So the fastest Intel there is 4% slower than the slowest EPYC at like 50% more power. I would not call that even at all.
So the fastest Intel there is 4% slower than the slowest EPYC at like 50% more power. I would not call that even at all.Technical superiority vs Emerald Rapids? They are more or less the same, unless you aim for those super premiums - 96-128c. Also there are non-technical aspects like - Intel price war or AMD's OEM relations have always been bad.
Strix won't shake anything if they can't push it to the OEMs. Besides, Strix are aimed at premium and top-premium $$$ segments. These are not going to shake the market.
5 weeks.Now Intel is way closer than it was in Skylake times.
What has a server Zen 5 has to do with AMD Q1 results?5 weeks.
Intel really hasn't closed the performance gap, sure they will dump volume with bad margins to keep the fabs busy but that is inevitable no matter what AMD does.What has a server Zen 5 has to do with AMD Q1 results?
Turin comes in H2. There are going to be "30% more designs than Genoa" - at some point in 2024-2025. Ugh
Intel will happily keep selling their Emeralds through OEMs.
6% margin in client is shocking.. zen 4 must not be selling well.. but in data center and have a big performance lead and are eating intel's slices of the cake
I was looking at 2p. 377 vs 556 is 47%, same place I got performance numbers and % from. And the 96 and 128 cores can't be ignored. I got my RETAIL 9654 for just over $4000. This not extreme high end. You are just twisting numbers and facts to suit your agenda.The linked article lists AMD 9554 averaging at 227W and Intel 8592+ at 289W. Peak power figures are 369W and 434W. That's not 50% in my books.
Anyways, Intel sold tons of Skylake servers vs Rome. OEMs do not care. Now Intel is way closer than it was in Skylake times.
2P the 8592+ averages 557W while the 9554 averages 377W, so in a more typical dual CPU configuration their test suite does show 50% more power. Interesting that the 2P Intel uses almost 2x the power of one processor, while the EPYC only uses 66% more power for 2P.The linked article lists AMD 9554 averaging at 227W and Intel 8592+ at 289W. Peak power figures are 369W and 434W. That's not 50% in my books.
Anyways, Intel sold tons of Skylake servers vs Rome. OEMs do not care. Now Intel is way closer than it was in Skylake times.
Yes, it's not great. Sony money printer is drying up*. MI300 is selling well for AMD but that's nothing compared to Nvidia.AMD stock taking it on the chin today, down nearly 10%. Seems AI hype deflation causing some investors to seek other options.
Probably waiting for their financials. If SIE isn't able to hit the reduced 21M forecast for PS5, outlook will be grim.* though Sony stock didn't collapse even though AMD gave a pretty good preview. Maybe the market already knew?
Yes, it's not great. Sony money printer is drying up*. MI300 is selling well for AMD but that's nothing compared to Nvidia.
* though Sony stock didn't collapse even though AMD gave a pretty good preview. Maybe the market already knew?
Oh it's not selling at all just yet.MI300 is selling well for AMD but that's nothing compared to Nvidia.
hell no lmao.Now Intel is way closer than it was in Skylake times.
Yeah Turin slaps something real fierce.AMD believes they are finally gaining momentum in enterprise (as opposed to cloud) CPU server sales and they believe this will continue.
What do you mean "if AMD get the performance crown" ? They already have it in everything except mobile, and thats a tie at the moment.If AMD gets the performance crown, they'll have a serious advantage over Intel on Client due to a simpler design and cheaper cost structure. If they can ramp up at high volume, Intel might have a lot of troubles.
On DT, even if AMD prices their products higher, it will have a much cheaper platform as Intel ARL will require a platform rebuilt (New SoC + New Mobo + New Memory), thus becoming much more expensive than AMD Z5 SoCs which are coming to the established AM5.
On Mobile, Intel designs are expensive due to multiple tiles and require extensive validation and packaging, thus being slow to ramp and with tons of cost adder. Lunar Lake simplified this, but it's something aimed at premium low voltage (Despite the push towards 30W) and still has it's own cost adders (MOP and N3B). AMD Monolithic approach is simpler and faster to ramp, while also being cheaper to manufacture and allowing AMD to cover from high-End (Strix P) to mainstream (Kraken 1/2) and Chromebook (SNV).
If AMD plays their cards well, they can make a huge dent at Intel on client. Intel will still be fine due to size and market reach. But on a much more precarious position. It will be interesting to see the state of the market in 1 year.
They can't, 1t gap too severe.For client in general: it doesn't matter if it is much faster Intel will spam cheapo RPL laptops at slightly lower prices and it will sell better still.