WSM only mean so much coming from Intel at this point IMHO, based on their numerous and costly delays many times over, cool they have "the fastest yada yada yada" but how many are actually on the shelf for a reasonable price to their customers (such as Asus) which leads to the end consumer (me and you)
proper news when THEY (Intel in this case, likely allowed Asus to say such things without fear of mega law suit) tell the full truth of things instead of 1/2 baked baloney..quite sure Investors would feel very much the same..
not that long ago they said similar things "have no fear we are on track for high volume production"
delay delay, problem problem, to the tune of 10s-100s of millions (if not billions in case of failed 10nm RTM designs)
Time will tell if they start actually meeting their overall demand without sacrificing many things to make it so (not to mention slap on higher price tag then they rightfully should have again IMHO
this is going into 2020, the BS train should have stayed back a decade ago instead of finding new tracks to go on
And some time next year they're competing with Renoir, which should be closer in perf and power (though I expect Intel to stay ahead on battery life). If Skylake-ish laptop chips are still in the mix by then the comparisons will be interesting.
I'd guess Intel sorts this out soonish: smaller laptop chips are "easier" for a new node, and they must get that leaving a big void here would be a huge mistake. Still, hard to rule anything out completely given how things have gone lately.
How do you figure? AMD is already far more power efficient than Intel. They have 16 cores consuming far lower power than an 8 core CPU for crying out loud.
If anything, Zen 2 should absolutely sing on mobile.
They're ahead on power under heavy load, which helps them fit more within a given TDP, but fine-tuning power use under light or no load is also a big part of battery life. The progress they've made can only help regardless, and I'd be happy to be surprised by better results than I expected!
Zen (not even Zen+) on mobile is already more efficient than Intel... under load. It's really idle and light loads where AMD is still losing. The answer probably still lies in the early Infinity Fabric analysis. Scales up and out, but cannot really scale down. Also, still hasn't provided faster time-to-market w.r.t. CPU+GPU integration, so far.
On laptops Intel is far ahead from AMD in efficiency, and this comes from an AMD fan. Thanks to the fear of ARM and their huge investments on Atoms for over a decade, Intel has managed to create extremely efficient CPUs for laptops. AMD unfortunately had to drop some projects because of financial and other typed of constrains, so they haven't really invested in that area. 7nm are going to really help them allot but maybe not as much as to make them beat Intel in power efficiency. We can only hope to see mobile AMD CPUs that will offer at least close to the efficiency of Intel CPUs, while being at the same level of performance.
@yannigr2 Last I checked their were 6 large laptop makers and of the beginning of 2019 3 of them were INTC houses only. INTC controlled the entire laptop market along with NVDA. I am pretty sure Lisa Su has a plan around mobile as its such a big market. You are right that INTC does have some very efficient laptop chips but that should not surprise AMD. It will be interesting to see how good the 7nm mobile chips are from AMD.
Intel does have OEMs in it's pocket, probably bound to multi year contracts not yet expired, but because OEMs are in a business they intend to keep doing for decades, they can't switch to AMD before they are 100% sure that AMD will keep producing top chips for many many years to come, not just for a year or two. That and the fact that with Intel chips they can promote light and slim laptops with more battery hours than with any AMD solution, doesn't really help. But don't expect miracles from 7nm. Better efficiency, but not miracles. AMD hasn't invested there all those years, only on performance. AMD manages to improve efficiency only when it jumps to newer manufacturing node. It doesn't have the power and personnel to hit two targets at once, performance AND efficiency(especially at low load or idle).
As for Nvidia, I don't think it has the same influence as Intel on OEMs. It sells more GPUs on laptop manufacturers because of the efficiency of it's designs and performance. But many OEMs prefer AMD low end cards than Nvidia for their cheaper models. The fact that Nvidia doesn't sell X86 CPUs, makes it almost impossible to convince OEMs to not chose AMD. Nvidia is a huge and really strong company today, but it could also collapse in a year or two if it loses it's advantages in GPUs. It sells nothing else that can bring billions. Only GPUs.
After watching the somewhat hilarious review of the 3950X by Wendell of Level1Techs, I've found that I can no longer recommend Intel for anything. Even in cases where Intel leads in performance, it takes much more power and generates much more heat for very little extra performance. Between that and continuous security issues, I'm going to stay away unless Intel seriously rethinks their architecture. Hopefully they won't make the same types of mistakes with their GPUs as they do their CPUs.
It doesn't matter if they can win in games by even 5-10% (although I haven't seen any large wins like that without huge overclocks). The price, security, and power efficiency just isn't there. This is coming from someone who, prior to my Threadripper, has been with Intel since the Core 2 Quad Q6600 launched (Q6600 -> i7 2600k).
I can't wait until Zen 2 hits mobile, because when it does, I'm selling my laptop and getting an AMD based one.
Well there are for me -- got an i9-9900KF for $250 (retired employee pricing program). I got 10 cores running at 5GHz, but it was a bit hotter than I liked with only air cooling for full time use.
I could say the same for Anandtech those last years. Nine out of ten times reviews here are extremely carefully written to focus on positives for Intel and downplay huge negatives. It hasn't became like Tom's of course, thankfully it's far from Tom's, but it is obvious. Even the review of the 3950X here was giving me the impression that AMD is still trying to catch up to Intel, while other reviews from various sites/youtubers where much more enthusiastic. And don't say that AMD is paying sites for positive reviews. They don't have the financial power and influence of Intel.
Obviously Intel can supply channels, AMD nope, there is not enough 7nm silicon around to do this. Intel choses to maintain the control of the market, AMD choses to follow new streets knowing well to have not momentum to penetrate the market over a certain limit. Looking carefully Intel strategy have a sense and it is very similar to Nvidia way to act. AMD will be forever a second source for both Cpus an GPUs. Intel is too large and rich, Nvidia too advanced and flexible.
Don't bet your house on Nvidia. They will lose sales because of Intel's GPUs, they will lose their edge on AI in a couple of years also, because everyone is trying to manufacture it's own AI chip. And in GPUs, AMD does have now an architecture for gaming. It doesn't try to compete with Nvidia using an architecture that was build for compute. Intel, yes, it's still the huge company that can supply the world with 70-80% of all the x86 CPUs needed. But if their 7nm get delayed, they will be in very very very deep s...problems.
I think having a single dominant chip maker is the reason for downfall of Pc & mobile industry The market was soo dependent on intel that when it f**ckd up the market suffered I think OEM'S promoting amd is a good thing it's a consumer friendly decision as it will promote competition
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
20 Comments
Back to Article
Dragonstongue - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
WSM only mean so much coming from Intel at this point IMHO, based on their numerous and costly delays many times over, cool they have "the fastest yada yada yada" but how many are actually on the shelf for a reasonable price to their customers (such as Asus) which leads to the end consumer (me and you)proper news when THEY (Intel in this case, likely allowed Asus to say such things without fear of mega law suit) tell the full truth of things instead of 1/2 baked baloney..quite sure Investors would feel very much the same..
not that long ago they said similar things "have no fear we are on track for high volume production"
delay delay, problem problem, to the tune of 10s-100s of millions (if not billions in case of failed 10nm RTM designs)
Time will tell if they start actually meeting their overall demand without sacrificing many things to make it so (not to mention slap on higher price tag then they rightfully should have again IMHO
this is going into 2020, the BS train should have stayed back a decade ago instead of finding new tracks to go on
(^.^)
Jorgp2 - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
Loltwotwotwo - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
And some time next year they're competing with Renoir, which should be closer in perf and power (though I expect Intel to stay ahead on battery life). If Skylake-ish laptop chips are still in the mix by then the comparisons will be interesting.I'd guess Intel sorts this out soonish: smaller laptop chips are "easier" for a new node, and they must get that leaving a big void here would be a huge mistake. Still, hard to rule anything out completely given how things have gone lately.
eek2121 - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
How do you figure? AMD is already far more power efficient than Intel. They have 16 cores consuming far lower power than an 8 core CPU for crying out loud.If anything, Zen 2 should absolutely sing on mobile.
twotwotwo - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
They're ahead on power under heavy load, which helps them fit more within a given TDP, but fine-tuning power use under light or no load is also a big part of battery life. The progress they've made can only help regardless, and I'd be happy to be surprised by better results than I expected!jeremyshaw - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
Zen (not even Zen+) on mobile is already more efficient than Intel... under load. It's really idle and light loads where AMD is still losing. The answer probably still lies in the early Infinity Fabric analysis. Scales up and out, but cannot really scale down. Also, still hasn't provided faster time-to-market w.r.t. CPU+GPU integration, so far.Jorgp2 - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
Not in the mobile space.And on the desktop they only have a lewd due to 7nm
yannigr2 - Saturday, November 16, 2019 - link
On laptops Intel is far ahead from AMD in efficiency, and this comes from an AMD fan. Thanks to the fear of ARM and their huge investments on Atoms for over a decade, Intel has managed to create extremely efficient CPUs for laptops. AMD unfortunately had to drop some projects because of financial and other typed of constrains, so they haven't really invested in that area. 7nm are going to really help them allot but maybe not as much as to make them beat Intel in power efficiency. We can only hope to see mobile AMD CPUs that will offer at least close to the efficiency of Intel CPUs, while being at the same level of performance.stockolicious - Saturday, November 16, 2019 - link
@yannigr2Last I checked their were 6 large laptop makers and of the beginning of 2019 3 of them were INTC houses only. INTC controlled the entire laptop market along with NVDA. I am pretty sure Lisa Su has a plan around mobile as its such a big market. You are right that INTC does have some very efficient laptop chips but that should not surprise AMD. It will be interesting to see how good the 7nm mobile chips are from AMD.
yannigr2 - Saturday, November 16, 2019 - link
@StockliciousIntel does have OEMs in it's pocket, probably bound to multi year contracts not yet expired, but because OEMs are in a business they intend to keep doing for decades, they can't switch to AMD before they are 100% sure that AMD will keep producing top chips for many many years to come, not just for a year or two. That and the fact that with Intel chips they can promote light and slim laptops with more battery hours than with any AMD solution, doesn't really help. But don't expect miracles from 7nm. Better efficiency, but not miracles. AMD hasn't invested there all those years, only on performance. AMD manages to improve efficiency only when it jumps to newer manufacturing node. It doesn't have the power and personnel to hit two targets at once, performance AND efficiency(especially at low load or idle).
As for Nvidia, I don't think it has the same influence as Intel on OEMs. It sells more GPUs on laptop manufacturers because of the efficiency of it's designs and performance. But many OEMs prefer AMD low end cards than Nvidia for their cheaper models. The fact that Nvidia doesn't sell X86 CPUs, makes it almost impossible to convince OEMs to not chose AMD. Nvidia is a huge and really strong company today, but it could also collapse in a year or two if it loses it's advantages in GPUs. It sells nothing else that can bring billions. Only GPUs.
eek2121 - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
After watching the somewhat hilarious review of the 3950X by Wendell of Level1Techs, I've found that I can no longer recommend Intel for anything. Even in cases where Intel leads in performance, it takes much more power and generates much more heat for very little extra performance. Between that and continuous security issues, I'm going to stay away unless Intel seriously rethinks their architecture. Hopefully they won't make the same types of mistakes with their GPUs as they do their CPUs.It doesn't matter if they can win in games by even 5-10% (although I haven't seen any large wins like that without huge overclocks). The price, security, and power efficiency just isn't there. This is coming from someone who, prior to my Threadripper, has been with Intel since the Core 2 Quad Q6600 launched (Q6600 -> i7 2600k).
I can't wait until Zen 2 hits mobile, because when it does, I'm selling my laptop and getting an AMD based one.
Jorgp2 - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
You does realize Wendell is heavily biased towards AMD, and will ignore any positives for Intel.Qasar - Saturday, November 16, 2019 - link
there are positives for intel ???RealBeast - Sunday, November 17, 2019 - link
Well there are for me -- got an i9-9900KF for $250 (retired employee pricing program). I got 10 cores running at 5GHz, but it was a bit hotter than I liked with only air cooling for full time use.Qasar - Sunday, November 17, 2019 - link
na, that just means you were able to get a good deal. maybeyannigr2 - Saturday, November 16, 2019 - link
I could say the same for Anandtech those last years. Nine out of ten times reviews here are extremely carefully written to focus on positives for Intel and downplay huge negatives. It hasn't became like Tom's of course, thankfully it's far from Tom's, but it is obvious. Even the review of the 3950X here was giving me the impression that AMD is still trying to catch up to Intel, while other reviews from various sites/youtubers where much more enthusiastic. And don't say that AMD is paying sites for positive reviews. They don't have the financial power and influence of Intel.Gondalf - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
Obviously Intel can supply channels, AMD nope, there is not enough 7nm silicon around to do this.Intel choses to maintain the control of the market, AMD choses to follow new streets knowing well to have not momentum to penetrate the market over a certain limit.
Looking carefully Intel strategy have a sense and it is very similar to Nvidia way to act.
AMD will be forever a second source for both Cpus an GPUs. Intel is too large and rich, Nvidia too advanced and flexible.
Korguz - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
yea ok gonfalf.. sureyannigr2 - Saturday, November 16, 2019 - link
Don't bet your house on Nvidia. They will lose sales because of Intel's GPUs, they will lose their edge on AI in a couple of years also, because everyone is trying to manufacture it's own AI chip. And in GPUs, AMD does have now an architecture for gaming. It doesn't try to compete with Nvidia using an architecture that was build for compute. Intel, yes, it's still the huge company that can supply the world with 70-80% of all the x86 CPUs needed. But if their 7nm get delayed, they will be in very very very deep s...problems.Kishoreshack - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
I think having a single dominant chip maker is the reason for downfall of Pc & mobile industryThe market was soo dependent on intel that when it f**ckd up the market suffered
I think OEM'S promoting amd is a good thing
it's a consumer friendly decision as it will promote competition