Question What happened with Intel?

[Endre]

Hello!

I’m on an Intel platform and for the majority of my life I’ve been an Intel fanboy.
But what happened with Intel?

AMD is boasting about launching CPUs with 16-32-64 cores, being run smartly by Lisa Su, while Intel continues to release 14nm CPUs with 8-10 cores that won’t be able to compete against new CPUs from AMD!
Intel 10th gen seems to be a failour right from the beginning!
Intel is no longer relevant!
Intel seems to be run by weak minded leaders (to say the least).

What are your thoughts on this matter?

 

[drea.drechsler]

...I still feel Intel laptops will outsell AMD for awhile yet.

Consumer pre-builts and laptops are emotional purchases, base more on brand recognition and little musical riffs playing in your head than rational choices, often with an allowance that "ooouuuu...it costs MORE. must be better".

Servers, enthusiast DIY, HEDT and business pre-builts are NORMALLY rational choices based on numbers, relative performance and a close eye on bottom line. I say NORMALLY because that can be skewed and contorted as Intel has managed in the past... and are today, in spite of agreements to the contrary.

Even if Intel's marketing shenanigans can be thwarted, though, I agree it will take a long while for AMD to capture the hearts and minds of laptop consumers in particular. But I have to wonder if that could be a good thing. Assuming their product acceptance continues apace they will have to solve a wafer supply problem at some point. This could give them time to work that out.

 

[Zizo007]

Are you being sarcastic or agreeing with me? hard to tell lol.

Apple does have a long history of using Intel CPUs instead of AMD, but they also have a history of using AMD GPUs.

Dell has plenty of Ryzen machines. They even released Ryzen 5 1400 prebuilts right when ryzen came out like this one LTT reviewed.

An ALL-AMD Gaming PC from DELL??

Buy Dell Inspiron Gaming 5675 on Amazon: http://geni.us/XfBtit Pre-built desktops - they've always been less than ideal, but can AMD's comeback bring them back to relative relevance?

linustechtips.com

I am agreeing with you that Intel will keep outselling AMD in laptops. Dell and Apple mostly sell Intel and they are the most bought laptops. Ryzen laptops will sell more as gaming laptops which is a small market.

 

[drea.drechsler]

....
Dell and Apple mostly sell Intel
....

Dell's history with their Intel bias is really quite storied. For a while back in the 2000's when AMD's processors were the clear performance leader (during the Netburst days?) Dell was having problems moving their Intel-only systems. Dell wanted to put on an AMD line but Intel propped them up with kick-backs to prevent it. For a while, Dell's entire profit line could be attributed to those kickbacks.

Apple is, well...Apple. The don't sell product nearly so much as they sell image, style, impressions. Intel fits with that.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Intel still gives heavy incentives for using their products.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Dell wanted to put on an AMD line but Intel propped them up with kick-backs to prevent it.

Yea, and this was partly what got Intel into a HUGE lawsuit.

Intel is a pretty scummy company sometimes. Other than some misleading benchmarks from AMD, they seem like a more honest company.

 

[Endre]

Exactly, Apple and Dell will always favor Intel and they will never switch to AMD. Lots of people buy Apple PCs and laptops; Apple only uses Intel. That's a market that AMD will never be able to get even if they have the performance crown.

I wouldn’t count on that!
Remember that Apple also used ATI Radeon graphics cards, instead of NVIDIA, on certain MacBooks.
If AMD is better than Intel, they’ll use their CPUs too!

 

[drea.drechsler]

...
If AMD is better than Intel, they’ll use their CPUs too!

Don't assume the reason Apple uses Intel processors is because they are a better CPU. There are a lot of considerations that accompany a sourcing decision when putting something like that in your product. I'd be extremely doubtful the deciding point had anything to do with performance, it's far more likely due to various business considerations.

 

[Endre]

Don't assume the reason Apple uses Intel processors is because they are a better CPU. There are a lot of considerations that accompany a sourcing decision when putting something like that in your product. I'd be extremely doubtful the deciding point had anything to do with performance, it's far more likely due to various business considerations.

You’re right, but on long term, if AMD continues crushing Intel, they could make AMD their second CPU provider.

 

[ohio_buckeye]

Actually, if I recall, Apple was talking about making their open CPUs again.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.co...its-own-mac-processors-report-claims.amp.html

 

[Endre]

Actually, if I recall, Apple was talking about making their open CPUs again.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.co...its-own-mac-processors-report-claims.amp.html

Apple CPUs...
That will be interesting to see.

 

[Zizo007]

Does that mean Mac OS will eventually stop working with Intel and AMD CPUs?

 

[drea.drechsler]

Does that mean Mac OS will eventually stop working with Intel and AMD CPUs?

By that do you mean no longer x86 compatible? Not that the Mac is, exactly, if you have to use something like BootCamp to install Windows10 for instance. But it CAN run it without a full-on emulator.

I have to imagine they would gladly abandon it if it means they get to focus hardware performance on the useage scenarios they consider important. Especially since their market probably wouldn't to much mind the costs being passed along in the finished product to get that performance. Consider that they are willing to spend $50,000 US for a new MAC Pro.

 

[DeauteratedDog]

Does that mean Mac OS will eventually stop working with Intel and AMD CPUs?

It wouldn't be the first time, remember, Apple used Motorola processors (68K, PowerPC) in their earlier PCs and MOS Technology processors before that (6502).