EPYC Datacenter Commitments

[Pieter3dnow]

To be honest the market share question is rather trivial (for now). In certain countries the deduction (of taxes) of new hardware can be done in a cycle of a few years. That would mean that not everyone is buying the latest and greatest whenever it gets released.
In reality AMD can do very well this year but that is not the entire story to this market share question it has to be doing this in a cycle of 3 to 5 years for it to matter again.

Most of the press releases or other forms of sharing this with us is mainly used for other purposes (stock market being one of them).

 

[Shintai]

To be honest the market share question is rather trivial (for now). In certain countries the deduction (of taxes) of new hardware can be done in a cycle of a few years. That would mean that not everyone is buying the latest and greatest whenever it gets released.
In reality AMD can do very well this year but that is not the entire story to this market share question it has to be doing this in a cycle of 3 to 5 years for it to matter again.

Most of the press releases or other forms of sharing this with us is mainly used for other purposes (stock market being one of them).

Since people not working in the datacenters dont seem to understand where the cost are associated. Its not the hardware. Its the running cost and software licenses. If AMD is so great that people on forums proclaim, then EPYC will account for more revenue this year than all other AMD products combined, including consoles.

Using a timeframe several years out is just a plain bad excuse for something that will never happen.

 

[Pieter3dnow]

Since people not working in the datacenters dont seem to understand where the cost are associated. Its not the hardware. Its the running cost and software licenses. If AMD is so great that people on forums proclaim, then EPYC will account for more revenue this year than all other AMD products combined, including consoles.
Using a timeframe several years out is just a plain bad excuse for something that will never happen.

What is rather silly that you are proclaiming that data centers will buy and switch hardware on a whim. And yes several years is what it takes it has not been differently at any other time period. What is even funnier that you say that it is about software license fee's which means _nothing_ because on the Intel side of things they still have to pay for those as well ....

If you fail to see why AMD is great then you purchase some of the top end Intel data center cpu, Others will likely not at those prices ....

 

[Shintai]

What is rather silly that you are proclaiming that data centers will buy and switch hardware on a whim. And yes several years is what it takes it has not been differently at any other time period. What is even funnier that you say that it is about software license fee's which means _nothing_ because on the Intel side of things they still have to pay for those as well ....

If you fail to see why AMD is great then you purchase some of the top end Intel data center cpu, Others will likely not at those prices ....

Datacenters constantly buy new hardware. So just drop the excuses.

Software and running cost was an example of how tiny the hardware cost in reality is. And software gets painful if you need more cores to perform what less cores do.

Either it sell or it doesn't. Dont try and play a new #waitforeverforAMD game and more hype at 11.

SKL-SP already had several billions in revenue.

 

[OrangeKhrush]

It will still be moot to use small samples, possibly by end of year report you will have Q3+Q4 data to work a trend off.

 

[JustReason]

Datacenters constantly buy new hardware. So just drop the excuses.

Software and running cost was an example of how tiny the hardware cost in reality is. And software gets painful if you need more cores to perform what less cores do.

Either it sell or it doesn't. Dont try and play a new #waitforeverforAMD game and more hype at 11.

SKL-SP already had several billions in revenue.

so confrontational... but BS. Yes data centers do buy hardware but not at an interval of one year, not saying they cant or will not but rather they don't tend to nor is it necessary. Comparing software cost is only a ploy by the likes of you shills to obfuscate the savings that truly exists between the hardware. Somehow I doubt a data center will not consider a $4k savings per just because the software cost is high, that makes no sense at all. And seriously throwing the #waitfor.... horse crap is getting old. So you are saying all information of how it will sell is KNOWN day one for 6 mths out? Are schools that bad worldwide?

 

[OrangeKhrush]

so confrontational... but BS. Yes data centers do buy hardware but not at an interval of one year, not saying they cant or will not but rather they don't tend to nor is it necessary. Comparing software cost is only a ploy by the likes of you shills to obfuscate the savings that truly exists between the hardware. Somehow I doubt a data center will not consider a $4k savings per just because the software cost is high, that makes no sense at all. And seriously throwing the #waitfor.... horse crap is getting old. So you are saying all information of how it will sell is KNOWN day one for 6 mths out? Are schools that bad worldwide?

It is so sad to see belligerent hate that stuff gets made up along the way

 

[juanrga]

For example: They both parrot that the latency involved in the CCX and between dies is catastrophic/disasterous (Last one ala-Shintai) and yet when asked how it directly affects the outcome of any real task, neither could give an answer, nor actually have, just skirted the question.

Before RyZen launch, I said that the chip has a latency problem and that it would be evident in latency-sensitive workloads such as games.

What was the general reaction of the usual deniers? They denied the existence of any latency issue and attacked me.

Immediately after their exercise on denialism, all reviews noticed that RyZen works fine in throughput-sensitive workloads such as Cinebench or Handbrake, but it lags in games.

The response of deniers? Did they apologize for the pre-launch attacks? No. They started to sell the hype that a magic BIOS/AGESA update was going to fix gaming "within few weeks". That magic fix doesn't exist, of course, and today the microarchitecture has the same latency problem than at launch.

Same history about EPYC, on top of the latency lag associated to the die, EPYC brings another latency gap by the use of a MCM4 package. We said before EPYC launch, that interdie latency in EPYC was going to be much higher than the intradie latency in RyZen. Again deniers attacked us. But EPYC reviews showed that interdie latencies in EPYC are in the same order of magnitude that intersocket latencies in a P4 Broadwell Xeon. It was explained then why this is a bad result. And again deniers tried to ridicule or dismiss the latencie issue. Evidently, the review measured latencies in EPYC and Broadwell Xeon, because they know this is a fundamental metric to evaluate general purpose servers.

In this thread as example, marketshare in terms of percentages is VERY misleading. 5% of the server market sounds small, and in the totality it is. But wait now lets add context. What percent of the server market will be upgrades this year, or any given year? That would depend on a servers lifecycle and growth. For arguments sake lets say 20%. so that meager looking 5% is actually 25% of this years sales. Which is a far better looking outcome and yet says the exact same thing. But that wasn't the original point of percents, it is more about the value of that meager 5%. That 5% is likely in the millions minimum and of course that doesn't speak to AMDs share of that sale but a better overall picture of penetration.

People has made bold claims such as that EPYC will get a 16% of total marketshare in the next quarter. Some of us have stated that such claims are pure BS and that, in a best case scenario, EPYC will get a marketshare in the low single digit percent in the next two years. Again we receive attacks from deniers that don't want us to say that.

In this same thread, you can find link to articles with an "optimistic view on AMD's future in the server market". You can find people giving extra weight to the article, and pretending that the author of the article is right, because he "has skin in the game with substantial AMD holdings" Some of us have mentioned that the author sold all the AMD stock he owned just 19 days latter publishing the article. Not only we are not wrong, but the author has changed his vision by 180º and came to our camp. This is the camp of those of us that can differentiate hard data and realistic expectations from BS and hype.

 

[OrangeKhrush]

We covered the stock situation yesterday, individual investors are entitled to cash stocks at any point irrespective of the market position. in the superconductor industry stocks are volatile and he may have seen the huge cash in, this has almost zero, no wait zero implication on how Epyc will do in the enterprise market. In my view this is such a retarded point to raise as it is neither baring a point and it is deflecting to an issue not in debate.

 

[Shintai]

so confrontational... but BS. Yes data centers do buy hardware but not at an interval of one year, not saying they cant or will not but rather they don't tend to nor is it necessary. Comparing software cost is only a ploy by the likes of you shills to obfuscate the savings that truly exists between the hardware. Somehow I doubt a data center will not consider a $4k savings per just because the software cost is high, that makes no sense at all. And seriously throwing the #waitfor.... horse crap is getting old. So you are saying all information of how it will sell is KNOWN day one for 6 mths out? Are schools that bad worldwide?

Your entire post is confrontational because you dont like the reality. Just as you didn't like the Vega reality, yet still bought it.

I already said datacenters constantly buy new hardware. So if EPYC doesn't show some big revenue change soon its not going to sell. SKL-SP already sold for several billions in revenue compared to AMD selling for around 45-50M$ a quarter in server CPUs.

4K savings with sporadic performance and perf/watt vs more for software licensing and higher TCO? You need to do your homework.

#waitforepycsales

#waitfornextamdhypetrainchoochoo

 

[JustReason]

Before RyZen launch, I said that the chip has a latency problem and that it would be evident in latency-sensitive workloads such as games.

What was the general reaction of the usual deniers? They denied the existence of any latency issue and attacked me.

Immediately after their exercise on denialism, all reviews noticed that RyZen works fine in throughput-sensitive workloads such as Cinebench or Handbrake, but it lags in games.

The response of deniers? Did they apologize for the pre-launch attacks? No. They started to sell the hype that a magic BIOS/AGESA update was going to fix gaming "within few weeks". That magic fix doesn't exist, of course, and today the microarchitecture has the same latency problem than at launch.

Same history about EPYC, on top of the latency lag associated to the die, EPYC brings another latency gap by the use of a MCM4 package. We said before EPYC launch, that interdie latency in EPYC was going to be much higher than the intradie latency in RyZen. Again deniers attacked us. But EPYC reviews showed that interdie latencies in EPYC are in the same order of magnitude that intersocket latencies in a P4 Broadwell Xeon. It was explained then why this is a bad result. And again deniers tried to ridicule or dismiss the latencie issue. Evidently, the review measured latencies in EPYC and Broadwell Xeon, because they know this is a fundamental metric to evaluate general purpose servers.




People has made bold claims such as that EPYC will get a 16% of total marketshare in the next quarter. Some of us have stated that such claims are pure BS and that, in a best case scenario, EPYC will get a marketshare in the low single digit percent in the next two years. Again we receive attacks from deniers that don't want us to say that.

In this same thread, you can find link to articles with an "optimistic view on AMD's future in the server market". You can find people giving extra weight to the article, and pretending that the author of the article is right, because he "has skin in the game with substantial AMD holdings" Some of us have mentioned that the author sold all the AMD stock he owned just 19 days latter publishing the article. Not only we are not wrong, but the author has changed his vision by 180º and came to our camp. This is the camp of those of us that can differentiate hard data and realistic expectations from BS and hype.

My god with this much crap fields in Georgia would produce quite the crops year round.

First you aren't at all worthy of praise as you are a nobody in the field. So stop with the self praise it only makes any point you make disingenuous.

Hey first lets make a point to state that you never linked any proof that said writer sold his stock and have been asked twice by another member. I wont hold my breathe you never answered my many questions either.

Second you never answered the original point of REAL world results of that latency. And no you can not attribute the gaming performance to it either otherwise all those game specific optimizations would have no impact and quite frankly NO ONE has proven the latency which is quite small had any impact at all on the performance. This is a case of all you shills skewing the results to favor your argument. You want the latency to be an issue to obfuscate the fact that ZEN in any form is a contender.

And we all gotta love how you take one point of many in articles that speak to the absolute shining example of a product that EPYC is and make that the only relevant point. In ALL reviews the take away is that EPYC was a win, not only in perf/$ but also in many metrics/workloads where it bested Intel.

See here is the thing: When I give info it is rational and give all sides of the subject, recommending solely on what is best, be it whoever. All you shills have yet to show an ounce of ability or notion to recommend AMD at all. Hence why no one cares to apologize to you nor acknowledge any thing you say with any amount of respect.

 

[OrangeKhrush]

My god with this much crap fields in Georgia would produce quite the crops year round.

First you aren't at all worthy of praise as you are a nobody in the field. So stop with the self praise it only makes any point you make disingenuous.

Hey first lets make a point to state that you never linked any proof that said writer sold his stock and have been asked twice by another member. I wont hold my breathe you never answered my many questions either.

Second you never answered the original point of REAL world results of that latency. And no you can not attribute the gaming performance to it either otherwise all those game specific optimizations would have no impact and quite frankly NO ONE has proven the latency which is quite small had any impact at all on the performance. This is a case of all you shills skewing the results to favor your argument. You want the latency to be an issue to obfuscate the fact that ZEN in any form is a contender.

And we all gotta love how you take one point of many in articles that speak to the absolute shining example of a product that EPYC is and make that the only relevant point. In ALL reviews the take away is that EPYC was a win, not only in perf/$ but also in many metrics/workloads where it bested Intel.

See here is the thing: When I give info it is rational and give all sides of the subject, recommending solely on what is best, be it whoever. All you shills have yet to show an ounce of ability or notion to recommend AMD at all. Hence why no one cares to apologize to you nor acknowledge any thing you say with any amount of respect.

To be fair Shintai and more so Juanrga hates AMD flat out, I have seen him get ad hominem with people on WCCFtech and licked my lips at the opportunity of a gloves off confrontation but he was always there in off hours, though just the type of things he said its hard to take his "opinions" as more than one way opinions. I have never seen him say anything good about AMD even when some "EXPERT" reviewers have, he is often accusing the "EXPERTS" of wrong information.

Shintai is far less coarse in his arguing, he is more homeristic that self proclaimed genius.

 

[DuronBurgerMan]

Datacenters constantly buy new hardware. So just drop the excuses.

Software and running cost was an example of how tiny the hardware cost in reality is. And software gets painful if you need more cores to perform what less cores do.

Either it sell or it doesn't. Dont try and play a new #waitforeverforAMD game and more hype at 11.

SKL-SP already had several billions in revenue.

Intel is the better buy in overall price/performance for per-core licensing. AMD is the better buy in overall price/performance for open source and most platforms that don't require per-core licensing. Server The Home said as much in their review: https://www.servethehome.com/dual-amd-epyc-7601-processor-performance-and-review-part-1/

Now even being the better buy for certain scenarios doesn't mean AMD hits an immediate home run. We have relative support, reputations, marketing, and brand considerations to take into account. All areas where Intel excels and AMD generally does not (I've long been of the opinion that AMD should chuck its marketing moonies into a woodchipper - we'd all be better off for the doing). Nonetheless, it's a good piece of kit, and I'm generally bullish on AMD's chances here. In fact, I am considering replacing one of my own servers, and will be weighing an Epyc build (or, perhaps, a Ryzen 7 build - I have to look at virtualization and a few other things to see if I can get away with it) against an Intel build for it. We'll see.

 

[DuronBurgerMan]

In this same thread, you can find link to articles with an "optimistic view on AMD's future in the server market". You can find people giving extra weight to the article, and pretending that the author of the article is right, because he "has skin in the game with substantial AMD holdings" Some of us have mentioned that the author sold all the AMD stock he owned just 19 days latter publishing the article. Not only we are not wrong, but the author has changed his vision by 180º and came to our camp. This is the camp of those of us that can differentiate hard data and realistic expectations from BS and hype.

You have still not supplied evidence for that claim. I searched Seeking Alpha and the writer's blog and saw none of what you claimed. No mention of him selling his stock and no mention of him turning around 180, and coming to your camp, and saying AMD sucks and won't penetrate the server market to any significant degree. If you can supply evidence for those two claims, I will consider the evidence. And if I'm wrong, I will say so. But after several repeated requests for this evidence, you still have not supplied it. I'm beginning to think you are full of shit on this, sir.

 

[gigaxtreme1]

Love your sig. Fry dem durons.

 

[juanrga]

First you aren't at all worthy of praise as you are a nobody in the field. So stop with the self praise it only makes any point you make disingenuous.

Sorry if it sounded as that. In reality it was a reminder of how wrong you guys have been in the past and how wrong you all are about EPYC.

Hey first lets make a point to state that you never linked any proof that said writer sold his stock and have been asked twice by another member.

I gave him the exact quote and I said him that the quote is from the blog of the author. That would be enough...

 

[bezant]

Sorry if it sounded as that. In reality it was a reminder of how wrong you guys have been in the past and how wrong you all are about EPYC.



I gave him the exact quote and I said him that the quote is from the blog of the author. That would be enough...

Made up quotes don't count. The blog is public so if the claim is not there, then you need to link to wherever you saw it.

 

[juanrga]

You have still not supplied evidence for that claim. I searched Seeking Alpha and the writer's blog and saw none of what you claimed. No mention of him selling his stock and no mention of him turning around 180, and coming to your camp, and saying AMD sucks and won't penetrate the server market to any significant degree. If you can supply evidence for those two claims, I will consider the evidence. And if I'm wrong, I will say so. But after several repeated requests for this evidence, you still have not supplied it. I'm beginning to think you are full of shit on this, sir.

I don't want your apologies. I want you to read properly my posts. When I quoted him, I used "" and italic font as here

That article is from 7 Jul 2017. and the author was so confident on that optimistic vision about AMD's future that sold all the stock 19 days latter: "I sold my remaining shares of AMD at $15.51 on July 26, 2017."

You are now mixing what he said with what I said. If you cannot read others' post, then consider not participating in the discussion.

Also I said you twice that I got the quotation from his blog. Why you searched Seeking Alpha is beyond my compression...

"Note: I sold my remaining shares of AMD at $15.51 on July 26, 2017."

You and others can accept it or not, but he sold all his stock of AMD just 19 days after he published that optimistic article about EPYC. Not even him believed the hype that he wrote.

 

[DuronBurgerMan]

You are now mixing what he said with what I said. If you cannot read others' post, then consider not participating in the discussion.

Also I said you twice that I got the quotation from his blog. Why you searched Seeking Alpha is beyond my compression...

"Note: I sold my remaining shares of AMD at $15.51 on July 26, 2017."

You and others can accept it or not, but he sold all his stock of AMD just 19 days after he published that optimistic article about EPYC. Not even him believed the hype that he wrote.

I accept the evidence for the claim that he sold the stock. And if you look on his profile page on Seeking Alpha, he has a blog on there too, which is different than the one you linked to, so that is the source of the confusion. You could have just provided the link earlier, you know. Why you didn't do that, I don't know.

Also, what you said was this:

In this same thread, you can find link to articles with an "optimistic view on AMD's future in the server market". You can find people giving extra weight to the article, and pretending that the author of the article is right, because he "has skin in the game with substantial AMD holdings" Some of us have mentioned that the author sold all the AMD stock he owned just 19 days latter publishing the article. Not only we are not wrong, but the author has changed his vision by 180º and came to our camp. This is the camp of those of us that can differentiate hard data and realistic expectations from BS and hype.

You specifically said the author changed his vision 180 degrees and came to 'your' camp. That claim must also be substantiated. The link you provided does not substantiate that, it merely says that he sold the stock. Do you have a link to him repudiating the conclusions of the original piece he wrote?

 

[DuronBurgerMan]

I don't want your apologies. I want you to read properly my posts. When I quoted him, I used "" and italic font as here

When you quote someone, it is customary to provide a link to the source, if asked. You not wanting my apologies is irrelevant, since I offered no apology. If you are right on a thing, I will concede the thing to you. If you make a claim, I will require backup for the claim in order to believe you. That is how things work, sir.

 

[ManofGod]

Before RyZen launch, I said that the chip has a latency problem and that it would be evident in latency-sensitive workloads such as games.

What was the general reaction of the usual deniers? They denied the existence of any latency issue and attacked me.

Immediately after their exercise on denialism, all reviews noticed that RyZen works fine in throughput-sensitive workloads such as Cinebench or Handbrake, but it lags in games.

The response of deniers? Did they apologize for the pre-launch attacks? No. They started to sell the hype that a magic BIOS/AGESA update was going to fix gaming "within few weeks". That magic fix doesn't exist, of course, and today the microarchitecture has the same latency problem than at launch.

Same history about EPYC, on top of the latency lag associated to the die, EPYC brings another latency gap by the use of a MCM4 package. We said before EPYC launch, that interdie latency in EPYC was going to be much higher than the intradie latency in RyZen. Again deniers attacked us. But EPYC reviews showed that interdie latencies in EPYC are in the same order of magnitude that intersocket latencies in a P4 Broadwell Xeon. It was explained then why this is a bad result. And again deniers tried to ridicule or dismiss the latencie issue. Evidently, the review measured latencies in EPYC and Broadwell Xeon, because they know this is a fundamental metric to evaluate general purpose servers.




People has made bold claims such as that EPYC will get a 16% of total marketshare in the next quarter. Some of us have stated that such claims are pure BS and that, in a best case scenario, EPYC will get a marketshare in the low single digit percent in the next two years. Again we receive attacks from deniers that don't want us to say that.

In this same thread, you can find link to articles with an "optimistic view on AMD's future in the server market". You can find people giving extra weight to the article, and pretending that the author of the article is right, because he "has skin in the game with substantial AMD holdings" Some of us have mentioned that the author sold all the AMD stock he owned just 19 days latter publishing the article. Not only we are not wrong, but the author has changed his vision by 180º and came to our camp. This is the camp of those of us that can differentiate hard data and realistic expectations from BS and hype.

They made bold claims of 16%. Who are they specifically?

 

[juanrga]

I accept the evidence for the claim that he sold the stock. And if you look on his profile page on Seeking Alpha, he has a blog on there too, which is different than the one you linked to, so that is the source of the confusion. You could have just provided the link earlier, you know. Why you didn't do that, I don't know.

The link to his personal blog Openicon is available in the same article that you did bring, just below his name. The link to his personal blog Openicon is again available in his profile page at Seeking Alpha, just below "Contributor since: 2011". It is a bit difficult to believe that no one of you could see the links to click on them and check that he sold all the stock...

You specifically said the author changed his vision 180 degrees and came to 'your' camp. That claim must also be substantiated. The link you provided does not substantiate that, it merely says that he sold the stock. Do you have a link to him repudiating the conclusions of the original piece he wrote?

I said that, not him. I have just explained you that when I quote him I use "" and italic font. I just warned you to not mix my claims with his claims, but you mix all again.

It is evident that he changed his view by 180 degrees. He sold all this stock of AMD, which means that he has zero confidence on EPYC doing it well enough.

 

[ManofGod]

Sorry if it sounded as that. In reality it was a reminder of how wrong you guys have been in the past and how wrong you all are about EPYC.



I gave him the exact quote and I said him that the quote is from the blog of the author. That would be enough...

Basically, we just have to take your word for it? Do not look at the person behind the curtain?

I don't want your apologies. I want you to read properly my posts. When I quoted him, I used "" and italic font as here

I lterally had the loudest laugh and a literal face palm at this, LOL!!!!!!!!!!............ He, I made quotes and italicized my letters, therefore, believe me......

Edit: And before you try to say otherwise, this is no troll post, I am an AMD fan in the AMD forum which is discussing an AMD processor and AMD platform. Looking forward to AMD moving ahead and moving on up.

 

[pendragon1]

I just warned you to not mix my claims with his claims, but you insist on mixing all.

warned him? hahahaha ok...

 

[juanrga]

Basically, we just have to take your word for it? Do not look at the person behind the curtain?



I lterally had the loudest laugh and a literal face palm at this, LOL!!!!!!!!!!............ He, I made quotes and italicized my letters, therefore, believe me......

Edit: And before you try to say otherwise, this is no troll post, I am an AMD fan in the AMD forum which is discussing an AMD processor and AMD platform. Looking forward to AMD moving ahead and moving on up.

You claim yours is not a trolling post, but in your reply to post #58, you have eliminated the link that I gave to the quote of the analyst. Therefore it is not a question about believing me or not believing me. It is just about you eliminating from your answer the link that I gave; the link that proves that the analyst said what I quoted.

 

[DuronBurgerMan]

The link to his personal blog Openicon is available in the same article that you did bring, just below his name. The link to his personal blog Openicon is again available in his profile page at Seeking Alpha, just below "Contributor since: 2011". It is a bit difficult to believe that no one of you could see the links to click on them and check that he sold all the stock...

If you click his name, you get a list of his Seeking Alpha articles, along with a link that says "Blog". That goes to a different place. This is why links to where you find things are good. That way everyone is on the same page.

I said that, not him. I have just explained you that when I quote him I use "" and italic font. I just warned you to not mix my claims with his claims, but you mix all again.

I understood that this was your claim. I asked you if you could back it up. You could not. There is no evidence for a 180 degree turnaround to your camp.

It is evident that he changed his view by 180 degrees. He sold all this stock of AMD, which means that he has zero confidence on EPYC doing it well enough.

This is not evidence that he changed his view 180 degrees. It means he sold the stock. Selling the stock can be for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with Epyc. He also explicitly states the following: "I will continue to cover the AMD story, and may buy stock again if it suits me. The shares I sold were bought on June 16, 2015 for $2.35 per share." -- William Meyers. If he had said that he was disappointed in Epyc, and that was why he sold the shares, then I would agree with you. But that is not what he said.

Given the low price he bought the shares for (I'm jealous - that's one hell of a profit he made there), he may have simply been cashing out his profits.

 

[juanrga]

If you click his name, you get a list of his Seeking Alpha articles, along with a link that says "Blog".

And if you click on blog you go to another page, that also contains a link to his personal blog Openicon. Therefore the link to Openicon is available in three different parts, but no one here was able to get therein, until I gave the link explicitly.

I understood that this was your claim. I asked you if you could back it up. You could not. There is no evidence for a 180 degree turnaround to your camp.

Except that the evidence is self-evident.

This is not evidence that he changed his view 180 degrees. It means he sold the stock. Selling the stock can be for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with Epyc. He also explicitly states the following: "I will continue to cover the AMD story, and may buy stock again if it suits me. The shares I sold were bought on June 16, 2015 for $2.35 per share." -- William Meyers. If he had said that he was disappointed in Epyc, and that was why he sold the shares, then I would agree with you. But that is not what he said.

Are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? Let me remind you what you wrote:

This gentleman has a somewhat more optimistic view on AMD's future in the server market. It is cautious, of course, but he sees a 20%-30% AMD server market share by 2020 as being quite possible. And unlike you (so far as I know, anyway), he has skin in the game with substantial AMD holdings.

Do you really pretend to say me that 26 days latter he sold all his stock of AMD, because he still see a brilliant future for AMD in the server market? LOL

 

[Gideon]

And if you click on blog you go to another page, that also contains a link to his personal blog Openicon. Therefore the link to Openicon is available in three different parts, but no one here was able to get therein, until I gave the link explicitly.



Except that the evidence is self-evident.



Are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? Let me remind you what you wrote:



Do you really pretend to say me that 26 days latter he sold all his stock of AMD, because he still see a brilliant future for AMD in the server market? LOL

I sold my AMD stock too, it's called making a profit. That does not mean one has no faith in the company doing better, I just wanted the cash. You and Shintai also said Epyc would get no business from the server market and our wrong like usual. You both whined for the Serve the Home review and they had a great review of Epyc and now you guys dont want to mention them at all anymore cause they recommended Epyc. You claim all these people over here on the AMD side are making these wild claims about performance, but yet all I see is you two making such claims. I to be honest was surprised to see some companies move so fast already on Epyc, that in itself is a good sign and well it pretty much sinks your ship on the idea no one will use it.

 

[DuronBurgerMan]

And if you click on blog you go to another page, that also contains a link to his personal blog Openicon. Therefore the link to Openicon is available in three different parts, but no one here was able to get therein, until I gave the link explicitly.

Look, man. If you quote somebody, and someone says "where did you find that?" Just supply the link. What's so hard about that? Copy, paste, done.

Except that the evidence is self-evident.

Evidence is self-evident. Because Juanrga.

Are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? Let me remind you what you wrote:

This is a forum about computer shit. So we talk computer shit. If this bothers you, I don't really know why you are here. Anyway, my point was to explain that when it comes to AMD's financials, I'm much more inclined to believe someone who is actually trading AMD stock, and thus has a stake in AMD's performance, than random forum guy. No offense, you understand. Skin in the game is a term used repeatedly by one of my favorite authors on economic matters: Nassim Nicholas Taleb. Smart guy. I made good money listening to him.

Do you really pretend to say me that 26 days latter he sold all his stock of AMD, because he still see a brilliant future for AMD in the server market? LOL

That's a fallacy, sir. There are many reasons to buy and sell a stock. Since he did not tell us his specific reasons, we have no knowledge. What we do know, however, is that he spoke very highly of AMD's potential in the server market, and has not retracted or repudiated that statement.

 

[BrainEater]

You have learned nothing then. Also I have great disdain for those who do not own the CPUs, of any particular kind, nor have experience using them, telling me or others with how they operate.

Actually , you mis-understand.
I LOVE threads like this.Occasionally the rabid fanboi exposition leaves bits of information behind....mostly in links .
--

oh and sorry , I missed just exactly what EPYC system you are running ..



I'm just here for the popcorn now.

 

[DuronBurgerMan]

I'm just here for the popcorn now.

Popcorn is a perennial feature of AMD vs Intel arguments. At least, it is now. During the Bulldozer days, I thought maybe we were about to run out.

 

[JustReason]

Actually , you mis-understand.
I LOVE threads like this.Occasionally the rabid fanboi exposition leaves bits of information behind....mostly in links .
--

oh and sorry , I missed just exactly what EPYC system you are running ..



I'm just here for the popcorn now.

And what would me owning EPYC have anything to do with any point I have made? Look I haven't seen your posts or know of you in the slightest, so I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But my original point was, in regards to your post, is that either of them 2 knows Jack about anything. They intentionally post half truths and slants at every opportunity. Therefore beware and why I mention that if you rely on them for SOLID info when it comes to AMD YOU WILL KNOW NOTHING of AMD.

 

[juanrga]

I sold my AMD stock too, it's called making a profit. That does not mean one has no faith in the company doing better, I just wanted the cash.

It seems evident that he didn't sell because wanted the cash, but he sold before the stock drops and lose the profit that he made then. Because he added that the would reconsider "buy stock again if it suits me". Those aren't the words of someone expecting the stock to generate a higher profit.

You and Shintai also said Epyc would get no business from the server market and our wrong like usual.

This misconception was answered before

"No one said that EPYC wouldn't get "some business". Even Bulldozer and Itanium got some sales. What was stated is that the impact of EPYC on the server market will be minimal and in the low single-digit percent."

You both whined for the Serve the Home review and they had a great review of Epyc and now you guys dont want to mention them at all anymore cause they recommended Epyc.

I continue citing STH review. The other day, I mentioned again the huge latencies that they measured on EPYC. I also said I am awaiting to the second part of their review. I guess you also missed that.

 

[juanrga]

This is a forum about computer shit. So we talk computer shit. If this bothers you, I don't really know why you are here. Anyway, my point was to explain that when it comes to AMD's financials, I'm much more inclined to believe someone who is actually trading AMD stock, and thus has a stake in AMD's performance, than random forum guy. No offense, you understand. Skin in the game is a term used repeatedly by one of my favorite authors on economic matters: Nassim Nicholas Taleb. Smart guy. I made good money listening to him.

I understand your position. I simply mentioned how the analyst that you believed so much by "actually trading AMD stock" just sold all his stock of AMD 26 days after publishing the article.

That's a fallacy, sir. There are many reasons to buy and sell a stock. Since he did not tell us his specific reasons, we have no knowledge. What we do know, however, is that he spoke very highly of AMD's potential in the server market, and has not retracted or repudiated that statement.

He spoked very highly 26 days before selling all his stock of AMD, not after. And not only he did sold all his stock, but he also added that he would reconsider getting AMD stock again in a future if it suits him. He is being very clever. The information he is managing now doesn't give him enough confidence to buy stock.

 

[JustReason]

I understand your position. I simply mentioned how the analyst that you believed so much by "actually trading AMD stock" just sold all his stock of AMD 26 days after publishing the article.



He spoked very highly 26 days before selling all his stock of AMD, not after. And not only he did sold all his stock, but he also added that he would reconsider getting AMD stock again in a future if it suits him. He is being very clever. The information he is managing now doesn't give him enough confidence to buy stock.

What are your credentials as a financial analyst? And what does stock sales and price have to do with any of it? Hell use Tesla as an example, vastly overpriced and not a damn thing to do with any tangible metrics.

And I want to point out the majority of us stated single digit percents for expected AMD penetration, at least early on. So stop alluding that ALL of us are over-hyping the possibility of that penetration into the market. Even one contract itself is good and we have more than a few.

 

[juanrga]

What are your credentials as a financial analyst?

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/19/Appeal_to_Accomplishment

And I want to point out the majority of us stated single digit percents for expected AMD penetration, at least early on. So stop alluding that ALL of us are over-hyping the possibility of that penetration into the market. Even one contract itself is good and we have more than a few.

I didn't use the word "ALL" a single time.

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

 

[Riccochet]

Comes down to cost of ownership for the workloads being performed. I can see EPYC being very enticing to datacenters due to the cost per core/socket. You also have to take in to account the VMWare licensing costs per socket. Higher density core counts per socket equate to lower licensing costs.

As someone that manages a datacenter I can see EPYC gaining market share. Easily. It's already being considered for our next upgrade cycle if/when Cisco integrates the platform in to their blades. We could reduce our blade count by half while maintaining core count and reduce licensing costs. If we can get 3 blades with EPYC for roughly the same cost as 2 blades with comparable Xeon's guess which we'll be buying.

 

[DuronBurgerMan]

I understand your position. I simply mentioned how the analyst that you believed so much by "actually trading AMD stock" just sold all his stock of AMD 26 days after publishing the article.

Only relevant if he tells us he did so because he reversed his position on Epyc.

He spoked very highly 26 days before selling all his stock of AMD, not after. And not only he did sold all his stock, but he also added that he would reconsider getting AMD stock again in a future if it suits him. He is being very clever. The information he is managing now doesn't give him enough confidence to buy stock.

He added that he would consider AMD stock in the future. He's telling you that he sold the stock, but not because he thinks the stock is shit, else he would have said "I sold my AMD shares, and you probably should too" instead of 'maybe I'll buy some more in the future.'

You don't know his reasons, because he has not told them to you. Perhaps he thinks poorly of something else AMD is doing, like Vega (which would not be entirely unfounded), and wanted to sell before that release. Maybe he doesn't think poorly of anything AMD is doing, but figured $2 to $15 was enough profit, and there's no reason to take a risk by holding. Take the profit and enjoy. Maybe he's liquidating all of his stocks for some personal financial reason. Point is, I don't know, and neither do you.

You made two claims. One, that he sold the stock. That claim is correct, even if you weren't timely in providing your evidence and made a big hoopla about what was, in essence, a mere copy-paste affair. The second was that he somehow reversed the stance in his article, and you cite the stock sale as evidence of that. That is not sufficient evidence for your claim. I do not accept it. To accept that, I would require a statement from him that the conclusions in his article were wrong. Either provide such evidence, or we are done here. There is nothing to be gained by further debate on this matter unless new evidence is presented.

 

[JustReason]

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/19/Appeal_to_Accomplishment



I didn't use the word "ALL" a single time.

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

maybe instead of linking irrelevant material (which is funny because you usually ignore requests for links when they are relevant), try actually reading the post. I said alluding ie: Inferring or leading others to believe. Oh the many tools of subterfuge.

I will ask again, what do you think 5% of the market is worth? And I will add: What percent do think AMD will have by 2020? I think 20% is plausible however I tend to be more conservative with my predictions and think a 12-15% is far more likely.

 

[Pieter3dnow]

maybe instead of linking irrelevant material (which is funny because you usually ignore requests for links when they are relevant), try actually reading the post. I said alluding ie: Inferring or leading others to believe. Oh the many tools of subterfuge.

I will ask again, what do you think 5% of the market is worth? And I will add: What percent do think AMD will have by 2020? I think 20% is plausible however I tend to be more conservative with my predictions and think a 12-15% is far more likely.

This is baffled me somewhat
https://hardforum.com/threads/vega-rumors.1933112/page-139#post-1043192302

Check the likes