Intels Coffin?

Comixbooks

Comixbooks

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
22,007
I was wondering if this guy was a funeral director. I think he got Coffin from the shape of the lid on the CPU is this something way over my head.


Screenshot_20191109-104835_Amazon Shopping.jpg
 
Last edited:
The last time AMD was on top it was the same story. Intel couldn’t fight so they had a sale. This went on for a little while, much to the delight of AMD flag wavers. But then one day Intel came back with a product.. a very good product, that ended up knocking AMD back into the dirt, for more than a decade.

Wouldn't it be funny if Intel played that same joke? Probably not to the guys who are waving that AMD flag..

The point is you don’t know what Intel is doing. Yes they are getting sand kicked in their face by the bucket load, that doesn’t mean they are done yet.

Enjoy your hardware while it’s still great ;)
 
Intel is going to swing around with some murderously fast hardware. Even if it takes them two years. What some don't realize is that Intel can wait that two years, all the while slowing AMD's market acceptance and penetration by releasing "refreshes" of their existing product stack and some 10nm mobile / embedded parts.

The bigger issue with the security holes that Intel patches out with microcode and software that impact their performance yet, they aren't touting that their new chips deal with. IIRC the newer ones are covered in microcode (which causes a performance hit) and not in actual architectural engineering/design. AND... drum roll please... no one gives a shit. That or the impact of said vulnerabilities is something few care about (aside from the data-center where AMD is gaining ground).

Give them time, they will happily release a new security hole riddled (but ultimate speed faster than anything else prior to patching) architecture for our viewing pleasure sometime soon. Funny thing is, I will probably buy one.

I like AMD, but after I just blew up my 3600 I am realizing that the hardware scene for the AMD stuff is far less forgiving than the Intel stuff. Intel's platform is bulletproof as far as screwing with settings and stability has been concerned (for years now). Their hardware just seems to run smoother. After reverting back to my i5 9600 at 5GHz I am having a hard time reminding myself of the difference between it and the 3600. IN some tasks it spanked the i5 but overall I can't even tell and the fact that my system fires up without issue (on a bullshit MB) works for me. I will definitely be giving the next gen Ryzen stuff a test run when it comes out, but I think I am hanging up my hat on the current architecture.
 
Intel has too much money and experience to be down for an extended amount of time. The same people that say Intel is dead are the ones that claimed AMD would never die and would come back even after they spun off their fabs. Intel isn't spinning off their fabs and they still make tons of money unlike AMD in the BAD years. Not seeing this prophesy of Intel dying coming to fruition.
 
This time around there isn't huge uarch or process gains to be had like last time though.
Only thing I can see is stacked designs but the thermals are going to suck..
Think of HBM but with a core under it..
I don't think it's a magic bullet, chiplet is definitely the way for now.
I don't think Intel will come back as hard this time, maybe break even maybe getting close.. Also no Hector Ruinez to fuck things up, Lisa is solid asf in her execution.
 
Even if Intel stopped doing anything right now, sheer inertia would probably carry them into 2025.
 
I have a new 9700K build on order (pure gamer... literally do nothing else resource intensive with my computer otherwise I would've gone 3700/3800X) and my last AMD chip was a T-Bird 1200MHz. But I am super happy to see Ryzen and new Threadripper kicking Intel's ass up and down the street. Competition is good people, and of course Intel has the resources to come back and will do so. Would be awesome to see the same on the GPU side.
 
Yawn, typical fanboi that has no real idea of what he is talking about but tries to keep up with the kool kids in slating Intel. I bet he secretly uses an Intel machine mainly but doesn't want to admit it. If my Intel overclocked was running those temps then I wouldn't be boasting about it!!!! I have never seen my 8700 get above 65C on sustained full load when o/c!! It idles at mid-low 20C as well!!!!
 
I might get the 10980XE because it can do one thing the Threadrippers can't, drop into my current system... and someone has to see if it can beat the KS in games with 10 cores disabled and 8 overclocked in a minimal heat sharing sequence.
 
Azphira said:
I might get the 10980XE because it can do one thing the Threadrippers can't, drop into my current system... and someone has to see if it can beat the KS in games with 10 cores disabled and 8 overclocked in a minimal heat sharing sequence.
Click to expand...

I asked "Elmor" about that also, in his post on overclock.net.
How it would do with only 8 cores enabled with HT.
 
DooKey said:
Intel has too much money and experience to be down for an extended amount of time. The same people that say Intel is dead are the ones that claimed AMD would never die and would come back even after they spun off their fabs. Intel isn't spinning off their fabs and they still make tons of money unlike AMD in the BAD years. Not seeing this prophesy of Intel dying coming to fruition.
Click to expand...

How can a company like Intel die because of a bad consumer desktop processor? Has anyone look at the net worth of Intel's Server/Networking/WIreless business? I mean c'mon regardless of AMD or Intel fanboy'ism you would be an utter retard to think that Intel is going to die and go out of business over one good win from AMD.

LMAO @ the very concept
 
tangoseal said:
I mean c'mon regardless of AMD or Intel fanboy'ism you would be an utter retard to think that Intel is going to die and go out of business over one good win from AMD.

LMAO @ the very concept
Click to expand...

it’s been not one but a multitude of wins in a row with refinement, conversion to fabless, infinity fabric. ect.

Prepare for two years more of the same - but yeah intel out of business would probably take at least ten years of nothing. Pretty far ferched.
 
Legendary Gamer said:
Intel is going to swing around with some murderously fast hardware. Even if it takes them two years. What some don't realize is that Intel can wait that two years, all the while slowing AMD's market acceptance and penetration by releasing "refreshes" of their existing product stack and some 10nm mobile / embedded parts.

The bigger issue with the security holes that Intel patches out with microcode and software that impact their performance yet, they aren't touting that their new chips deal with. IIRC the newer ones are covered in microcode (which causes a performance hit) and not in actual architectural engineering/design. AND... drum roll please... no one gives a shit. That or the impact of said vulnerabilities is something few care about (aside from the data-center where AMD is gaining ground).

Give them time, they will happily release a new security hole riddled (but ultimate speed faster than anything else prior to patching) architecture for our viewing pleasure sometime soon. Funny thing is, I will probably buy one.

I like AMD, but after I just blew up my 3600 I am realizing that the hardware scene for the AMD stuff is far less forgiving than the Intel stuff. Intel's platform is bulletproof as far as screwing with settings and stability has been concerned (for years now). Their hardware just seems to run smoother. After reverting back to my i5 9600 at 5GHz I am having a hard time reminding myself of the difference between it and the 3600. IN some tasks it spanked the i5 but overall I can't even tell and the fact that my system fires up without issue (on a bullshit MB) works for me. I will definitely be giving the next gen Ryzen stuff a test run when it comes out, but I think I am hanging up my hat on the current architecture.
Click to expand...

1) if you have the capacity to release "murderously fast" hardware, you don't do nothing about it for 3-4 years. Facts are Intel is in trouble and the outlook is not exactly looking like infinite moneybags can solve. So yes they may be waiting it out.

2) less forgiving platforms, you talk like Intel users don't have on masse failures. No overclock is ever really safe. The need to overclock is such a 2000's thing, we are at that stage where things run great out the box. Stop being disingenuous, you blew up the board, not the 3600.
 
freeagentt said:
The last time AMD was on top it was the same story. Intel couldn’t fight so they had a sale. This went on for a little while, much to the delight of AMD flag wavers. But then one day Intel came back with a product.. a very good product, that ended up knocking AMD back into the dirt, for more than a decade.

Wouldn't it be funny if Intel played that same joke? Probably not to the guys who are waving that AMD flag..

The point is you don’t know what Intel is doing. Yes they are getting sand kicked in their face by the bucket load, that doesn’t mean they are done yet.

Enjoy your hardware while it’s still great ;)
Click to expand...

The issue is that CPU design cycles are several years. Intel hasn't come back at AMD hard because it can't yet. It was caught off guard by complacency and they are paying the price for that. However, make no mistake. With its R&D budget, its working on a CPU that will dethrone AMD once again. The real question is not if, but when. The only other unknown is how long Intel's process issues will be a problem. Supposedly, they've got 10nm up and running but are a long ways off of having anything but mobile parts made on it.
 
Intel invested more in share buybacks than r&d. What does that tell you?
 
OrangeKhrush said:
1) if you have the capacity to release "murderously fast" hardware, you don't do nothing about it for 3-4 years. Facts are Intel is in trouble and the outlook is not exactly looking like infinite moneybags can solve. So yes they may be waiting it out.

2) less forgiving platforms, you talk like Intel users don't have on masse failures. No overclock is ever really safe. The need to overclock is such a 2000's thing, we are at that stage where things run great out the box. Stop being disingenuous, you blew up the board, not the 3600.
Click to expand...
First of all, Happy Thanks Giving, hope you and your family are having a good one!

Intel is not in the kind of deep shit that most people seem to believe they are in. They have decades of profit from market leadership and have poured billions into a marketing campaign that is geared to slow the adoption of AMD's new hardware.

AMD has a great competitor in their hands, but it's not completely at Intel performance parity in every way shape and form. It's damn close though, however, it's close and better than a 14nm chip at 7nm... What happens when Intel closes the gap on their own 7nm node? It will be a different story in a couple years.

Intel can take the loss, eat the market share loss and do so in stride. They have more money than god, probably more money than Apple (since they have been the hardware behind Apple for a number of years now) and aren't just sitting on their asses. They are attempting to recoup some money on the utter failure that 10nm turned out to be. They were attempting to get almost twice the density out of 10nm that people are getting out of TSMC's 7nm... That level of endeavor may have failed and the 10nm node might be shit, however, they will milk that shit for some ROI.

The last time I roasted a motherboard while attempting to OC an Intel chip was... never. The platform has been incredibly mature for a long time. That being said, Intel board partners and Intel themselves have gated access to Overclocking their chips by limiting you to a certain board type typically and generally offer boards more than capable of handling the OC.

AMD is in it's infancy of adoption for their new architecture. The Initial Ryzen release may have surprised many, however, it was already out dated the moment it shipped. Second gen was a node improvement and more of the same. (incredible value and perfect for many use cases) Third Gen (second gen) is close to Intel Parity, this is the first product that's really kicking Intel in the balls because their 10nm node didn't pan out and they have been sitting on their balls since Sandy Bridge came out.
Thus the platform will not push the chips in uniform fashion across the product stack, especially, on older generations of it.

It can't (AMD) but a 99 buck Intel board can expect to OC a 9700K to 5 Ghz on all 8 cores, you can't do that on an AMD 99 buck board. You will light the fucking board on fire trying to get the processor past 4.2Ghz. UNLESS you drop 300-700 dollars on the board that will let you do whatever the hell you want to do to your new chip.

I didn't kill the 3600. It still works fine. I killed the Gigabyte Motherboard pushing the 3600. Not sure where I ever said I nuked the AMD processor, just that in earlier posts I said I might have (verified I did not later).

Hope that clarifies what I am thinking
 
Last edited:
Legendary Gamer said:
First of all, Happy Thanks Giving, hope you and your family are having a good one!

Intel is not in the kind of deep shit that most people seem to believe they are in. They have decades of profit from market leadership and have poured billions into a marketing campaign that is geared to slow the adoption of AMD's new hardware.

AMD has a great competitor in their hands, but it's not completely at Intel performance parity in every way shape and form. It's damn close though, however, it's close and better than a 14nm chip at 7nm... What happens when Intel closes the gap on their own 7nm node? It will be a different story in a couple years.

Intel can take the loss, eat the market share loss and do so in stride. They have more money than god, probably more money than Apple (since they have been the hardware behind Apple for a number of years now) and aren't just sitting on their asses. They are attempting to recoup some money on the utter failure that 10nm turned out to be. They were attempting to get almost twice the density out of 10nm that people are getting out of TSMC's 7nm... That level of endeavor may have failed and the 10nm node might be shit, however, they will milk that shit for some ROI.

The last time I roasted a motherboard while attempting to OC an Intel chip was... never. The platform has been incredibly mature for a long time. That being said, Intel board partners and Intel themselves have gated access to Overclocking their chips by limiting you to a certain board type typically and generally offer boards more than capable of handling the OC.

AMD is in it's infancy of adoption for their new architecture. The Initial Ryzen release may have surprised many, however, it was already out dated the moment it shipped. Second gen was a node improvement and more of the same. (incredible value and perfect for many use cases) Third Gen (second gen) is close to Intel Parity, this is the first product that's really kicking Intel in the balls because their 10nm node didn't pan out and they have been sitting on their balls since Sandy Bridge came out.
Thus the platform will not push the chips in uniform fashion across the product stack, especially, on older generations of it.

It can't (AMD) but a 99 buck Intel board can expect to OC a 9700K to 5 Ghz on all 8 cores, you can't do that on an AMD 99 buck board. You will light the fucking board on fire trying to get the processor past 4.2Ghz. UNLESS you drop 300-700 dollars on the board that will let you do whatever the hell you want to do to your new chip.

I didn't kill the 3600. It still works fine. I killed the Gigabyte Motherboard pushing the 3600. Not sure where I ever said I nuked the AMD processor, just that in earlier posts I said I might have (verified I did not later).

Hope that clarifies what I am thinking
Click to expand...

10nm was supposed to be out in 2015 but has been pushed to 2020-2021, I would regard Intel's 10nm faux pas as a major problem. It was also reported 4 years ago Intel's R&D debt was at 12bn climbing last estimates were around 30bn unservised debt that is massive. Intel has implementation problems not less limited to mitigations. There is talk that minimum standard mitigation will be forced with criminal sanctions for deviations. This is in light of increased cyber crimes.

As for performance it is really only clockspeed saving Intel, but I weigh up the negative, more power, heat, transistor stress adds up. aMD at base is more or less Intel around 4.9ghz. AMD have gotten stability dialled in, more getting to 4.4-4.5ghz now though the beauty of AMD is clockspeed nets worse gains than memory tweaking it is a balance that nets you best results. When you can get a 3600 approaching stock 9900k scores you kind of see potential, Intel is basically maxed out 5.2 is a watershed but it will come down as 10nm has power limitations
 
OrangeKhrush said:
10nm was supposed to be out in 2015 but has been pushed to 2020-2021, I would regard Intel's 10nm faux pas as a major problem. It was also reported 4 years ago Intel's R&D debt was at 12bn climbing last estimates were around 30bn unservised debt that is massive. Intel has implementation problems not less limited to mitigations. There is talk that minimum standard mitigation will be forced with criminal sanctions for deviations. This is in light of increased cyber crimes.

As for performance it is really only clockspeed saving Intel, but I weigh up the negative, more power, heat, transistor stress adds up. aMD at base is more or less Intel around 4.9ghz. AMD have gotten stability dialled in, more getting to 4.4-4.5ghz now though the beauty of AMD is clockspeed nets worse gains than memory tweaking it is a balance that nets you best results. When you can get a 3600 approaching stock 9900k scores you kind of see potential, Intel is basically maxed out 5.2 is a watershed but it will come down as 10nm has power limitations
Click to expand...
Intel has some issues to be certain due to the mismanagement of 10nm.

I agree with you on the AMD front. The real beauty of the Ryzen platform is it's IPC efficiency. It was more efficient than Intel, even on the first gen parts. The real issue was the clock speed couldn't really rise much above 4.1 then 4.2 on 12nm parts. With 7nm parts being rather clock speed limited and some odd behaviors with boost clocks on the "3rd gen" parts being what's really holding AMD back. Clock for clock the 3rd gen parts destroy Intel overall. I am guessing this will improve as the silicon yields improve and AMD dials in their microcode updates. 10nm on Intel is going to kill Intel on clockspeed, yields just aren.t there and they are only deploying it for lower clocked mobile parts (ATM).

What worries me is that AMD is still milking Vega and is incorporating it on their next gen 7nm architecture APUs... I have no idea WTF they are doing. Only thing I can think of is that the process was too far along and Navi wasn't mature enough so they pushed it off until heterogeneous matured more on the APU side. Most data points to Intel already out pacing AMD's Vega on the APU side, even with their older stuff (in many benches). With the advent of true Intel APUs the fact that AMD hasn't knocked the design out of the park already makes me think they will never achieve the market penetration they want to.

AMD needed to be better than Intel in every way, with a clearly superior lead in order to steal the market. They haven't leveraged all their design wins yet. Those advancements might come too little too late, especially with the project management talent behind directing engineering to build the Ryzen parts, on the Blue team, Jim Keller. He's not super man, but the dude knows how to organize talent under one roof and churn out design wins like nobody's business.

I only hope that AMD can keep up the pressure to keep the market place competitive for a couple more years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
AMD and Intel is like choosing Turbo Diesel or Petrol, each has upside though Diesel is designed to be a perfect balance of power, efficiency and longevity.

Not really concerned about APU's they are designed for people that won't go discrete and thus cost managed or SSF HTPC type setups and the price makes them unbeatable in that segment. Intel may try a new i5 5775C thing but it will just be an expensive novelty in a price bracket where entry level dGPUs roflstomp it.

AMD also makes royalties on Vega branded Intel iGPUs.

AMD just have to keep innovating and people will keep buying, it is not what Intel are doing financially it is what AMD does to keep growing their revenue which is on the up and up due to consistent upgrades and fresh innovation. AMD projected revenue gains year on year and that has been true as a much smaller operation they are making a ton of money.
 
freeagentt said:
Enjoy your hardware while it’s still great ;)
Click to expand...

That's what I do with my hardware regardless of vendor. When AMD was great I had AMD, when AMD stopped being great I had Intel. I'm back at AMD now. When i'm due for my next upgrade, it will be the vendor that has the better product.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Cascade Lake is here!



Ooops but it got crushed by AMD Zen 2.

I have no doubt that Intel has plans to release a new platform to compete but Cascade Lake just screams 'we give up' for this generation at least.

Intel really needs to master their fab process and come out with a revolutionary product on a better process.

Otherwise this could just keep getting even uglier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top