Intel is losing against AMD

legcramp said:
Don't worry what you pointed out is what's left of [H] nowadays.
Click to expand...

Oh? Just how did he prove that this thread is out right wrong? They are losing, regardless of their sales volume or other stuff......

Edit: Oh, and didn't Intel just lay off thousands of folks? Yeah, that money would be a "record revenue" move.
 
Last edited:
ManofGod said:
Oh? Just how did he prove that this thread is out right wrong? They are losing
Click to expand...

Just because the giant stumbled and the gnat found some crumbs, the gnat isn't suddenly going to topple the giant.

ManofGod said:
regardless of their sales volume or other stuff......
Click to expand...

One can make any bogus statement appear to be true if they exclude all of the facts.
 
the only way amd wins(feels stupid saying that) is if they can maintain the lead they have right now, for the next 5 years. being that intel has just had its best quarter and best year to date despite amds success. what are the odds that intel doesnt come roaring back in the next year or so? does anyone honestly believe that intel isnt going to dump as much money and resources into their fabs and r&d to retake the performance crown? we will be lucky to have some kind of parity in the coming years so we can enjoy the ipc/core improvements along with realistically priced gear. we need both evil empires to do well but not to well or we will fall right back into the price gouging bullshit of the past.
 
Intel success argument
Money == Success
Money == Innovation
Past Performance (with exception of the last three years) == Future Performance
Present and the Last Three years are a Mirage
AMD success == Motivation for Intel to Succeed
Nobody ever Fired for Buying Intel
Increased Share price due to a Multi-Billion dollar buyback Scheme

Evidence of Intel future Success?
Reduced Margins
Reduced Outlook
Increased Competition
Lack of Innovation
Huge Debt
Old Boy Purchasing Enterprise Managers that are soon to retire
Poor Execution
Fab Issues / broken Process Nodes
Chip Shortages
Under-performing CPUs Beat at every angle by Competiton
More expensive Fabrication Process
No Chiplet designs
Poor Management and Leadership
 
Last edited:
hititnquitit said:
the only way amd wins(feels stupid saying that) is if they can maintain the lead they have right now, for the next 5 years. being that intel has just had its best quarter and best year to date despite amds success. what are the odds that intel doesnt come roaring back in the next year or so? does anyone honestly believe that intel isnt going to dump as much money and resources into their fabs and r&d to retake the performance crown? we will be lucky to have some kind of parity in the coming years so we can enjoy the ipc/core improvements along with realistically priced gear. we need both evil empires to do well but not to well or we will fall right back into the price gouging bullshit of the past.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Intel stumbled, and many here seem to be declaring victory (for someone, maybe just their stocks), and expect Intel to stay down. Meanwhile, they're looking at AMD and expecting them to continue advancing without failure -- neither of these conditions are representative of the respective companies' performance literally since they began competing.

For those of us that have been buying CPUs from both companies (and others!) since before they started competing, making claims such as the above come off as, well... silly.

Mega6 said:
<excerpted block of fanboism>
Click to expand...

Tell yourself what you need to in order to justify your investments. You do you.
 
Zen 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10.......

Intel .....more security bugs, bigger chiller, bride fake benchmarks....nail in coffin on 2029.

AMD acquired Intel on 2030.

Wild guess :p
 
ManofGod said:
Oh? Just how did he prove that this thread is out right wrong? They are losing, regardless of their sales volume or other stuff......

Edit: Oh, and didn't Intel just lay off thousands of folks? Yeah, that money would be a "record revenue" move.
Click to expand...

Easy, they are still posting record quarters. That this has to do with the fact that they became pretty much a natural monopoly and not due to the quality of their current products annoys me greatly.

Yes, they are still in a weakened position even with the record quarters and if they don't get their shit together it can crumble but sadly they really are too massive still.

BTW you should know that I have no love for Intel, but I try to keep my views as objective as I can even if what I see isn't too my liking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Auer
like this
Revdarian said:
That this has to do with the fact that they became pretty much a natural monopoly and not due to the quality of their current products annoys me greatly.
Click to expand...

AMD committed to Bulldozer while they were ahead -- and, predictably, faded into CPU irrelevance for a decade.

You can make plenty of claims concerning Intel and perhaps even prove some, but Bulldozer was all AMD, and they did it right after Intel was recovering from their own misadventure with Netburst.
 
? Intel was pretty much a natural monopoly since before bulldozer, in any case not interested in talking to you atm I was stating my opinion after being quoted months after the fact.
 
Revdarian said:
? Intel was pretty much a natural monopoly since before bulldozer
Click to expand...

AMD was on the way to breaking that "natural monopoly" and then shot themselves in the foot by developing and then populating their entire product line with a lower-quality product.

Intel proceeded to continue to produce CPUs, and people / organizations bought them.

Revdarian said:
in any case not interested in talking to you atm I was stating my opinion after being quoted months after the fact.
Click to expand...

Then don't post...?
 
Mega6 said:
Intel success argument
Nobody ever Fired for Buying Intel
Click to expand...

DYRRNyYW0AAuTvv.jpg


let's not forget security. what happens when you're the one responsible for loosing 100k credit card numbers because you chose to buy insecure intel chips? idk, just sayin.
 
Last edited:
d3athf1sh said:
let's not forget security. what happens when you're the one responsible for loosing 100k credit card numbers because you chose to buy insecure intel chips? idk, just sayin.
Click to expand...

If you posses credit card information and your enterprise security is such that someone is able to get to the point of exploiting hardware vulnerabilities for which there are patches -- you're getting more than fired. That's a pervasive institutional failure.

Like we've already seen, actually, from a number of companies, where no hardware vulnerability was needed to steal data.
 
AMD Athlon 64 had great success against Pentium 4.. then AMD got destroyed until Ryzen came where they again are seeing some great success. People make it seem like Intel has 0% chance of pulling another Core 2 Duo. And yes... Athlon 64 was faster than the Pentium 4 at *gasp* gaming lol
 
legcramp said:
AMD Athlon 64 had great success against Pentium 4.. then AMD got destroyed until Ryzen came where they again are seeing some great success. People make it seem like Intel has 0% chance of pulling another Core 2 Duo. And yes... Athlon 64 was faster than the Pentium 4 at *gasp* gaming lol
Click to expand...

Athlon 64 wasn't only fast it demolished Itanium by pushing 64 bit to x86 and in multicore.

This time Intel hasn't invested billions in replacing x86, they just stumbled several times in a row. Maybe their culture is borked this time?
 
IdiotInCharge said:
If you posses credit card information and your enterprise security is such that someone is able to get to the point of exploiting hardware vulnerabilities for which there are patches -- you're getting more than fired. That's a pervasive institutional failure.

Like we've already seen, actually, from a number of companies, where no hardware vulnerability was needed to steal data.
Click to expand...

just about every company posses credit card info.
not every hardware vulnerability needs physical access.
there are always bugs before there are patches.

and who knows how all the data keeps getting stolen... but it does. and most likely it's off intel hardware if the surveys are to be trusted.
 
legcramp said:
AMD Athlon 64 had great success against Pentium 4.. then AMD got destroyed until Ryzen came where they again are seeing some great success. People make it seem like Intel has 0% chance of pulling another Core 2 Duo. And yes... Athlon 64 was faster than the Pentium 4 at *gasp* gaming lol
Click to expand...

Ryzen is not Athlon 64 and 9900K is not Pentium 4. Also, AMD is not sitting around waiting for Intel to catch back up, anymore, it is not the AMD of old. :) Intel is still having issues, major ones, that they have not yet overcome and that is without a new, secure architecture.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Just because the giant stumbled
Click to expand...

Giant is subjective from my perspective as an [H] consumer, Intel just happens to be standing on a foundation of ill gotten cash.

Most of what Intel has done in their CPU+++++++++++++++++ market is stumble, and they've remained relevant and 'on top' because of said cash.

They've had genuine success in other sectors, but it all comes back to what kept them up and AMD down, and those anti-competitive actions led to the cash at a time AMD had a decisive lead, active denial of true market competition, and other sectors.
 
idiomatic said:
Athlon 64 wasn't only fast it demolished Itanium by pushing 64 bit to x86 and in multicore.

This time Intel hasn't invested billions in replacing x86, they just stumbled several times in a row. Maybe their culture is borked this time?
Click to expand...

Yeah I know I owned most of those Athlon 64 / FX / Opteron chips until they weren't #1 anymore.

Honestly I just like messing with the Shintels of AMD nowadays lol
 
Inacurate said:
foundation of ill gotten cash.
Click to expand...

That doesn't take away AMDs decision to pursue Bulldozer instead of iterating the Athlon architecture further or some other direction that didn't result in shooting themselves in the foot.

That's all AMD.

Further, there's no 'fair' in business. Companies that fight fair lose.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
That doesn't take away AMDs decision to pursue Bulldozer instead of iterating the Athlon architecture further or some other direction that didn't result in shooting themselves in the foot.

That's all AMD.

Further, there's no 'fair' in business. Companies that fight fair lose.
Click to expand...

you just got to remember, if intel would have made their procs as secure as amd's then they would have been A LOT closer (if not slower) in performance and wouldn't have gained as much market share. i believe that's prob what he was talking about "ill gotten cash"

that's why they are having such a hard time now. add in security and what do you got? s**t...
 
Last edited:
IdiotInCharge said:
If you posses credit card information and your enterprise security is such that someone is able to get to the point of exploiting hardware vulnerabilities for which there are patches -- you're getting more than fired. That's a pervasive institutional failure.

Like we've already seen, actually, from a number of companies, where no hardware vulnerability was needed to steal data.
Click to expand...

I think about statements like this... And toss them. Because as an engineer I need to design my solutions for security. So th hardware I run on will be secure even if it has to run like a 486. Just means I'll need a lot more of it.

I would have some epyc servers I just need our vendor to get off of their asses and get me a couple demo units for a quarter or two but dell is so in bed with freaking Intel that won't happen. And I'm not happy about it.
 
There is another company that imdid what it seems amd is doing this generation.. But their competitor didn't have the financial cohones to weather the fight like Intel does. That company was nvidia when 3dfx was the big dog. nvidia was a small company who came out with a tech lead in the 3d arena. They licensed and got vendors and kept improving their hardware where 3dfx kept stumbling. Trying to make their own only and cut out aib vendors and such. 5 years later nvidia purchased 3dfx and thst fight was won. Yet nvidia keeps iterating and improving.

Amd took a breath a d battered and bruised doubled down. They have some engineers that know their shit and cut back on production and focused on creation. They released some good cpus and are slowly doing what nviida did. They arnt succeeding and stopping. They just keep getting better and in the process Intel is being racked with security holes and lackluster performance. Will they fold? No but they will be a lot smaller of a company. If they can trim off sales and reinvest in engineering, cut away fab and focus on creation it will be interesting. We are now seeing why companies like global foundries built built massive fabs. Samsung, amd, and others will be using all of the production they can. Heck even TI will be in this race.

Sorry got off track. End point. AMD is taking a page from Nvidias play book and they arnt stopping the technological iteration to draw out profit. They are going in and tearing the meat away from Intel. Death by a thousand cuts it may be. If Intel can't put out a clear bad ass winner they will tumble.

Where it will tenaciously cling to customer base is in server and infrastructure processors. Time shall tell.
 
phatbx133 said:
Zen 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10.......

Intel .....more security bugs, bigger chiller, bride fake benchmarks....nail in coffin on 2029.

AMD acquired Intel on 2030.

Wild guess :p
Click to expand...
It'll be more Intel sold in parts. AMD hasn't the money and it will never have. TSMC is getting all the profit.
 
How underused, cool, etc. are the top CPUs these days if the system is GPU limited on a game?
 
Grimlaking said:
I think about statements like this... And toss them. Because as an engineer I need to design my solutions for security. So th hardware I run on will be secure even if it has to run like a 486. Just means I'll need a lot more of it.

I would have some epyc servers I just need our vendor to get off of their asses and get me a couple demo units for a quarter or two but dell is so in bed with freaking Intel that won't happen. And I'm not happy about it.
Click to expand...
Dell isn’t able to provide demo u it’s because AMD is not able to provide them with enough CPU’s to meet their orders let alone potential orders. I have 2 new EPYC servers on the way for a new VMware setup and Dell is giving me a 4-6 month wait time on delivery because they don’t have the parts.
 
Lakados said:
Dell isn’t able to provide demo u it’s because AMD is not able to provide them with enough CPU’s to meet their orders let alone potential orders. I have 2 new EPYC servers on the way for a new VMware setup and Dell is giving me a 4-6 month wait time on delivery because they don’t have the parts.
Click to expand...

Wow that is shit. That's exactly why I want epyc for new VMware servers. I wonder if this is a false lead time or real.
 
Lakados said:
Dell isn’t able to provide demo u it’s because AMD is not able to provide them with enough CPU’s to meet their orders let alone potential orders. I have 2 new EPYC servers on the way for a new VMware setup and Dell is giving me a 4-6 month wait time on delivery because they don’t have the parts.
Click to expand...
Because Dell tells the truth all the time........
What they are doing are sitting on their butts "validating" the EPYC server chips to get ready to sell them.
Guaranteed they have lots of EPYC chips but are not selling them yet because they are slow getting their "platform" ready.
Supermicro has lots of Epyc options, but businesses want Dell because its Dell, and Dell is basically government type slow as far as enterprise
 
IdiotInCharge said:
As an engineer, if a system is perfectly secure, no work will ever get done on it.

That's why risk is managed. Some companies actually have to deliver to their customers.
Click to expand...

Wow really, I had no idea. you mean that the only way data is secure is to not have data? Oh my gosh. Give me a little credit here man. I don't think anyone here thought I was making impregnable systems. All you need is one criminally pissed off person with Administrator rights and your security is worth nothing.
 
Rockenrooster said:
Because Dell tells the truth all the time........
What they are doing are sitting on their butts "validating" the EPYC server chips to get ready to sell them.
Guaranteed they have lots of EPYC chips but are not selling them yet because they are slow getting their "platform" ready.
Supermicro has lots of Epyc options, but businesses want Dell because its Dell, and Dell is basically government type slow as far as enterprise
Click to expand...

Correction there are EPYC systems you can order from Dell today. They have validated the CPU's. They are surely dragging their feet on fulfilling those orders or not. If it's a supply issue for the CPU's that looks good/bad for AMD. But for some reason I think it's more... dirty pool.
 
Grimlaking said:
Correction there are EPYC systems you can order from Dell today. They have validated the CPU's. They are surely dragging their feet on fulfilling those orders or not. If it's a supply issue for the CPU's that looks good/bad for AMD. But for some reason I think it's more... dirty pool.
Click to expand...
As much as I would like to think its just dirty pool, I honestly believe demand has exceeded AMD's ability to produce the new chips and its not like we have many options because Intel's Xeons at my pricepoint are honestly non options, they either take a sharp decrease in core count, which we can't do with out expanding the system beyond what my rack has room for or I increase the budget by like 20k which I also can't do. So I like many others are just going to have to wait, and it wasn't like Dell sprung the wait time on me after the fact they were pretty upfront with it during the proposal.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Just because the giant stumbled and the gnat found some crumbs, the gnat isn't suddenly going to topple the giant.



One can make any bogus statement appear to be true if they exclude all of the facts.
Click to expand...

Notice you left out the point of 1000's of layoffs or firings? Hmmmmm........ :D
 
All I can say is Intel's issues were bad enough that out IT team at the city stopped using them and switched to Epyc. So far everything is running good and IT seems happy with them so far. Most desktops and laptops are still Intel but most of those still have a few years left before being due for replacement.
 
Gideon said:
All I can say is Intel's issues were bad enough that out IT team at the city stopped using them and switched to Epyc. So far everything is running good and IT seems happy with them so far. Most desktops and laptops are still Intel but most of those still have a few years left before being due for replacement.
Click to expand...

Gideon please feel free to DM me on this. But could you have you put me into contact with someone in your infrastructure team? If so let me know and I'll pass long my work email address. I'd love to hear about their pain points and big wins if they can share!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top