• 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 ***

humbug said:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/41...a7d54b100cb17a549d5f255878c52b6&uprof=55#alt1



Its only one retailer but still a window into what's going on, given that global sales statistics are hard to find....

It seems that Jun and July there has not actually been a lot of difference in Intel vs AMD sales numbers, and whatever the reason may or may not be, its good to see AMD over taking Intel in August (54% AMD - 46% Intel), yes no doubt when Coffee Lake launches it will change back but i think the days of Intel enjoying a high degree of sales dominance are gone.

One other very big 'but unmentionable here' global retailer consistently has Ryen CPU's in the top 5.

Once Coffee Lake drops at the same price as Kaby Lake i can see AMD CPU's becoming even cheaper in responce so if Intel think Coffee Lake will put AMD back in their box they have another shock coming, all it will do is serve to lower the cost of CPU's, just what we all want, cheap CPU's :D

PS; since launch the 1950X is consistently outselling the 7900X, interesting....
Click to expand...

AMD and Intel need to make profits. If a price war broke out, Intel could probably bury AMD in their grave. AMD is the weaker company, it doesn't have the deep pockets of Intel. Don't go thinking the cheaper the better for the consumer as that's not always the case longer term (if one competitor goes under we'll be back to high prices....)
 
DarrenM343 said:
AMD and Intel need to make profits. If a price war broke out, Intel could probably bury AMD in their grave. AMD is the weaker company, it doesn't have the deep pockets of Intel. Don't go thinking the cheaper the better for the consumer as that's not always the case longer term (if one competitor goes under we'll be back to high prices....)
Click to expand...

They may have to, AMD cannot afford to let their market share fall to obscurity again, Intel are always arguing AMD are obscure, they don't have any market share, any partners.
So their existence depends on it, they may have no choice but to cut the price significantly on their existing chips if Intel are going to fight AMD on their own terms, IE high core counts for less money. AMD will have to make that even less money.

Intel in offering 50% more CPU for the same money have started that war, AMD have no choice but to respond, its that or die. We are already in a price war, Intel have been forced to cut the price of their HEDT CPU's by half, With Intel now offering 6 core CPU on mainstream AMD may also have to cut the price of their HEDT CPU's.

And don't think its AMD who can't afford this, Intel's overheads are vastly higher than Intel and Intel's HEDT chips cost them a lot more to make that what Threadripper cost AMD, they only way Intel could stop AMD gaining anything over what they had before Ryzen and Threadripper is if they practically gave the X299 away.

AMD will out do Intel at every turn because they have tiny overheads in comparison.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
They may have to, AMD cannot afford to let their market share fall to obscurity again, Intel are always arguing AMD are obscure, they don't have any market share, any partners.
So their existence depends on it, they may have no choice but to cut the price significantly on their existing chips if Intel are going to fight AMD on their own terms, IE high core counts for less money. AMD will have to make that even less money.

Intel in offering 50% more CPU for the same money have started that war, AMD have no choice but to respond, its that or die. We are already in a price war, Intel have been forced to cut the price of their HEDT CPU's by half, With Intel now offering 6 core CPU on mainstream AMD may also have to cut the price of their HEDT CPU's.

And don't think its AMD who can't afford this, Intel's overheads are vastly higher than Intel and Intel's HEDT chips cost them a lot more to make that what Threadripper cost AMD, they only way Intel could stop AMD gaining anything over what they had before Ryzen and Threadripper is if they practically gave the X299 away.

AMD will out do Intel at every turn because they have tiny overheads in comparison.
Click to expand...
Always good to hear opinions and good thoughts.
Intel probably do have high overheads and manufacturing costs of their current chips but if AMD have a tiny market share, they need to try to make a decent profit per item sold. With Intel, they can even afford to make a loss on each item sold (for a while) just to maintain market share. The shareholders wont be happy though of course. I still think it's a bit of a make or brake time for AMD as an independent company. If someone like Samsung snapped them up they could truly compete with Intel, even make a loss(per item) to gain market share and voila.
Definitely interesting times on the CPU front :)
 
Not sure if this has been posted here yet; there is an interesting article of the history of threadripper on Forbes. Threadripper, wasn't part of the original business plan. It was worked during the spare time of some of the engineers at AMD. Threadripper was the code name of the project but they liked it so much that they decided to keep it.

Link here https://www.forbes.com/sites/antony...d-the-processor-that-beat-intel/#1f3ce16d230c

Threadripper timeline:

2014 – 2015: Work began on Threadripper concept, mostly in the initial team’s spare time and without a dedicated business plan

2016: The team presented the idea to Jim Anderson just before the Computex tradeshow who had joined from Intel the previous year. Loved the idea so much the launch timeline was cut to 18 months to be the same year as Ryzen and EPYC.

May 2017: AMD officially announces Threadripper, which comes mostly as a surprise to the press.

August 2017: Threadripper goes retail
Click to expand...
 
I have a box on top of my PC that says Threadripper - the name is just pure awesomeness!
 
I'm just glad AMD are back again, after years in the wilderness and INTEL taking the P with a lack of new "proper" tech, AMD is where my cash is going for CPU's in the first instance and perhaps later on, if they sort Navi, maybe the GPU too.
 
subbytna said:
I'm just glad AMD are back again, after years in the wilderness and INTEL taking the P with a lack of new "proper" tech, AMD is where my cash is going for CPU's in the first instance and perhaps later on, if they sort Navi, maybe the GPU too.
Click to expand...

Same here. I'm still more than happy with my current system, but for sure whenever I upgrade, it will be an AMD CPU if they continue to be competitive.

Really good to have competition once again. Intel have stifled this market for far too long.
 
Threadripper development story. Pretty fascinating. Not sure if this has been posted:

www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/on-the-story-of-amds-ryzen-threadripper-product-development.236838/

What is interesting about Threadripper is that we may get even more higher core count on X399 in future :

Don't expect AMD's Threadripper to sit and wait for Intel's answers, however. While AMD is enjoying the performance crown with its 16-core, 32-thread behemoths as of now, Intel's 18-core response will certainly snatch the HEDT performance crown back from AMD. At least, it will, if AMD doesn't expand on Threadripper's core-counts. AMD's John Taylor himself says he doesn't expect Threadripper's lineup to be finished with the current 8, 12 and 16-core CPUs it currently features; and looking at Threadripper's development history and EPYC roots, it's easy to see it wouldn't take AMD that long - or that much - to increase core counts above what they currently stand at. MCM designs may have their shortcomings, but AMD has shown - and will continue to show - how these are, more likely than not, the industry's future.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
24 core would be bonkers. I'd love to get a X1900 and X399 board to replace the last two systems I have, but fear Mrs Jigger will assault in my sleep if I upgrade anything else.
 
Does Windows treat a Threadripper chip as one or two physical chips? The news comments suggest that standard windows might struggle going above 16 Cores as each 8 Core module is being treated as an individual chip by Windows and Consumer windows does not support more than 2 Chips.

If that is wrong then is there actually anything stopping them going all the way to 32 cores on threadripper?
 
Windows sees TR as one chip.

Thermals would be the only reason I can see of not offering more cores on TR.
 
humbug said:
Once Coffee Lake drops at the same price as Kaby Lake i can see AMD CPU's becoming even cheaper in responce so if Intel think Coffee Lake will put AMD back in their box they have another shock coming, all it will do is serve to lower the cost of CPU's, just what we all want, cheap CPU's :D

PS; since launch the 1950X is consistently outselling the 7900X, interesting....
Click to expand...

The other alarming issue for Intel looking at the number is the 1600 non X since release has been eating away at the 7700K's lead and in August it's actually outsold the Intel chip for the first time (by 150 units), also Intel's other sales gem the i5 7600 is now outsold by the both the 1700 and 1700X. I'm not sure if August was a odd month by if you take AMD's top selling 6 chips and Intel's top selling 6 chips AMD out sold Intel by 1639 units meaning AMD has a sales unit advantage of 34% in August and the trend is only going one way and it's all to the green team. By sales revenue (again using the top 6 selling CPU's AMD was 276K Eur ahead of Intel and even when factoring in the high end chips AMD still out sold Intel on every metric in August.

If AMD are replicating this trend in the OEM and server business (why wouldn't they be?) I would be buying up AMD stock!
 
Freddie1980 said:
If AMD are replicating this trend in the OEM and server business (why wouldn't they be?) I would be buying up AMD stock!
Click to expand...

The certainly are not in the OEM sector, as there is no integrated GPU, That will happen next year. As for the server business, it's picking up and the impact will take 9-12 months to be fully visible.
 
Although all major oems do have ryzen machines and selling well by the looks of it.
 
Freddie1980 said:
The other alarming issue for Intel looking at the number is the 1600 non X since release has been eating away at the 7700K's lead and in August it's actually outsold the Intel chip for the first time (by 150 units), also Intel's other sales gem the i5 7600 is now outsold by the both the 1700 and 1700X. I'm not sure if August was a odd month by if you take AMD's top selling 6 chips and Intel's top selling 6 chips AMD out sold Intel by 1639 units meaning AMD has a sales unit advantage of 34% in August and the trend is only going one way and it's all to the green team. By sales revenue (again using the top 6 selling CPU's AMD was 276K Eur ahead of Intel and even when factoring in the high end chips AMD still out sold Intel on every metric in August.

If AMD are replicating this trend in the OEM and server business (why wouldn't they be?) I would be buying up AMD stock!
Click to expand...

That's awesome.... just what we need. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom