What Will Intel Do?!

[cordes85]

After seeing AMD just hit the stores. and saw the price, (loud profanity add here). Sure Intel has been milking us since they know and AMD Both know that Moores law in that silicon is transistor count and die size is running out of performance. We could see actual the last great change was Sandybridge, which is why OC'ed 26-27-00 is still keeping up with the lastest CPU minus the newer bells and whistles, SATA6, SATA E, M.2 all of that. but the point is that with great marketing and lack of competition we have been sleeping.
If i were competition id take 5960x/6900k, delid it and reverse engineer the chip. You could take another view, with so much debt AMD, why dont Cash rich Intel Just dont buy AMD?!?!
But if competition regulators monopoly's rules against Intel.
Intel will have to re-structure their whole company against the biggest threat to its company for a long time. Its still early days, once i watch LinusTechTips, and JayZTwoCents, GamerNexus and other youtube channels for benchmarks, how the render videos using Handbreak Cinebench, Prime 95, along with conclusions. Intel needs to dramatically work overtime to discover price schemes for each tier to compete with AMD.


What other suggestions or ideas do anyone else have????????

 

[CropEditPaste]

Intel will probably get it's engineers and design some new super better chip architecture now that AMD is back in the game.

 

[bumnut53]

New AMD chips look good but they aren't cheap. The cheapest one costs more than I paid for my 6700K

 

[13thmonkey]

You do remember the days of the PIV when the athlon XPs were faster and cooler, we are simply back there again. It's happened before, it will happen again. Intel will lose market share, will carry on investing in design, and will eventually beat AMD. in the meantime there will be reduction in prices as now there is actual competition.

 

[mcnumpty23]

well the 7 1700 is showing up here around the price point of a 7700k so not sure why that would be considered cheap--approx £320 --the 7 1700x and

1800x are showing

£60 and £160 more than a 7700k so they had better be up to all of amds hype really

8 cores and 16 threads means nothing if it cant actually out perform the 7700k since its not coming in cheaper than it--at least not from what i am seeing

here in the uk so far

 

[dudeman509]

New AMD chips look good but they aren't cheap. The cheapest one costs more than I paid for my 6700K

They'll be glad to sell you a 6C/12T or 4C/8T down the line. Like Intel, they release their enthusiast versions first (well, Intel usually releases the 4C enthusiast versions, and the 6-8C a year later), then trickle their way down.

 

[Susquehannock]

Intel will continue as always. They own 83% of the CPU market and 66% of the GPU. All the while AMD is bleeding cash like no tomorrow. New offerings will not change that unless they are so revolutionary & groundbreaking so as to create a paradigm shift in processing. Which is not going to happen.

 

[shrapnel_indie]

8 cores and 16 threads means nothing if it cant actually out perform the 7700k since its not coming in cheaper than it--at least not from what i am seeing here in the uk so far

I can't speak for the UK... but... 8-core to 8-core, AMD's pricing beats Haswell-E AND Broadwell-E. AMD benchmarks show it beating the more expensive Intel counter-parts too. Independent testing results will be able to be shown... at least here in the States... in approximately a week. Then we'll know know how much difference there really is. Worse case so far looks like maybe a 10% deficit in performance... at today's speeds that is fairly negligible by most anybody. But I'll emphasize this: Third party tests will be available next week and then we'll all know with certainty. For Intel's 4-core parts, AMD will release their answer a little later on.... and again... third party tests will let us know how Ryzen is actually doing. I'm sure with the hype and interest that exists, Toms will even have their own test data ready-formatted awaiting NDA expiration to publish for us all to peruse at our leisure.

 

[shrapnel_indie]

Intel will continue as always. They own 83% of the CPU market and 66% of the GPU. All the while AMD is bleeding cash like no tomorrow. New offerings will not change that unless they are so revolutionary & groundbreaking so as to create a paradigm shift in processing. Which is not going to happen.

How do you get Intel owns 66% of the GPU market? Are you including the server market? Workstations and gaming rigs either use AMD or (as the majority of the install base is) nVidia, neither is owned by Intel. The only way you potentially might hit this figure is toss in all the business machines out there (The ones where many businesses decide on a minimal spec and hold everyone to it, even in cases hamstringing those departments that actually need more resources in their PCs) AND all the mom-and-pop & grandparents owned systems that are bought on cheap price alone because all they do is surf the net, do email, and play simple Solitaire.

 

[The Paladin]

intel cannot buy AMD the courts would be all over it in conspiracy of monopoly.

my bet is wait it out a few months, let dust settle and see if Intel doesn't have a response.... but if all Amd did is bring their CPu's to match or better Current Intel CPU, then I want to see next Gen from Intel before I bother upgrading.

personally spending 450$ on Amd of 450 on Intel for the same performance... sorry but.. Ill sit on Intel. simple economy case for me... reseal value of a used CPU AMD vs Intel, you always get more from an intel cpu and board on resell market.

 

[mcnumpty23]

8 cores and 16 threads means nothing if it cant actually out perform the 7700k since its not coming in cheaper than it--at least not from what i am seeing here in the uk so far

I can't speak for the UK... but... 8-core to 8-core, AMD's pricing beats Haswell-E AND Broadwell-E. AMD benchmarks show it beating the more expensive Intel counter-parts too. Independent testing results will be able to be shown... at least here in the States... in approximately a week. Then we'll know know how much difference there really is. Worse case so far looks like maybe a 10% deficit in performance... at today's speeds that is fairly negligible by most anybody. But I'll emphasize this: Third party tests will be available next week and then we'll all know with certainty. For Intel's 4-core parts, AMD will release their answer a little later on.... and again... third party tests will let us know how Ryzen is actually doing. I'm sure with the hype and interest that exists, Toms will even have their own test data ready-formatted awaiting NDA expiration to publish for us all to peruse at our leisure.

i would think Haswell-E AND Broadwell-E users market make up a lot smaller share than the market amd is aiming at though

ie for example if you surveyed 1,000 users of this forum how many would be in the Haswell-E AND Broadwell-E bracket compared to the others?

and yes until independant reviews are out nothing is settled yet

but for people like me who just bought 7700k and z270 boards so far the price point(uk at least) isnt getting me excited

and i would love amd to push intel hard i am not a fan boy of either i will buy from who ever makes the best product in my price range

just get the sinking feeling we may see another only as good as existing intel products or slightly better rather than really better scenario once again

though have my fingers crossed for the benchmarks showing a good lead over intels existing products so the market gets competitive which is best for us the consumers

 

[Susquehannock]

How do you get Intel owns 66% of the GPU market? Are you including the server market? Workstations and gaming rigs either use AMD or (as the majority of the install base is) nVidia, neither is owned by Intel. The only way you potentially might hit this figure is toss in all the business machines out there (The ones where many businesses decide on a minimal spec and hold everyone to it, even in cases hamstringing those departments that actually need more resources in their PCs) AND all the mom-and-pop & grandparents owned systems that are bought on cheap price alone because all they do is surf the net, do email, and play simple Solitaire.

Yes. The number includes the professional market and integrated graphics. In that sector AMD's market share hit a low in 2009 at 12%, rose to 25% by 2014, and has fallen off somewhat since. AMD stock has risen nearly 35% since beginning of this year. No doubt in anticipation of Ryzen and Vega. Let's all hope they both do very well.

 

[shrapnel_indie]

After seeing AMD just hit the stores.

Pre-orders at present.In stores next week.

and saw the price, (loud profanity add here).

The ones released first, the 8-core units are geared to compete with the HEDT market first, and are priced accordingly.

Sure Intel has been milking us since they know and AMD Both know that Moores law in that silicon is transistor count and die size is running out of performance. We could see actual the last great change was Sandybridge, which is why OC'ed 26-27-00 is still keeping up with the lastest CPU minus the newer bells and whistles, SATA6, SATA E, M.2 all of that. but the point is that with great marketing and lack of competition we have been sleeping.
If i were competition id take 5960x/6900k, delid it and reverse engineer the chip.

... and violate patent laws as the result, unless proven clean-room reverse engineering.

You could take another view, with so much debt AMD, why dont Cash rich Intel Just dont buy AMD?!?!
But if competition regulators monopoly's rules against Intel.
Intel will have to re-structure their whole company against the biggest threat to its company for a long time.

They can't own AMD or its CPU assets... ever, anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws. This would even prevent the absorption of AMD assets into Intel if AMD were to close their doors.

Its still early days, once i watch LinusTechTips, and JayZTwoCents, GamerNexus and other youtube channels for benchmarks, how the render videos using Handbreak Cinebench, Prime 95, along with conclusions. Intel needs to dramatically work overtime to discover price schemes for each tier to compete with AMD.

The results are coming... from all sources... including YouTube sources that have no clue on what they're doing in providing a real test and review. As to Intel restructuring? No. They'll review their price-points and adjust accordingly only... Work overtime to accomplish this? They've already started work on it, as a contingency... an unlocked i3 is possibly one of their answers to the potential threat.

What other suggestions or ideas do anyone else have????????

Intel isn't waiting for a "fire" caused by AMD's threat... they've already been working on it as any business that wants to last does.

 

[13thmonkey]

You could take another view, with so much debt AMD, why dont Cash rich Intel Just dont buy AMD?!?!
But if competition regulators monopoly's rules against Intel.
Intel will have to re-structure their whole company against the biggest threat to its company for a long time.

They can't own AMD or its CPU assets... ever, anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws. This would even prevent the absorption of AMD assets into Intel if AMD were to close their doors.

And would probably result in the splitting up of Intel. AMD is possibly in such a position that it can't be allowed to fail by Intel.

 

[tazmo8448]

After seeing AMD just hit the stores. and saw the price, (loud profanity add here). Sure Intel has been milking us since they know and AMD Both know that Moores law in that silicon is transistor count and die size is running out of performance. We could see actual the last great change was Sandybridge, which is why OC'ed 26-27-00 is still keeping up with the lastest CPU minus the newer bells and whistles, SATA6, SATA E, M.2 all of that. but the point is that with great marketing and lack of competition we have been sleeping.
If i were competition id take 5960x/6900k, delid it and reverse engineer the chip. You could take another view, with so much debt AMD, why dont Cash rich Intel Just dont buy AMD?!?!
But if competition regulators monopoly's rules against Intel.
Intel will have to re-structure their whole company against the biggest threat to its company for a long time. Its still early days, once i watch LinusTechTips, and JayZTwoCents, GamerNexus and other youtube channels for benchmarks, how the render videos using Handbreak Cinebench, Prime 95, along with conclusions. Intel needs to dramatically work overtime to discover price schemes for each tier to compete with AMD.


What other suggestions or ideas do anyone else have????????

to me it's like arguing over Fords vs Chevrolets or Mercedes vs BMW...it'll never end...just go with what you can afford.

 

[lrrelevant]

Well, you all know Kaby-X/Skylake-X is coming, which surely will smash ryzen in every benchmark due to better IPC, and will probably be priced more competetively to ryzen compared to the kind of absurd Broadwell-E prices. Ask me, this will be Intels answer to ryzen. Or coffee lake later this year.

 

[krzyimprt]

New AMD chips look good but they aren't cheap. The cheapest one costs more than I paid for my 6700K

For $229 You can get a 6core / 12 threaded processor... That is A LOT cheaper than a 7700K

 

[gamerk316]

If i were competition id take 5960x/6900k, delid it and reverse engineer the chip. You could take another view, with so much debt AMD, why dont Cash rich Intel Just dont buy AMD?!?!

1: Reverse engineering a chip in that manner would be illegal, as you'd violate a couple hundred of Intels patents.

2: AMD doesn't have a lot of technologies that have a lot of value. About the only things AMD has that are worth purchasing are the GPU division (mainly for the patent portfolio) and the x86-64 patent (which only Intel benefits from). As I've been noting for years now, this is the main reason no one purchased AMD back when they were dirt cheap: They don't have anything seen as valuable.

intel cannot buy AMD the courts would be all over it in conspiracy of monopoly.

x86 is a minority CPU architecture; it's absolutely dwarfed by ARM in terms of volume. Intel purchasing AMD wouldn't even warrant a second look.


Long story short, Intel isn't going to do much of anything. AMDs reached close to performance parity (which isn't shocking; Ryzen looks a lot like Core under the hood), and there aren't a lot of ways to farther increase CPU performance left. There's one, maybe two die shrinks left, so both companies are more or less our of ways to increase performance going forward.

 

[shrapnel_indie]

Well, you all know Kaby-X/Skylake-X is coming, which surely will smash ryzen in every benchmark due to better IPC, and will probably be priced more competetively to ryzen compared to the kind of absurd Broadwell-E prices. Ask me, this will be Intels answer to ryzen. Or coffee lake later this year.

THAT remains to be seen as they aren't here yet.

 

[praxis22]

From what I've seen and heard, AMD have produced a corker of an architecture, that Intel wasn't expecting and have no natural counter for. Much like the Athalon64 & x86_64 this came out of left field. As such, again, from what I've heard on't Tubes, Intel are looking at doing what you do when you don't have an answer, which is FUD via PR channels. While I don't doubt they will eventually produce a faster chip, I doubt it will be anywhere close to AMD's prices, or it will be so rare that it's basically a paper launch and engineering samples only.

I'm not a hardware expert, but I doubt this is as simple as delidding a CPU and reverse engineering it. This is a whole new architecture we’re talking about here, backed up by a different business model, one seemingly predicated on taking the low-end/middle ground and OEM's rather than the high-end. That's just gravy, and rubbing Intel's nose in it.

In Six months when the dust settles and we can see what AMD's 1300 & 1500 SKU's look like and how they integrate with board manufacturers, then we'll know where the sweet spot is. At present it's looking like the 1700x is the CPU to buy though at present you need a high-end board and may or may not have to worry about RAM compatibility, though again, that may just be FUD. On the flip side, I heard today that the 1700x is capable of being clocked to 4Ghz on all cores. Wait and see I reckon.

 

[13thmonkey]

From what I've seen and heard, AMD have produced a corker of an architecture, that Intel wasn't expecting and have no natural counter for. Much like the Athalon64 & x86_64 this came out of left field. As such, again, from what I've heard on't Tubes, Intel are looking at doing what you do when you don't have an answer, which is FUD via PR channels. While I don't doubt they will eventually produce a faster chip, I doubt it will be anywhere close to AMD's prices, or it will be so rare that it's basically a paper launch and engineering samples only.

I'm not a hardware expert, but I doubt this is as simple as delidding a CPU and reverse engineering it. This is a whole new architecture we’re talking about here, backed up by a different business model, one seemingly predicated on taking the low-end/middle ground and OEM's rather than the high-end. That's just gravy, and rubbing Intel's nose in it.

In Six months when the dust settles and we can see what AMD's 1300 & 1500 SKU's look like and how they integrate with board manufacturers, then we'll know where the sweet spot is. At present it's looking like the 1700x is the CPU to buy though at present you need a high-end board and may or may not have to worry about RAM compatibility, though again, that may just be FUD. On the flip side, I heard today that the 1700x is capable of being clocked to 4Ghz on all cores. Wait and see I reckon.

From what you've seen and heard they've created something that on LN2 beats intel (2yr old architecture) by 100pts so maybe 2%?

Examples of FUD please if you are going to start accusing people.