Intel to produce X86 chips with NVIDIA RTX GPU chiplets

[mark 11:11]

i personally see 2 things nvidia get from this
1] it is going to seriously put pressure on amd in the cpu and igp markets im guessing thus assumeably this will leave less in amds resources so less strong amd gpus [a guess]
2] the x86 licensing is probably going to be a fair bit easier and that is a lot less than they might need to invest in arm like they have been?
if im making any sense here

 

[humbug]

Here is the problem with all this.

Intel has a 75% X86 Marketshare, AMD are eating in to that but its gradual.
In GPU's Nvidia have a 90% Marketshare and Nvidia are still taking more, that doesn't seem to be getting any better, AMD could end up like Intel in GPU's at 0%

Intel on their own, it seems, can't stop AMD from gradually taking some more of Intel's X86 marketshare and with that making it more even..

However with Nvidia's help, in terms of monetary kickbacks and influence with OEM's and SI's Intel could now push AMD out of the X86 market leaving AMD with nothing, it is now in Nvidia's interest to make Intel the monopoly in X86, Nvidia are calling the shots now at Intel, Intel exists now only in name, Nvidia have control of the X86 market and just as they have with GPU's they will push AMD in to marketshare irrelevance, with that making sure AMD don't have the money to R&D competitive products.

We don't get better CPU's from this, far from it, what we get is going back to when AMD couldn't compete with Intel and the decade of quad core CPU's, because that ultimately is the goal of all these big corporations, no competition and refresh the same products over and over again, with Nvidia joining forced with Intel they have the monopoly to make that happen.

This is not good news @Dave2150 this is our worst nightwear, Nvidia controlling the X86 CPU space.

 

[humbug]

AMD do have one leaver to pull to put a wrench in this Alpha Bro's monopoly, AMD64, the _64 part in X86_64, AMD own it and Intel are nothing with without it, if Intel didn't have that their CPU's are literally a paper weight.

AMD does have a card to play, for once in AMD's history its time for them to get aggressive and threatening, they need to barge in to the little Trump, Jenson, Lip-Bu Tan Alpha Bro's Club, Big **** throw on the table and tell them all "you lot are nothing without my IP, NOW lets negotiate"

 

[Joxeon]

However with Nvidia's help, in terms of monetary kickbacks and influence with OEM's and SI's Intel could now push AMD out of the X86 market leaving AMD with nothing, it is now in Nvidia's interest to make Intel the monopoly in X86, Nvidia are calling the shots now at Intel, Intel exists now only in name, Nvidia have control of the X86 market and just as they have with GPU's they will push AMD in to marketshare irrelevance, with that making sure AMD don't have the money to R&D competitive products.

AMD only have themselves to blame for the current state of their GPU market share, Nvidia selling 60 class dies as 70/80 class GPUs as shown by Gamers Nexus so AMD should be destroying these cards by 50% yet they’re not and are equally as poor.

Hopefully AMD will see this as a wake up call and realise that they can’t compete if they follow Nvidia’s strategy of milking consumers while delivering the bare minimum.

 

[humbug]

AMD only have themselves to blame for the current state of their GPU market share, Nvidia selling 60 class dies as 70/80 class GPUs as shown by Gamers Nexus so AMD should be destroying these cards by 50% yet they’re not and are equally as poor.

Hopefully AMD will see this as a wake up call and realise that they can’t compete if they follow Nvidia’s strategy of milking consumers while delivering the bare minimum.

You're one of these people who think AMD should give their GPU's away to gain marketshare, as if this is a revolutionary idea, as if AMD have not already tried this... its the most idiotic gaslighting i think i have ever seen in 30 years of my interest in this industry, lets say AMD sell a $600 for $400, to make that happen each GPU costs AMD $50 in losses to sell.

They do sell more of them because they are so cheap, they gain marketshare, they can't sustain these losses forever, eventually they have to make their money back, so the price must go up, yes? What happens when the prices go up? Serious question.

 

[Pelsepup]

>> most people still want a dGPU and dCPU

Mate, you are living in a bubble. APUs/iGPUs far outsell dGPUs.

What you have to buy isn't always the same thing you wanna buy...

 

[Joxeon]

You're one of these people who think AMD should give their GPU's away to gain marketshare, as if this is a revolutionary idea, as if AMD have not already tried this... its the most idiotic gaslighting i think i have ever seen in 30 years of my interest in this industry, lets say AMD sell a $600 for $400, to make that happen each GPU costs AMD $50 in losses to sell.

They do sell more of them because they are so cheap, they gain marketshare, they can't sustain these losses forever, eventually they have to make their money back, so the price must go up, yes? What happens when the prices go up? Serious question.

All I’m saying is that AMD a couple of years back was selling high end cards like the 6800XT which was within 15% the performance of a 3090 for the same price as they are now selling the 9070XT which has an 80% performance gap to the 5090.


Back around the 6800XT era AMD had above 20% marketshare yet today they have just 6% so surely they can and must do better.

 

[Pelsepup]

All I’m saying is that AMD a couple of years back was selling high end cards like the 6800XT which was within 15% the performance of a 3090 for the same price as they are now selling the 9070XT which has an 80% performance gap to the 5090.


Back around the 6800XT era AMD had above 20% marketshare yet today they have just 6% so surely they can and must do better.

6800xt was $649, 3090 was $1,499 = 43% of price for 85% performance
9070xt was $599, 5090 was 1999 US = 30% of price for 50-75% of performance
(performance % are so-so quickly looked average, going to bed...)

 

[Joxeon]

6800xt was $649, 3090 was $1,499 = 43% of price for 85% performance
9070xt was $599, 5090 was 1999 US = 30% of price for 50-75% of performance
(performance % are so-so quickly looked average, going to bed...)

AMD has gone from offering 85% of the performance for 43% of the price to 55% of the performance for 30% price so despite Nvidia jacking up consumer prices to new highs and prioritising data centre AMD offers worse performance per dollar vs Nvidia now than they did 5 years ago.

 

[humbug]

All I’m saying is that AMD a couple of years back was selling high end cards like the 6800XT which was within 15% the performance of a 3090 for the same price as they are now selling the 9070XT which has an 80% performance gap to the 5090.


Back around the 6800XT era AMD had above 20% marketshare yet today they have just 6% so surely they can and must do better.

The 6800XT was equal to a 3080, the 6800XT was $650 with the 3080 $700, a $50 difference.

Its not just that the 6800XT was 85% the performance of the 3090, so was the 3080 and it was $50 more expensive, nothing has changed.

In fact, the 5070 Ti was $750 MSRP, the 9070 XT was $600 MSRP, right now the cheapest 9070 XT is £579.
The cheapest 5070 Ti is £100 more expensive at £680.

PowerColor Radeon RX 9070 XT Reaper 16GB GDDR6 PCI-Express Graphics Card

Order PowerColor Radeon RX 9070 XT Reaper 16GB GDDR6 PCI-Express Graphics Card now online and benefit from fast delivery.

www.overclockers.co.uk

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pny-geforce-rtx-5070-ti-oc-triple-fan-16gb-gddr7-pci-express-graphics-card-gra-pny-04063.html

So if anything when you're looking at pricing AMD vs Nvidia things have improved since 2020.

When i bought my RX 7800 XT in 2023 is was £80 cheaper than the cheapest RTX 4070. Probably pre RDNA4 the 7800 XT is the best mid range GPU from AMD since the RX 480, its a great GPU and has stood the test of time against Nvidia's latest mid tier crap, as AMD's cards always do, and yet it still hasn't sold enough to make it on the Steam Hardware charts, a real shame because i think AMD really tried with what you're asking for here with that card and its been a complete sales flop, somehow... the message that AMD keep getting when they try to give us a banger card at a good price is.... 'nah, i'll pay more for Nvidia's comparatively just a little bit lame GPU instead, thanks'

This card feel as fresh and as capable to me today as it did the day i bought it, i'm still a proud owner of it, with in a year of owning the RTX 2070S it seemed well cooked and past its prime, to me it was already an old out of date GPU that i just didn't get any joy out of using anymore, it became a tool that needed to be compromised with.

 

[Joxeon]

The 6800XT was equal to a 3080, the 6800XT was $650 with the 3080 $700, a $50 difference.

Its not just that the 6800XT was 85% the performance of the 3090, so was the 3080 and it was $50 more expensive, nothing has changed.

Of course it’s changed as both manufacturers used to offer high end cards for £600-700 and now just offer midrange.

So if anything when you're looking at pricing AMD vs Nvidia things have improved since 2020.

It only appears that way because Nvidia is now selling cards that would have traditionally been a £300 60 class product as a £700 70ti class, it’s hardly a feat for AMD to come in slightly cheaper.

When i bought my RX 7800 XT in 2023 is was £80 cheaper than the cheapest RTX 4070. Probably pre RDNA4 the 7800 XT is the best mid range GPU from AMD since the RX 480, its a great GPU and has stood the test of time against Nvidia's latest mid tier crap, as AMD's cards always do, and yet it still hasn't sold enough to make it on the Steam Hardware charts, a real shame because i think AMD really tried with what you're asking for here with that card and its been a complete sales flop

It flopped because it offered no real performance improvement on the 6800XT and just a £100 discount after nearly 3 years although by the time of launch the 6800XT had been selling for £500 or less for nearly a year anyway.

 

[Tee Hee Johnson]

AMD do have one leaver to pull to put a wrench in this Alpha Bro's monopoly, AMD64, the _64 part in X86_64, AMD own it and Intel are nothing with without it, if Intel didn't have that their CPU's are literally a paper weight.

AMD does have a card to play, for once in AMD's history its time for them to get aggressive and threatening, they need to barge in to the little Trump, Jenson, Lip-Bu Tan Alpha Bro's Club, Big **** throw on the table and tell them all "you lot are nothing without my IP, NOW lets negotiate"

Intel can do the exact same thing with x86.

So let’s stop being silly.

 

[Grim5]

Intel share price up another 10% today on rumours Apple is also investing in Intel

 

[Mesai]

It only appears that way because Nvidia is now selling cards that would have traditionally been a £300 60 class product as a £700 70ti class, it’s hardly a feat for AMD to come in slightly cheaper.

The 5080 is probably the biggest offender - the performance is that of what should be the 70 or 70ti.

 

[jigger]

Here is the problem with all this.

Intel has a 75% X86 Marketshare, AMD are eating in to that but its gradual.
In GPU's Nvidia have a 90% Marketshare and Nvidia are still taking more, that doesn't seem to be getting any better, AMD could end up like Intel in GPU's at 0%

Intel on their own, it seems, can't stop AMD from gradually taking some more of Intel's X86 marketshare and with that making it more even..

However with Nvidia's help, in terms of monetary kickbacks and influence with OEM's and SI's Intel could now push AMD out of the X86 market leaving AMD with nothing, it is now in Nvidia's interest to make Intel the monopoly in X86, Nvidia are calling the shots now at Intel, Intel exists now only in name, Nvidia have control of the X86 market and just as they have with GPU's they will push AMD in to marketshare irrelevance, with that making sure AMD don't have the money to R&D competitive products.

We don't get better CPU's from this, far from it, what we get is going back to when AMD couldn't compete with Intel and the decade of quad core CPU's, because that ultimately is the goal of all these big corporations, no competition and refresh the same products over and over again, with Nvidia joining forced with Intel they have the monopoly to make that happen.

This is not good news @Dave2150 this is our worst nightwear, Nvidia controlling the X86 CPU space.

Intel still holds close to 80% of the graphics market, sure AMD are growing fast and predicted to even faster over the next 5-10 years but AMD will never catch Intel.

I’d imagine Nvidia will have to pay Intel a lot of money to gain access to this end of the market, because nothing in Nvidia’s portfolio will make Intel look any more attractive. Just now, Intel along Nvidia will need to massively improve to produce APUs that are competitive with AMD. All Nvidia can offer Intel is cheap money.

 

[humbug]

It flopped because it offered no real performance improvement on the 6800XT and just a £100 discount after nearly 3 years although by the time of launch the 6800XT had been selling for £500 or less for nearly a year anyway.

You're placing too much emphasis on the name, RX 7800XT.

It was $150 cheaper, 8% faster in raster and 15% faster in RT than its name sake, yes, not a lot, its should have been called what it is, that is an RX 7700XT, the RX 6700XT, which did sell well, weirdly, was $469.99, the RX 7800XT was $30 or 6% more for 16GB vs 12GB, 65% better RT and 53% better Raster.
Had AMD not been so stupid in trying take people for idiots by pretending it a #800XT class card and actually given it its proper name things might have been different as tech tubers put more effort in to hating on the card for the stupid name than they did actually reviewing it, again for clicks.

Intel can do the exact same thing with x86.

So let’s stop being silly.

They could, it wouldn't do them much good as X86 or 32Bit is while not completely dead it pretty much is, its only kept in Windows for backwards compatibility with ancient 32Bit software that only Intel care about and in Datacentre it isn't used at all and hasn't been for many years, at this stage if Intel revoked AMD's X86 licence it wouldn't matter much to them, they carry on pretty much as they do now, if Intel loses AMD64 Intel's CPU's no longer work. They are dead, paperweights.

 

[humbug]

I'll put it this way, the entire industry, everything, pretty much, runs on AMD64.

 

[humbug]

I forgot to add, the RX 6700XT was a full fat Navi 22 die, the RX 7800XT was a full fat Navi 32 die.

 

[jigger]

I'll put it this way, the entire industry, everything, pretty much, runs on AMD64.

32 bit, yeah that’s a whopping 4gb addressable… Intel will have get its pcie implementation working correctly because page file ahoy…

 

[Tee Hee Johnson]

You're placing too much emphasis on the name, RX 7800XT.

It was $150 cheaper, 8% faster in raster and 15% faster in RT than its name sake, yes, not a lot, its should have been called what it is, that is an RX 7700XT, the RX 6700XT, which did sell well, weirdly, was $469.99, the RX 7800XT was $30 or 6% more for 16GB vs 12GB, 65% better RT and 53% better Raster.
Had AMD not been so stupid in trying take people for idiots by pretending it a #800XT class card and actually given it its proper name things might have been different as tech tubers put more effort in to hating on the card for the stupid name than they did actually reviewing it, again for clicks.



They could, it wouldn't do them much good as X86 or 32Bit is while not completely dead it pretty much is, its only kept in Windows for backwards compatibility with ancient 32Bit software that only Intel care about and in Datacentre it isn't used at all and hasn't been for many years, at this stage if Intel revoked AMD's X86 licence it wouldn't matter much to them, they carry on pretty much as they do now, if Intel loses AMD64 Intel's CPU's no longer work. They are dead, paperweights.

I don’t think x86 is as dead as you think it is. There are still modern development toolsets that use x86, or at least still support it as an option for compatibility reasons.

Actually my office use x86 Office as some tools provided by pretty large finance products still haven’t released 64 bit versions.

It’s actually a nightmare, by this point it should be 64 bit or nothing, but that’s just not feasible.