What could Intel do to remain competitive in the Desktop Market ?

[Justaphysicsnerd]

Quite frankly, nobody wants either AMD or Intel Dead in the Desktop market space. Back when Ryzen Launched, AMD forces Intel to provide high core count CPUs for cheaper, just imagine paying 350-400 USD for an overclockable quad core CPU nowadays. Likewise its Intel's turn now, as the tides have shifted. Here's something I thought of :

1.Let High speed memory be able to run on Chipsets other than the Z series

2. Allow the ability to overclock every 11th gen and future generation Quad Core and above CPU

3. Just for even once provide 3 or more gen of CPU on same motherboard chipset.

Any more ideas what Intel could do ?

[Velcade]

What can they do?!  Sub-Ambient cooling  (obviously)

[Ankh Tech]

2 minutes ago, Justaphysicsnerd said:

Quite frankly, nobody wants either AMD or Intel Dead in the Desktop market space. Back when Ryzen Launched, AMD forces Intel to provide high core count CPUs for cheaper, just imagine paying 350-400 USD for an overclockable quad core CPU nowadays. Likewise its Intel's turn now, as the tides have shifted. Here's something I thought of :

1.Let High speed memory be able to run on Chipsets other than the Z series

2. Allow the ability to overclock every 11th gen and future generation Quad Core and above CPU

3. Just for even once provide 3 or more gen of CPU on same motherboard chipset.

Any more ideas what Intel could do ?

Drop the whole "F" and "K" thing and make good cpus for reasonable prices, since now they aren't the best, they can't just release cpus with single digit performance gains and add 100 dollars to the price, and make naming simpler

[PiberiusWilde]

I know intel developed and manufactured their own chips. But considering that they are struggling to make 10nm. I think they need help from other fab manufacturer. Maybe TSMC???

 

I know that Apple work together with TSMC to make their "Apple Silicon" so ugh... why not Intel give it a go.

[AndreiArgeanu]

Intel doesn't seem to like change, they'd rather still believe that they're on top rather than swallowing their "pride" and attempting to compete with AMD. Or in Intel terms, it would be unsuitable and dangerous to the consumer for us to bring Z and K series features to lower end motherboards and CPUs, or something in between those lines.

 

Frankly enough, first, make xmp available on all chipsets.

Leave all the cpu's unlocked, including pentiums.

Support for Overclocking on their budget boards.

And of course don't change sockets every 2 generations for the sake of changing sockets.

[AndreiArgeanu]

1 minute ago, PiberiusWilde said:

But considering that they are struggling to make 10nm. I think they need help from other fab manufacturer. Maybe TSMC???

 

I know that Apple work together with TSMC to make their "Apple Silicon" so ugh... why not Intel give it a go.

I think Intel tried but TSMC denied because Intel wanted something temporary, just enough to get them going while TSMC most likely wanted a long term relationship. Or something like that.

[porina]

10 minutes ago, Justaphysicsnerd said:

1.Let High speed memory be able to run on Chipsets other than the Z series

The vast majority of people just want a system to work. Enthusiast desires are a tiny fraction of that. So on that note, I'd like to see more default/official support for higher speed ram, but it isn't as straight forward as that. Industry standard DDR4 is only defined to 3200 at relatively slack timings. Enthusiast grade modules are outside spec. Sure, most of the time XMP works, but there's also a lot of time where it doesn't. I'd love for all of Intel, AMD and ram manufacturers to come up with something to make running higher speed ram easier than the current XMP situation. XMP is not a good solution for the mass market. 

 

10 minutes ago, Justaphysicsnerd said:

2. Allow the ability to overclock every 11th gen and future generation Quad Core and above CPU

I'd argue similarly on this, that overclocking is a tiny part of the industry. With AMD leading the way, OC is more pointless than ever. Stock CPUs running close to their limit already. The only gains to be got either cost a LOT more power consumption under extreme cooling, or you choose not to be stable under all situations. Offsetting that, I'd like to see more underclocking features for non-overclocking mobos. This is more useful than overclocking right now, since that's where most efficiency gains are to be found.

 

10 minutes ago, Justaphysicsnerd said:

3. Just for even once provide 3 or more gen of CPU on same motherboard chipset.

Big no to that. Look at the mess of compatibility we have on AMD already, depending on chipset generation and which bios you might or might not have installed. Some enthusiasts may tolerate that, but it is not a good thing for the mass market.

 

 

On the more basic question, Intel are already doing what they need to to get back in the race. It is not quick or simple that some people negligently think it should be. 10nm was broken. 10SF might be them finally turning that corner, and if so, we can see some real progress. It will be more of a catch up in the next year or so, before they have a good chance to take the lead once again.

 

New architectures do exist, and are continuing to be developed. These are largely unseen since they've only been offered on mobile, but it goes back to the manufacturing side. A new architecture isn't much good without a way to make it. So we're getting the Rocket Lake stepping stone, before reaching Alder Lake 10nm by end of next year if there are no further slips to the schedule. Alder Lake is a generation beyond Tiger Lake, which itself is already 2 generations beyond Skylake/Comet Lake family. How that fights against Zen 3 or even Zen 4 remains to be seen. 

 

So what Intel have to do is continue to execute their recovery plan. Get 10nm products out. Get 7nm out ASAP. Keep going with the new architectures. They're already doing that.

 

Another wish for me, make a more affordable HEDT tier for higher core count CPUs. Dual channel ram is not sufficient.

[SignatureSigner]

Try to get off the 14nm process and stop locking out high speed ram on certain chips.

[WhitetailAni]

Making LGA 1200 compatible with LGA 1151 with an adapter.

Because why not.

[Guest]

Make better processors for less money.
Like any other industry.

[Letgomyleghoe]

25 minutes ago, Ankh tech tips said:

Drop the whole "F"

F is fine, it literally just means their is no iGPU which is fine, its a cheaper option for people who dont need/want an iGPU

[Letgomyleghoe]

1 minute ago, ragnarok0273 said:

Making LGA 1200 compatible with LGA 1151 with an adapter.

Because why not.

thats not possible, you'd need to switch out the chipset too

[WhitetailAni]

Just now, Letgomyleghoe said:

thats not possible, you'd need to switch out the chipset too

Exactly!

You would need a Y-series chipset that would support both LGA1151 and LGA1200 CPUs, with the LGA1200 socket being the base and the motherboard comes with an adapter from LGA1200 to LGA1151.

The chipset also features support for AGP, PCI, ISA, and PCIe through the use of 12 expansion slots, creating the new form factor YATX.

Compatibility for all!

[Justaphysicsnerd]

Remember the i3 8350k..

>

>

>

>

>>.

>

>

>

>

>
>

>.

.

.

 

.

>

>.

 

>.

 

>

>.

 

>

..

Me neither, I just found out recently that INTEL HAD MADE AN OVERCLOCKABLE I3 !

[Letgomyleghoe]

1 minute ago, ragnarok0273 said:

Exactly!

You would need a Y-series chipset that would support both LGA1151 and LGA1200 CPUs, with the LGA1200 socket being the base and the motherboard comes with an adapter from LGA1200 to LGA1151.

The chipset also features support for AGP, PCI, ISA, and PCIe through the use of 12 expansion slots, creating the new form factor YATX.

Compatibility for all!

that costs $200 more than z490 lmfao

[WhitetailAni]

Just now, Justaphysicsnerd said:

Remember the i3 8350k..

I did not know it existed.

[Justaphysicsnerd]

Just now, ragnarok0273 said:

I did not know it existed.

Apparently that thing was in limited supply and why would someone who is already buying a Z-series motherboard or an expensive B-series motherboard to run an overclockable CPU, buy an i3 ?

[AndreiArgeanu]

2 minutes ago, Justaphysicsnerd said:

Remember the i3 8350k..

>

>

>

>

>>.

>

>

>

>

>
>

>.

.

.

 

.

>

>.

 

>.

 

>

>.

 

>

..

Me neither, I just found out recently that INTEL HAD MADE AN OVERCLOCKABLE I3 !

Yeah, they also had an i3 7350k and i3 9350K.

[WhitetailAni]

3 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

that costs $100 more than z490 lmfao

Only one board with a Y-series chipset is made.

It is the Y69X chipset.

It is produced by Intel.

It has a blue PCB.

It costs $1000.

And has built-in drivers for everything out of the box with a 1TB driver disk that is not user-accessible.

I realized I forgot VLB and PCI-X, so that's included.

Layout of slots:

 

1. AGP Pro Universal

2. PCI

3. PCI-X

4. PCIe 4.0 x16

5. PCIe 4.0 x1

6. PCIe 4.0 x4

7. PCIe 4.0 x16

8. VLB

9. ISA 8-bit
10. ISA 16-bit

 

It's full name:
Intel Y69X Chipset Motherboard

 

Because Intel, and in Intel-speak X = better.

[steelo]

Release a CPU that outshines AMD in performance per dollar. Intel has pretty much given the middle finger to the PC consumer in that aspect. AMD is beating Intel on just about every front right now because they chose to remain complacent. 

[Gix7Fifty]

Implement a step up program!

[Letgomyleghoe]

4 minutes ago, Gix7Fifty said:

Implement a step up program!

??

[Gix7Fifty]

5 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

??

Something like EVGA's, just wishful thinking.

 

https://www.evga.com/support/stepup/

[porina]

 

16 minutes ago, Justaphysicsnerd said:

Remember the i3 8350k..

I bought one. Keep in mind that Ryzen 1st gen had come out about the same time. For my workloads, FP64 performance was most important. Ryzen really sucked at that until Zen 2 came along and AMD gave it some decent resource. Even the double the core count on Ryzen 1700 I had to play with didn't offset the weakness since it also had lower stock clock.

 

13 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

Yeah, they also had an i3 7350k and i3 9350K.

I also got a 7350k. That was more targeted, I got it used long after it was interesting to the masses. I wanted to try setting 2 core overclocking records, and that was the logical CPU to use for it. Unfortunately the 8350k isn't ideal for attempting all 4 core records, since HT does help in many benchmarks. 7740X would be the best Intel CPU in that area, or 7700k close behind. However with 3300X on AMD side that would be interesting also, as would any Zen 3 equivalent in future.

[AndreiArgeanu]

12 minutes ago, porina said:

The vast majority of people just want a system to work.

The vast majority of people who want a system to just work just buy from SI's like Dell and HP. They don't really configure their own PC's and know/want to build a PC to start with. So adding those extra features won't affect those that want something that "just works".

 

15 minutes ago, porina said:

Sure, most of the time XMP works, but there's also a lot of time where it doesn't. I'd love for all of Intel, AMD and ram manufacturers to come up with something to make running higher speed ram easier than the current XMP situation. XMP is not a good solution for the mass market. 

Why not just build feature that tests the ram once with XMP at boot-up, if it fails, fall back to stock, like 2400, 2133mhz. Those than don't care will just boot up to OS and forget about it.

19 minutes ago, porina said:

I'd argue similarly on this, that overclocking is a tiny part of the industry.

True, but why purposely lock most CPU's. AMD doesn't lock any ryzen/athlon cpu/apu, so why can't Intel? It's another bullet point they can add to their advertising, and AMD has definitely shown that it can be done without charging the consumer an extra 100$, or messing anything up.

 

20 minutes ago, porina said:

Stock CPUs running close to their limit already. The only gains to be got either cost a LOT more power consumption under extreme cooling, or you choose not to be stable under all situations.

Not really, I was able to OC my Ryzen 3 3100, to 4.2 all core no issues on the stock cooler. Yes, you definitely can't overclock as much as you used to be able with older systems, but it's definitely not at the point where your CPU turns into a ball of flames if you run it at three to four hundred mhz higher.

 

27 minutes ago, porina said:

Big no to that. Look at the mess of compatibility we have on AMD already, depending on chipset generation and which bios you might or might not have installed. Some enthusiasts may tolerate that, but it is not a good thing for the mass market.

It's not a big mess,as long as you're going forwards,300 series chipsets have support up to Zen 2 cpus. 400 series chipsets and up have support up to Zen3. Though if you try to backwards it does become a mess. And again, the "mass market", the people who aren't enthusiasts are unlikely to build their own PC to start with, and will just go to an SI to get their system. Like I don't get it, is there just a large amount of people who will build their pc's but not be an enthusiast, or be willing to do much research regarding a fairly large purchase they'll make?