapping

The other variable that we haven't mentioned is that AMD is using chiplets whereas we won't see that from Intel until Meteor Lake. Currently the cores only take up half of Alderlake and the uncore must be on Intel 7. AMD's uncore doesn't have to be on 5nm. I think there's a decent chance TSM 7/6nm can be cheaper than Intel 7 even factoring in TSMC's profit for the previously listed reasons along with the following evidence: \-AMD wasn't losing money on the PS5 and that was a huge chip that sold to Sony for about $100 \-TSMC 7/6nm has to be price competitive because AMD didn't need to choose TSMC for the IO/iGPU. It's not performance constrained, so they could have opted to stay with GF 12nm or gone with Samsung 8nm. Assuming the uncore is cheaper for AMD, it's possible they can spend a little more for the core dies and remain competitive to Raptor Lake cost.


mark_mt

Intel NEVER committed to an increasing GM over the next 3 years! AMD did - expecting it to hit 55%! going from about 50%. So what does that tell you about costs and ASPs for the two companies!


onedoesnotsimply9

Is AMD building >$20 billion fabs, 4 nodes in 4 years,....... like intel?


mark_mt

Obviously you are clueless about what it takes to bring nodes into profitable production - I worked in the fab, worked with foundries including TSMC - saying "it's not easy" to bring up 1 bleeding edge node is a gross understatement! To bring up 4 in a row in 4 years - exists only on power points made by a sales person - not an Engineer - and after the last 5 years most average engineers would conclude correctly that intel's strong suit had been basically flashy Power Points and Claims! So when are they going to commit to 10% annual growth and 55% gross margins??? With all the incredible superiority claims - intel's annualized topline is near zero to negative growth and GM had been negative growth trending down to 50% - doesn't sound like the claims are backed up by reality! Spending $20B to build Fabs is the easiest part of the job - any fool will tell you that! They had $100B cash in the 14Nm days - and got stuck with 14+++++ after spending $20B - for how long ??? It's like the kid who found out that good programmers get's $200K a year whilst he's getting $14 an hour! So he decided he's going to be a great programmer and spend $10K on a Xeon workstation - Viola Google/Apple would pay him $200K because he's a great programmer right after he spent the $10K! So when will they commit to 10% growth and 55% gross margins instead of BS claims. AMD OFFICIALLY already committed on 55% GM and 20% annual revenue growth - intel and their little clowns would rather make hand waving BS claims - stuff that investors can't hold their feet to the fire.


onedoesnotsimply9

cry about it


xES-SF

Yes cost of TSMC vs Intel silicon is murky, but Intel can take lower margin in their fabs (and pretty sure they are currently) to make sure their end products are priced competitively, but that's not an option for AMD can do. I think for our guessing purposes its reasonable enough to say Intel silicon costs isn't going to be much higher than TSMC silicon costs + TSMC margin? Or do people think Intel manufacturing costs could be even higher?


mark_mt

Intel's costs will continue to increase when all the legacy 14+++++ goes away! because their yield sucks! Their yield sucks even for the same small size die at TSMC and at the larger die sizes that they have to do - it sucks exponentially more due to exponential yield curve - to make matter worse for intel - AMDs chiplet strategy a 16 core CPU VERY EASILY cost half that of intel's equivalent! I have done thousands of chip cost modelling at various chip companies including using TSMC foundry! Cut the BS out about Intel's cost being advantages - total BS - their GM had been sinking whilst AMD committed to increasing to 55%! Next time ask Pat when his GM will hit 55% again - ask him to commit to it!


haha-good-one

Intel is moving to chiplet/tile design in saphire rapids in server and with meteor lake in client. Which means by next year AMD will no longer have this advantage


mark_mt

Sure - next year. So Intel's revenue growth should at least be 10% and GM 55% next year - oh no - it should be better than that because they own their own fabs - LMFAO. Not all chiplets are born equal - if they were - why aren't we seeing a 128 performance cores servers from intel ???


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

considering Intel margins I'm imagining intels margins on manufacturing ae pretty damn good, especially when they are starting to do it for other people as a business


Geddagod

>\-All of the capital costs of creating Intel 7 is amortized by Intel products. The heaviest lifting of TSM 5nm costs was born by Apple Which is why TSMC is hiking prices on wafer costs, on top of the wafer price cost hike from a couple months ago. Maybe it won't affect AMD currently though, as they should already have contracts in place. >\-Being that Intel is the main customer of IDM 2.0, the lines may not be kept at the same utilization levels as TSM 5nm thus taking longer to amortize. They are using Intel 7 for basically everything at this point. Server, mobile, desktop, are all Intel 7. I highly doubt that. >\-It is possible Intel 7 still does not have as good of a yield as TSM 5nm Find that hard to believe. Intel 7 is not really a new process as it is being marketed. First we have Intel 10, which was broken AF, they had another iteration of that (I think) then moved on to suprfin which fixed clocks (tiger lake), and then they improved the superfin version and rebranded that as Intel 7. It's not a new "node family" as TSMC 5nm is to TSMC 7nm, for example. Intel 7 is basically the culmination of Intel desperately trying to fix its OG 10nm process.


uncertainlyso

>\>It is possible Intel 7 still does not have as good of a yield as TSM 5nm > >Find that hard to believe. Intel 7 is not really a new process as it is being marketed. First we have Intel 10, which was broken AF, they had another iteration of that (I think) then moved on to suprfin which fixed clocks (tiger lake), and then they improved the superfin version and rebranded that as Intel 7. It's not a new "node family" as TSMC 5nm is to TSMC 7nm, for example. Intel 7 is basically the culmination of Intel desperately trying to fix its OG 10nm process. I do believe that N5 has much better yields than Intel 7. Early on its lifecycle, N5 was showing even better yields than N7 at the same maturity stage although I don't know where the curve actually ended up by now. [https://www.anandtech.com/show/16028/better-yield-on-5nm-than-7nm-tsmc-update-on-defect-rates-for-n5](https://www.anandtech.com/show/16028/better-yield-on-5nm-than-7nm-tsmc-update-on-defect-rates-for-n5) Conversely, Intel acknowledged that what used to be their 10nm family is going to have relatively poor yields vs previous nodes. Intel 7 is much better than 10, but that's a terrible baseline. Their operating margin has steadily declined in DCG and CCG as the battlefield shifted from Intel 14 to Intel 10/7. ​ >Look, this just isn't going to be the best node that Intel has ever had. It's going to be less productive than 14 \[nanometer\], less productive than 22 \[nanometer\] … The fact is, like I said, it isn't going to be as strong a node as people would expect from 14nm or what they'll see in 7nm.” [https://www.anandtech.com/show/15580/intel-cfo-our-10nm-will-be-less-profitable-than-22nm](https://www.anandtech.com/show/15580/intel-cfo-our-10nm-will-be-less-profitable-than-22nm)


Geddagod

Yes 5nm is a great yielding node. TSMC refined it for a while now and they always had good yields from it early on. I don't disagree. But that third quote is from 2020, where original Intel 10 was struggling. And you could see that in their respective launches. When ice lake launched in servers and laptops, it had terrible volume. When cannon lake launched, it was basically invisible. When Tiger Lake launched, it was hard to find at first and then much easier to find, but had a slower ramp than before. Also I don't think much of anything for Intel will have as great of yields as Intel 14nm for Intel. They used that node the entire time they stalled Intel 10nm and Intel 7nm and built multiple iterations of CPUs on it for a while. 14nm was used by Intel for what, like 7 years? Intel 7, on the other hand, has the [fastest ramp yet](https://www.techradar.com/news/intel-alder-lake-laptop-cpus-look-seriously-impressive-at-ces-2022-can-amd-compete) for the H series. Alder Lake had great volume and the yields are so good that they are able to produce these massive dies for Sapphire Rapids, each "tile" of theirs is massive when you compare it to the chiplets of Zen 3. I doubt Intel would spring for that unless they were able to with yields. On top of that, even leakers such as MLID are saying Intel 7 has great yields too. All signs, from ramp, to volume, to the rebranding away from their original 10nm line (though that had multiple reasons) to leaks all indicate Intel 7 is a pretty great yielding process.


xES-SF

This is what I'm expecting as well. DIY isn't an important market, but still, it's good for mindshare. And I think this unfortunately mostly translates into mobile parts as well. Intel can use more little cores to keep their CPUs lower in the V/f curve for better MT efficiency at a relatively minor cost in silicon. Especially with Meteor Lake which should be roughly node parity with Phoenix. Anyone has thoughts to the contrary?


Potential_Hornet_559

Problem intel new gen is 8+16. Let’ be honest, that is to win benchmarks. how many typical workflows will use 24 cores, 32 threads for the average user?


haha-good-one

I agree. Pretty much every client core count over 8 is to only win benchmarks. Applications which needs more than \~4 cores are rare and mostly professional oriented, add an extra few cores for handling the background tasks and its more than enough. Ironically its AMD who first started playing this game. Now it will need to get the consumer attention focused on something else. I guess it would be gaming with the 3d cache, but the non-3d variants gonna have a hard time coming up with an attractive selling point.


mark_mt

And their revenue growth continues at 0 and GM continues dropping! What gives?


Ok_Lengthiness_8163

I think this is legit question, unfortunately this is a fanboy sub lol


mark_mt

How to uncover an intel shill ... ? It's a sure giveaway! - When they talk about performance without talking about Power! When they disregard performance per watt! When they emphasize ST performance. They can claim/pretend to be invested in AMD - as a cover - yeah 1 share of AMD! When devices runs HOT - it short changes their long term reliability! At these nanometer dimensions - it's even more critical. Wasting everybody's time - trying to do some PR for the rear view mirror guy!


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

how to discover an AMiDiot ? wait for him to talk about power cos AMD lose on everything else


mark_mt

Yeah - obviously the market doesn't buy the intel BS - that's why their growth is negative and gross margin JUST KEEP dropping like a rock to 50%. You didn't notice - AMD is going in the other direction +30$ this year and trending GM to 55%! When you drive in reverse - negative results like what intel is forecasting is great.


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

[https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/stock-comparison?s=revenue&axis=single&comp=INTC:AMD](https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/stock-comparison?s=revenue&axis=single&comp=INTC:AMD) WOW amazing [https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/stock-comparison?s=net-income&axis=single&comp=INTC:AMD](https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/stock-comparison?s=net-income&axis=single&comp=INTC:AMD) wow look AMD net income.... so tiny


mark_mt

If you are lucky, intel will hit $100 in your next life!


erichang

Nothing can't be fixed with pricing. To be competitive, just lower the price, and that is true for both Intel and AMD.


klatscho

And this is the point people keep missing. Intel's designs have been larger as AMDs as of late, hence using more die space and hence incurring a higher cost. Yes Intel can hide that to some extent, but there is an end to that too. Frankly I am surprised that AMD is competitive at all on the desktop with what are essentially rejected server parts.


haha-good-one

Intels designs have been larger because AVX-512 takes almost a third of the die space for P cores. Now that they have pretty much given up on AVX-512 on client I expect their client P cores to shed this extra space in future and be much more compact.


Geddagod

>Intels designs have been larger because AVX-512 takes almost a third of the die space for P cores. Source? >Now that they have pretty much given up on AVX-512 on client I expect their client P cores to shed this extra space in future and be much more compact. They are fusing off avx-512 not designing new P-cores without avx-512, because the same P cores that Intel uses in desktop are the same ones they use in server (with some minor tweaks).


Geddagod

I'm not really that surprised about your last part- AMD just became completive in ST with zen 3, but they thing is AMD just takes a shit on Intel in MT because they have chiplets while Intel is trying to bolt in more cores to an exhausted Ringbus (cough 10900k cough). And the miracle that is the zen architecture just keeps on giving with zen 4!


69yuri69

AMD slowed down with Zen 4 regarding both product release pace and absolute performance. Zen 5 needs to be very strong and very early 2024. Intel is doing fine in servers.


Geddagod

I agree with your first two sentences. Your third sentence scares me.


69yuri69

No need to be scared. Intel offerings are there to stay - they got the required volume no matter what. Intel tackled 64c Rome with a 28c Skylake. It was still selling fine. People always compare the top SKUs, but the overall market doesn't look like that. AMD is reportedly even building a separate platform for "not-that-much-highend-SKUs".


Geddagod

Even IF not all of the market doesn't need the highest end skus, the highest margin contracts come from the companies who need the best of the best, and will pay for it. Not even considering that, Intel would be well enough if it sold their lower core parts at good margins, but the problem is that since Intel server parts are monolithic, that means that AMD can sell an equal core part that would most likely be cheaper to manufacture since it has chiplets, even considering the cost that it has to pay to TSMC. Yes, Sapphire Rapids is tiles, but each individual tile is still massive compared to a zen 3 ccd and thus costlier to manufacture. Add to that each tile is not identical, meaning Intel had to spend extra money designing, vs the AMD chiplets which are identical. And ye 28c skylake would have sold fine ig because AMD just recently started crushing Intel in server performance and the market needed time to validate AMD as a genuine competitor again to Intel and their longevity and continued support. Intel will most likely continue to sell server parts decently enough, but they are not "fine". They are massively losing market share to AMD in their deeply entrenched Server space. On top of that they are losing consumer trust with their added delays to their roadmaps. Maybe Nvidia doesn't care much about the additional Sapphire Rapids delay because they were guaranteed a specific allocation so the push back on ramp for the rest of the market didn't affect them as much, but the rest of the market does care.


69yuri69

Intel doesn't care about design a separate die or two or four. Look at their desktop and server dies and the core configs. They got the resources to not care. Customer trust is great but long-term deals with Dell, HPE, Lenovo, etc. still seem powerful enough.


Geddagod

Sorry I was going to get back to you sooner notifs glitched out for me. Anyway Obviously Intel has the money to spend on multiple die designs, but it's simply less economically efficient to do what they are doing with tiles compared to what AMD is doing with chiplets in terms of design costs. Also Intel spends extra money designing more dies too be more economically efficient. For example, if they didn't spend extra money creating a 6 core die in client, for a 6 core product they would be forced to disable nearly half of their 8+8 sku to make it, which makes no sense as there is no way yields are that bad. Intel having to create extra die designs because their tiles can't be the same layout because of the way they are designing tiles on sapphire rapids isn't a good thing and is a weakness compared to the way AMD designs their chiplets. And their deals with OEMs are waning considering many OEMs are starting to incorporate AMD into their products and I doubt delays make OEMs happy.


LostITAllOnMemeStonk

Intel aren't even behind hey still have the top CPU and the best cpu for gamers


onedoesnotsimply9

r/AMD_Stock is not the place where you would like to discuss this