• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD demonstrates Ryzen 9 5900X prototype with 3D V-Cache stack chiplet design

Soldato
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Posts
9,193
With timings like that i can't see DDR5 being any better than DDR4, the timings are just as important, for ANY CPU. It might be better for iGPU's with a higher bandwidth but that's really it.

Isn't that always the way for any new memory standard? It'll probably take a year or two to get DDR5 latencies down to where the DDR5 is a faster choice than DDR4 at a sensible price.
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Oct 2003
Posts
3,704
Location
York
Anyone have any updated info as to when we might expect these v-cache chips to be available for order?
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Sep 2010
Posts
6,755
Location
Stoke-on-Trent
Anyone have any updated info as to when we might expect these v-cache chips to be available for order?
Production isn't even starting until the end of the year, so personally I wouldn't expect anything until and of Q1 next year. Possibly sooner if the Alder Lake leaks prove to be even remotely true.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
40,392
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
Production isn't even starting until the end of the year, so personally I wouldn't expect anything until and of Q1 next year. Possibly sooner if the Alder Lake leaks prove to be even remotely true.
They probably are and they have to be because if not AMD are just going to run off into the distance over the next couple of years.
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Oct 2019
Posts
8,368
Location
Uk
They probably are and they have to be because if not AMD are just going to run off into the distance over the next couple of years.
Just imagine where Intel would be now had they got their 10nm out 5/6 years ago on schedule. It's Intels failure that's put AMD in the lead not AMD forcing their way past a strong innovative Intel.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
40,392
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
Just imagine where Intel would be now had they got their 10nm out 5/6 years ago on schedule. It's Intels failure that's put AMD in the lead not AMD forcing their way past a strong innovative Intel.

CPU's with twice the power consumption of AMD?

AMD's product quality is not AMD's innovation, work or success but Intel's failure.

So whose fault is Intel's failure, AMD's?

I failed to innovate a vaccine for Covid, i'm still better than Pfizer and Astrazeneca, i just failed where they succeeded, that doesn't make them better than me.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
28 Jun 2013
Posts
1,918
Just imagine where Intel would be now had they got their 10nm out 5/6 years ago on schedule. It's Intels failure that's put AMD in the lead not AMD forcing their way past a strong innovative Intel.

Its only a matter of time before intel come up with a breakthrough that put them comfortably ahead and then they will rest on their laurels for a decade slowly releasing tech at their own slow pace and trying to drain every drop of cash out of each generation
 
Soldato
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Posts
3,229
Its only a matter of time before intel come up with a breakthrough that put them comfortably ahead and then they will rest on their laurels for a decade slowly releasing tech at their own slow pace and trying to drain every drop of cash out of each generation

The good thing now is we're at a point where not only is AMD out completing them in the x86 field but Apple, Nvidia, and other companies have released , or are developing ,processors to compete with Intel.

With ARM growing Intel can't rely on abusing it's monopoly position and x86 dominance in the home computer field anymore. Windows 11 looks like it'll bring in a big push for ARM support.

So sitting releasing incremental upgrades bi-anually with a 10-20% uplift per generation isn't really an option for Intel anymore if they want to remain in business longer term!

Intel's loss will be our gain though!
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
40,392
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
The good thing now is we're at a point where not only is AMD out completing them in the x86 field but Apple, Nvidia, and other companies have released , or are developing ,processors to compete with Intel.

So sitting releasing incremental upgrades bi-anually with a 10-20% uplift per generation isn't really an option for Intel anymore if they want to remain in business!

Intel have built their business model on having it all, the more market share Nvidia, ARM, Apple and AMD gain from Intel the weaker they will get, the real advantage particularity someone like ARM and AMD have is what they can do with nothing and everything they gain is Intel's loss, AMD these days are the fastest growing tech company.
End of financial year 2016 AMD made a loss of $500m, End of this year AMD are on track for $2,000m free cash flow, year ending 2022 $5,000m free cash flow, that's money unspent, pocket money to burn.
 
Associate
Joined
31 Dec 2010
Posts
1,431
Location
Sussex
Just imagine where Intel would be now had they got their 10nm out 5/6 years ago on schedule. It's Intels failure that's put AMD in the lead not AMD forcing their way past a strong innovative Intel.
I still maintain that it was the idea of Atom or similar which got Intel into trouble.

That is the unwillingness to seriously develop products with lower margins in the fear they'd take a reduction in their margins.

Took long enough, but eventually pure foundries (mainly TSMC) used the volumes the low margin stuff enable to get ahead in manufacturing.

This is a new sutation for Intel. Previously when they were behind design-wise they did okay due to having the best fabs.

That is no longer the case.

To get back on top they really now need both: a good design and a good fab. For the fab they can use TSMC.

TSMC ordinarily might be relucant to work too closely with an Intel which needs a few years to get its fabs sorted, but then with both the US and EU going on about having fabs within their territories and the American's willing to back that up with protectionism (plus generous grants/tax breaks etc. - of which Intel is probably expection the lion's share), TSMC might consider it strategic to play along.
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Sep 2010
Posts
6,755
Location
Stoke-on-Trent
TSMC might consider it strategic to play along.
Or they'll just sell all new US capacity to Apple and AMD, then Nvidia.

TSMC are producing Intel's DG2 on 6nm (the "launch partner" thing seems to have fizzled however), and there's supposedly some i3 SKU on 3nm when that's up and running, so it's not like they could be seen as favouring Intel's competition, but in actuality, Apple has the money and AMD has the partnership to just snap up all capacity before Intel (and Nvidia) can get a decent look in.
 
Top