Just What does Intel Have up Its Sleeve in Response to Ryzen?

thesmokingman said:
Ugh, not gonna harp on this but why is it that you convey this in a negative way? Like do you expect Intel to produce a top end gpu while simultaneously producing a top cpu as well (ignoring the fact that they cannot produce a decent gpu)? At 1/50th the R&D budget? Like wtf man that's asking a bit much.
Click to expand...

AMD has two major products. By not rolling them out at the same time, you lose out the synergy of sales for both. Granted, cpu's will probably sell like hotcakes assuming all the leaks are true, however by failing to release them as a platform it dilutes the impact they could have had. From a marketing perspective, what do you think of when you hear Intel? Just the cpu, you don't think ARM, storage, iot, blah blah blah. AMD? CPU and graphics. Many of us buy a whole new system at once (as in my my previous post, my current system is from 2011). I might upgrade the gpu once during that cycle. AMD can sell me a cpu and then I have to wait for the gpu. Am I patient? 3-4 months isn't a long time to wait. But you can see from all the vitriol and vinegar that not many people are out there mixing their CPU/GPU brands, people on HardOCP seeming to be the exception. Many people don't even buy discrete cards anymore. That is about the opposite of what I'm saying, but if they released their APUs with the Vega improvements, then it is a triple whammy.

All I'm saying it would have a been a coup if they were able to do both at once, they would get a bunch of people to buy into one platform and guess what? They would stay with for a half decade or more, get their friends to buy the same thing, etc etc... Their was much more to be gained than lost if they had either come out with both at the same time by delaying Ryzen or spending money moving up Vega. Frankly, their stock price needs the bump. You can look at it from two ways: the current plan of release cpu now, get great sales, stock price goes up for Q1 release, then quarters of Intel lowering prices etc, then second bump in Q2 from Vega release, then quarters of Nvidia lowering prices; or what I would have liked to see, release them both at the same time, stunning both of the industry leaders at once and making a double impact. Maybe their current strategy will work fine, but I think they lose some momentum by splitting it out. And yes, I do expect them do more with their budget. They don't do process anymore, they are fabless. I don't know personally what amount goes into process vs cpu/gpu design, but I'm pretty sure they get to devote a majority to design. Yes, they actually have to test their stuff in real life, but the capital investment for AMD is almost nothing compared to Intel and Nvidia.

The whole is more than the sum of the parts.

So here's to waiting another 4 months, if I can stick it out. I'm just playing MTGO right now anyways since my 680 cooked itself.
 
ngoy said:
AMD has two major products. By not rolling them out at the same time, you lose out the synergy of sales for both. Granted, cpu's will probably sell like hotcakes assuming all the leaks are true, however by failing to release them as a platform it dilutes the impact they could have had. From a marketing perspective, what do you think of when you hear Intel? Just the cpu, you don't think ARM, storage, iot, blah blah blah. AMD? CPU and graphics. Many of us buy a whole new system at once (as in my my previous post, my current system is from 2011). I might upgrade the gpu once during that cycle. AMD can sell me a cpu and then I have to wait for the gpu. Am I patient? 3-4 months isn't a long time to wait. But you can see from all the vitriol and vinegar that not many people are out there mixing their CPU/GPU brands, people on HardOCP seeming to be the exception. Many people don't even buy discrete cards anymore. That is about the opposite of what I'm saying, but if they released their APUs with the Vega improvements, then it is a triple whammy.

All I'm saying it would have a been a coup if they were able to do both at once, they would get a bunch of people to buy into one platform and guess what? They would stay with for a half decade or more, get their friends to buy the same thing, etc etc... Their was much more to be gained than lost if they had either come out with both at the same time by delaying Ryzen or spending money moving up Vega. Frankly, their stock price needs the bump. You can look at it from two ways: the current plan of release cpu now, get great sales, stock price goes up for Q1 release, then quarters of Intel lowering prices etc, then second bump in Q2 from Vega release, then quarters of Nvidia lowering prices; or what I would have liked to see, release them both at the same time, stunning both of the industry leaders at once and making a double impact. Maybe their current strategy will work fine, but I think they lose some momentum by splitting it out. And yes, I do expect them do more with their budget. They don't do process anymore, they are fabless. I don't know personally what amount goes into process vs cpu/gpu design, but I'm pretty sure they get to devote a majority to design. Yes, they actually have to test their stuff in real life, but the capital investment for AMD is almost nothing compared to Intel and Nvidia.

The whole is more than the sum of the parts.

So here's to waiting another 4 months, if I can stick it out. I'm just playing MTGO right now anyways since my 680 cooked itself.
Click to expand...

What? Seriously, quoted for posterity.
 
ngoy said:
AMD has two major products. By not rolling them out at the same time, you lose out the synergy of sales for both. Granted, cpu's will probably sell like hotcakes assuming all the leaks are true, however by failing to release them as a platform it dilutes the impact they could have had. From a marketing perspective, what do you think of when you hear Intel? Just the cpu, you don't think ARM, storage, iot, blah blah blah. AMD? CPU and graphics. Many of us buy a whole new system at once (as in my my previous post, my current system is from 2011). I might upgrade the gpu once during that cycle. AMD can sell me a cpu and then I have to wait for the gpu. Am I patient? 3-4 months isn't a long time to wait. But you can see from all the vitriol and vinegar that not many people are out there mixing their CPU/GPU brands, people on HardOCP seeming to be the exception. Many people don't even buy discrete cards anymore. That is about the opposite of what I'm saying, but if they released their APUs with the Vega improvements, then it is a triple whammy.

All I'm saying it would have a been a coup if they were able to do both at once, they would get a bunch of people to buy into one platform and guess what? They would stay with for a half decade or more, get their friends to buy the same thing, etc etc... Their was much more to be gained than lost if they had either come out with both at the same time by delaying Ryzen or spending money moving up Vega. Frankly, their stock price needs the bump. You can look at it from two ways: the current plan of release cpu now, get great sales, stock price goes up for Q1 release, then quarters of Intel lowering prices etc, then second bump in Q2 from Vega release, then quarters of Nvidia lowering prices; or what I would have liked to see, release them both at the same time, stunning both of the industry leaders at once and making a double impact. Maybe their current strategy will work fine, but I think they lose some momentum by splitting it out. And yes, I do expect them do more with their budget. They don't do process anymore, they are fabless. I don't know personally what amount goes into process vs cpu/gpu design, but I'm pretty sure they get to devote a majority to design. Yes, they actually have to test their stuff in real life, but the capital investment for AMD is almost nothing compared to Intel and Nvidia.

The whole is more than the sum of the parts.

So here's to waiting another 4 months, if I can stick it out. I'm just playing MTGO right now anyways since my 680 cooked itself.
Click to expand...


Do people really go out and buy all their parts for a new build all at once?

In my 25+ years of building my own systems I' don't think I've ever done this. Every build I do is an incremental upgrade reusing most of the parts from my previous build. The only time I can think of that I've ever bought GPU's and Motherboards at the same time has been when the standard for connectivity changed. (ISA -> VLB, VLB -> PCI, PCI -> AGP, and AGP -> PCIe) Essentially, my current build is still the spiritual successor of my 286 from 1991, upgraded piece by piece over the years.

I'm considering going Ryzen depending on how the official tests look, but when I do, I'm definitely not buying a new GPU at the same time. I'll be buying a motherboard, a CPU and some RAM (just because of the new DDR4 requirement, otherwise I'd keep my old RAM). The GPU is staying as well, as is the case, my drives, my water loop, and just about every other part. I only extremely rarely do "from scratch" builds, and then it's only dfor a secondary project (like a HTPC) or a system for my stepson or something like that (and even then, I used mostly parts from the old parts bin in my basement).

In reality, a major product launch like Ryzen sucks absolutely everything out of a company. There are people across multiple departments working overtime to make it happen right. You try to do TWO major releases at the same time, and inevitably something is going to get effed up. It's better to focus on one, and then do the other.
 
thesmokingman said:
What? Seriously, quoted for posterity.
Click to expand...

You asked, I answered, I think anyone who now reads your five words as a reply is scratching their heads looking at you. If you need something explained more then ask a question. I guess maybe I didn't answer your original question. So yes, I expect them to do more with their money and 1/50th of the same budget. They've had 6 years since bulldozer. It looks like they made a the right investments to make Ryzen. Pray Intel and Nvidia don't have anything in the pipeline. Really wish I could buy the latest complete platform from them assuming the benchmarks are good. /EOM
 
ngoy said:
You asked, I answered, I think anyone who now reads your five words as a reply is scratching their heads looking at you. If you need something explained more then ask a question. I guess maybe I didn't answer your original question. So yes, I expect them to do more with their money and 1/50th of the same budget. They've had 6 years since bulldozer. It looks like they made a the right investments to make Ryzen. Pray Intel and Nvidia don't have anything in the pipeline. Really wish I could buy the latest complete platform from them assuming the benchmarks are good. /EOM
Click to expand...

You have made a case for yourself and those needing to build a new machine.
There are very few other reasons to upgrade the motherboard, CPU, ram and gfx card at the same time.
AMD could stall the launch of Ryzen until Vega is ready but that would be stupid.

There is nothing lost upgrading just the CPU + motherboard now.
Your point has no point.
 
oldmanbal said:
A KABILLIION dollar cpu company pushing storage is clearly lacking a timely response to AMD. This isn't a quick fix scenario. This is YEARS OF R/D AND PLANNING that they have not invested into keeping their product significantly better than a floundering competitor. Really no excuse why they don't have a significantly faster product, other than greed, and capitalism.
Click to expand...

Those small node factories that intel owns and invest in to stay ahead of the curve aren't exactly cheap. It's taking them much longer to recoup cost.

But I will admit they are shooting themselves in the foot a bit. Intel has been raking us over the coals with BS incremental improvements with the same or higher prices over the years while holding back the lucrative multi cores for server only budgets. When intel claimed, "This generation is 30%->40% faster than the last" I consider that a broad faced lie as it only applied to very specific metrics and not general purpose computing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
well my system is still a first gen i7-920 24GB so its going to be a complete new system (not sure what i do with this system seems a shame to just sell it for £300-400)

so its going to be all out system [email protected] (or slightly older 6 core i7) or 1700X@4Ghz , 2x16GB (32GB) , probably 1080, 1TB SSD, 4TB HDD (probably a 144 g-sync monitor as well to get back into gaming)

no point getting the 1800x as same overclock + £100 more, that should last me for another 5-7 years (unless i sell it in within 2 years for a reasonable price as i have done in the past)

it all depends on the reviews (as i do need per core high IPS for games that are still single threaded but if its not far off 7700k like 80-90% per core then i guess its a go) not sure if not having Quad channel DDR is going to harm them or not on RYZEN

basically any system is faster than what i have got so 8 core 16 thread is very interesting
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Do people really go out and buy all their parts for a new build all at once?

In my 25+ years of building my own systems I' don't think I've ever done this. Every build I do is an incremental upgrade reusing most of the parts from my previous build. The only time I can think of that I've ever bought GPU's and Motherboards at the same time has been when the standard for connectivity changed. (ISA -> VLB, VLB -> PCI, PCI -> AGP, and AGP -> PCIe) Essentially, my current build is still the spiritual successor of my 286 from 1991, upgraded piece by piece over the years.

I'm considering going Ryzen depending on how the official tests look, but when I do, I'm definitely not buying a new GPU at the same time. I'll be buying a motherboard, a CPU and some RAM (just because of the new DDR4 requirement, otherwise I'd keep my old RAM). The GPU is staying as well, as is the case, my drives, my water loop, and just about every other part. I only extremely rarely do "from scratch" builds, and then it's only dfor a secondary project (like a HTPC) or a system for my stepson or something like that (and even then, I used mostly parts from the old parts bin in my basement).

In reality, a major product launch like Ryzen sucks absolutely everything out of a company. There are people across multiple departments working overtime to make it happen right. You try to do TWO major releases at the same time, and inevitably something is going to get effed up. It's better to focus on one, and then do the other.
Click to expand...

I might upgrade one thing in between, which mostly has been the GPU. I went from one early clone IBM 8088s (in 1984), to a 286 in 1988 (replacing the motherboard in the IBM). I only vaguely remember the graphics back then, I think I had moved the CGA graphics card to the 286, then finally got a VGA ISA card. I replaced the whole 286 with a new 386 and the same graphics card, then replace that later on with a 486 and some vesa vl-bus thing? I remember really wanting a 486dx66 but it was on the order of $550 or something then, I'll have to find an old Byte or Computer shopper (I have a few from way back when) and check. I got a second PC with an AMD K6-2 (don't remember too much at this point, I had kids) and then went to a P2 of some sort I think with a Voodoo and gave my kid the AMD system. Iirc, I skipped the P3 and went to a P4 and upgraded to a 9600xt for graphics?, got an athlon for my son somewhere in all this (my timing is off because, kids) , then got some socket 775 intel chip was a core2 duo, with a 460 gtx, and now I'm on my current system, which is a 2500k and a 680 (well, a 960 since my son upgraded and my 680 cooked itself). The two AMD builds were ground up, the last 2 or 3 Intel builds were ground up also iirc. I've had a few one off's also like you, two for htpc (although both were already self contained units) and some for friends/family.

I've done both upgrade and ground up, I just really think they could have delivered a one-two punch if both had come out simultaneously. Today you have Intel supposedly lowering prices, and then Nvidia with their 1080ti announcement. Having Vega out would totally take the wind out of Nvidia's ploy, even if the ti is the fastest thing on the planet, a card as fast as a 1080 for near half the price is a win.

My company has separate marketing arms, our brands do not have direct synergy with each other though, power tools, hand tools, automotive, etc...may have product types that are shared across the portfolios, but the branding is different as well as the tool quality.
 
I upgrade CPU/Mobo every 5-7 years and GPU every 3 or so. Asking for a small company like AMD to launch two huge launches at the same time is asking for two inferior or problem ridden products.
 
Design1stcode2nd said:
I upgrade CPU/Mobo every 5-7 years and GPU every 3 or so. Asking for a small company like AMD to launch two huge launches at the same time is asking for two inferior or problem ridden products.
Click to expand...

well first thing, we only know a small bit about Ryzens performance, and secondly we don't know anything about Vega.
 
Without reading all 4 pages, my guess is intel's response will be not a damn thing, coupled with a price drop

At BEST they may re-brand some Xeons. Intel has been fucking over the enthusiast community for a long time... all while telling us that they have no interest in the enthusiast community.

They even told you they weren't focused on PC's anymore last year

https://www.extremetech.com/computi...ree-areas-of-growth-none-of-which-involve-pcs
 
rgMekanic said:
Without reading all 4 pages, my guess is intel's response will be not a damn thing, coupled with a price drop
Click to expand...

That is half right. The "not a damn thing" half.

There won't be a steep price drop, probably no price drop at all.

All the claims of price drops so far are bullshit. Based on comparing street price to MSRP.

But we had the same street prices 6 months ago, so there hasn't been any price drop.

Anyone doing such a comparison is either clueless, or trying to fool people.

If you look back to the Athlon/Athlon 64 era when AMD was legitimately kicking Intels Ass, Intel really didn't bother with price cuts even then. So why would they today?

Especially when you have enthusiasts saying they will stick with Intel for 5GHz x 4 cores, over 4GHz x 8 cores.
 
That is half right. The "not a damn thing" half.
Click to expand...

Intel will have a 6C / 12T i7 on the mainstream platform later this year. Although that is not a response it was on the roadmap for over a year.
 
AMD will put Intel nail in coffin no questions, This year AMD CPU will drop price during Black Friday.

For example, 1800x $399 to $379 ? or even lower.

Intel is dead.
 
Snowdog said:
If you look back to the Athlon/Athlon 64 era when AMD was legitimately kicking Intels Ass, Intel really didn't bother with price cuts even then. So why would they today?
Click to expand...

Well there are less people buying CPUs these days. Even in the early 2000s, average people would occasionally do a platform upgrade to save cost over buying an entirely new PC. They'd go down to their local computer store and get it done for them. These days, those people are mostly using laptops and just throw out their old ones and buy a whole new one. The only real market for individual CPUs these days are gamers and to a lesser extent, those who use workstations at home. Assuming Intel still holds the lead for the fastest CPU, which I assume their 10 core i7 will, I don't see much changing for professional workstations that need the fastest CPU. A few thousand dollars likely means nothing to the companies that use them while being a worthwhile investment.

So in short, I can see a price drop for consumer i5 and i7s. Their smaller market is more informed these days (because we're all enthusiasts), and the "Intel is better" marketing or brand recognition doesn't mean anything anymore. Because people want a "2017" edition of the Macbook Pro, and couldn't care less what is under the hood. I don't seem them slashing prices by 100%, but I can see some 30-40% discounts. But I may be wrong, and maybe Intel will keep them high. But it would not surprise me if they did.
 
phatbx133 said:
AMD will put Intel nail in coffin no questions, This year AMD CPU will drop price during Black Friday.

For example, 1800x $399 to $379 ? or even lower.

Intel is dead.
Click to expand...
I'm always impressed by people who think companies like Intel, Microsoft, or Google are just hanging in there and one wrong move will do them in. Now might be a good time to mention Intel is worth over 100 billion and had a revenue of almost 60 billion last year. Nail in the coffin!
 
He thinks its funny to create bait posts.
Best ignored,
 
PeaKr said:
The K7 days were glorious, still have my circuit trace pen. Yes intel fucked amd. amd should have done a better job with marketing. Its good to see them back.

and Athlon was one of the coolest processor names of all time.
Click to expand...
ATHLON K7 changed the world... the fanboi wars were biblical back then... INTELLIOTS were shocked. great times
 
thesmokingman said:
It's gonna be dead in the water, requiring yet another socket.
Click to expand...

like kaby lake did?

because coffee lake is a rehash of skylake, again, just like kaby was

these times are kinda unique, as in newer CPU's from Intel didn't gain any IPC increase through changes in the architecture, but only clocked higher


remember those Intel slides; +15% performance from 6th to 7th generation; +15% from 7th to 8th?

those are just higher clocks through a more and more mature manufacturing process


if I can pop in a 6 core i7 next year January in my z170, I'm gonna go for that one

if it does require a new board I'm so going for Ryzen
 
My opinions

1. Intel can afford to undercut AMD for far longer than AMD can afford to under cut Intel, so the competitive edge is in Intel's hands when it comes to pricing.

2. After taking a closer look at the AM4 platform, I can only conclude that 1800X is basically a i7-6850k CPU installed on a Z97 motherboard, IE the feature set is severely lacking. The chipset lanes on Z270 are all PCI-E 3.0, where as all chipset lanes on AM4 are all 2.0, which I believe 1150 chipsets were the last to use them. Also, Ryzen can only use 64GB RAM, X99 has a max of 128GB, and that was available 3 years ago, if not more at this stage.

3. The lower end Ryzens, ironically, still don't have much against G4560 by looking at the specs, but I am willing to be proven wrong. Still, Kaby Lake will still have the edge due to their media DRM decoding support, and if Ryzen has it as well, G4560 is still out of reach for Ryzen because you don't really need more than that for HTPC unless you are going to be doing heavy gaming on it as well.

I would still continue to keep an eye out on Ryzen's future iterations however, but particularly the chipset features.

If I were to upgrade my main rig, here and now, Ryzen doesn't have that pull it needs to win me over, the chipset features is a gen or two behind.
 
chenw said:
My opinions

1. Intel can afford to undercut AMD for far longer than AMD can afford to under cut Intel, so the competitive edge is in Intel's hands when it comes to pricing.
Click to expand...

Intel has never shown any interest in competing with AMD on price, even in K7/K8 days when AMD had better CPUs than Intel, Intel still charged more. There will never be a price war.

Intel is confident that the enthusiast market is full of Intel enthusiasts, that will stick with Intel unless AMD clearly better in every possible way ( a sentiment echoed by the rest of your post).

Considering that you can clock top Intels close to 5GHz and AMDs to 4GHz, hardly any of the Intel enthusiast market is considering moving.

Intel is going to pretend Ryzen doesn't exist, and unfortunately for AMD, so will most of the "enthusiast" market.
 
Snowdog said:
Intel is going to pretend Ryzen doesn't exist, and unfortunately for AMD, so will most of the "enthusiast" market.
Click to expand...

I don't think they need to pretend. And I say that hat in hand with tears in my eyes.
 
Snowdog said:
Intel has never shown any interest in competing with AMD on price, even in K7/K8 days when AMD had better CPUs than Intel, Intel still charged more. There will never be a price war.
Click to expand...
Publicly, yes, but for vendors, that's not true. they were undercutting AMD left and right, sometimes selling below costs, offering enormous discounts if companies agreed NOT to buy from AMD, etc. Who knows if they would do anything that reckless (and illegal) again, but during the Athlon days, they did EVERYTHING to suppress AMD.
 
Snowdog said:
Intel is going to pretend Ryzen doesn't exist, and unfortunately for AMD, so will most of the "enthusiast" market.
Click to expand...

I'll pretend Ryzen doesn't exist this generation, since I just upgraded to a 7700k. Next generation or after, we'll see where they sit, cause I'll want a upgrade then.

Sadly, a lot of "enthusiasts" will only pay attention to gaming benchmarks. Which I think will tip in Intel's favor, until 4/6 core products from AMD come.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top