• 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 THREADRIPPER VS INTEL SKYLAKE X

humbug said:
I want to try something out to see how it looks, so here it goes....

"AMD have the most powerful and most power efficient CPU on earth right now"

Yeah, feels good :D
Click to expand...


I think you need some quantifiers in there,

"AMD have the most powerful and most power efficient CPU on earth right now...... and they are using an inferior process and have an R&D spend that was around 1/12th of Intel's in the last quarter.... and spend a decent wedge of that on GPUs as well".

I said earlier, Intel should be flat out embarrassed. Even if AMD had a one generation ahead process that R&D spend difference should mean AMD struggle to make something half as fast. AMD created a single die that whips Intel across three different platforms(server, hedt and mainstream) despite all the difficulty that brings. Intel has the money to tape out 20 times as many chips as AMD yet somehow making specialised server chips have something with less cores, uses more power, has less performance(in many many situations and this is with extremely little optimisation with AMD architecture and 100% optimised for Intel) and significantly worse I/O.

If AMD spent the same 3.26billion on R&D in the last quarter that Intel did, instead of the 279million they did, I'd still say wow for beating Intel on a worse process. But to do it on that big a difference in spending, it's literally amazing work by AMD and again nothing short of horrifically embarrassing for Intel.

This is a true Xerox moment, where Intel decided to put marketing and business people in charge rather than engineers, spent years spending extremely poorly. I mean AMD spend on their entire Zen project is dramatically less than Intel spent just on their attempts to get into mobile strongly and they've utterly failed where as AMD have taken the fight and surpassed Intel in Intel's core business.

R&D changes over time but since late 2012 AMD's highest R&D spend in a quarter has been 328mil, Intel's lowest in the same period was a little over 2.5billion. The thing is Intel aren't in THAT many more areas than AMD and a lot of the areas they get into they often just buy companies to get their tech. Mobile with Atom, complete failure and they spend literally billions buying sales to prop up the numbers. Network cards, sure, and good, but the expense there is tiny, modems(as in mobile phone) they spend on but again we're talking a pretty small amount of money there. Intel's fundamental business is CPUs, you could say SSDs as well which is fair but still fairly small costs as the bulk of R&D there comes from micron and partners same way AMD work heavily with companies on memory but the bulk of the spending comes from the memory partners.
 
Last edited:
Actually I think we have 2 7900X capable of running 5ghz 24-7 but these will be held for benching and 8Pack systems.

When I say higher core count I mean 12-18 Core Skylake E cpu's.. :) in hand and ready to rock!!
 
Astonishing! Go AMD, everyone loves an underdog, they really shouldn't be anywhere near where they are and they've managed to pull off an unbelievable technical feat.
Josh.
 
drunkenmaster said:
I think you need some quantifiers in there,

"AMD have the most powerful and most power efficient CPU on earth right now...... and they are using an inferior process and have an R&D spend that was around 1/12th of Intel's in the last quarter.... and spend a decent wedge of that on GPUs as well".

I said earlier, Intel should be flat out embarrassed. Even if AMD had a one generation ahead process that R&D spend difference should mean AMD struggle to make something half as fast. AMD created a single die that whips Intel across three different platforms(server, hedt and mainstream) despite all the difficulty that brings. Intel has the money to tape out 20 times as many chips as AMD yet somehow making specialised server chips have something with less cores, uses more power, has less performance(in many many situations and this is with extremely little optimisation with AMD architecture and 100% optimised for Intel) and significantly worse I/O.

If AMD spent the same 3.26billion on R&D in the last quarter that Intel did, instead of the 279million they did, I'd still say wow for beating Intel on a worse process. But to do it on that big a difference in spending, it's literally amazing work by AMD and again nothing short of horrifically embarrassing for Intel.

This is a true Xerox moment, where Intel decided to put marketing and business people in charge rather than engineers, spent years spending extremely poorly. I mean AMD spend on their entire Zen project is dramatically less than Intel spent just on their attempts to get into mobile strongly and they've utterly failed where as AMD have taken the fight and surpassed Intel in Intel's core business.

R&D changes over time but since late 2012 AMD's highest R&D spend in a quarter has been 328mil, Intel's lowest in the same period was a little over 2.5billion. The thing is Intel aren't in THAT many more areas than AMD and a lot of the areas they get into they often just buy companies to get their tech. Mobile with Atom, complete failure and they spend literally billions buying sales to prop up the numbers. Network cards, sure, and good, but the expense there is tiny, modems(as in mobile phone) they spend on but again we're talking a pretty small amount of money there. Intel's fundamental business is CPUs, you could say SSDs as well which is fair but still fairly small costs as the bulk of R&D there comes from micron and partners same way AMD work heavily with companies on memory but the bulk of the spending comes from the memory partners.
Click to expand...
Just to add to this the R&D budget was also used for developing the consoles as well.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Mobile with Atom
Click to expand...

For all the hate those Atom chips are often underestimated - clock for clock they can match desktop Core 2 (as long as the cooling is upto scratch) while using a fraction of the power and producing a fraction of the heat which is actually quite impressive - sure they aren't going to compete (with all the extra baggage) against stripped out ARM cores in specialised application but you can run a full Windows experience in pretty tiny devices now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom