AMD reports Threadripper 2990 is upto 50% faster than the Intel 7980

[Master Disaster]

2 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Intel is working on a type of chiplet design. Though not as modular as Ryzen. Seems like they are planning on doing different CPU components at different nodes. Allowing them to have better yields since the entire chip doesnt have to be 10nm

So that's what Keller is working on then?

[GoldenLag]

Just now, Master Disaster said:

So that's what Keller is working on then?

Idk. Im just talking out of what ive heard and based on a few statements from intel. 

 

Ive got ni clue what keller is working on

[Dylanc1500]

8 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

So that's what Keller is working on then?

EMIB started before Keller, however, he may or may not be involved in it now.

 

@GoldenLag are you talking about EMIB (Embedded Multi-die Interconnect Bridge)? I assumed you were, my apologies if not.

[schwellmo92]

12 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Doesn't Intel have a 28 core "enthusiast" chip now (as in not server)?  The one from the chiller fiasco?  If so, AMD should really be comparing to that, otherwise we should be taking the 7980 vs 1950X.  If not, where is it and what was even the point of that demo?

The Intel 28 core chip isn't out yet.

[vanished]

2 minutes ago, schwellmo92 said:

The Intel 28 core chip isn't out yet.

Ah, alright then.  I thought it was.  Well good job then AMD, they can quite comfortably claim the thrown on this one for now.

[Quadriplegic]

Woah, chill out AMD.

Wouldn't want this to backfire at you, would you?

[mrthuvi]

26 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

So that's what Keller is working on then?

Iirc, Musk said Keller was working on new server architecture for Intel.

[GoldenLag]

Just now, mrthuvi said:

Iirc, Musk said Keller was working on new server architecture for Intel.

*Cough *cough. Chiplet design *cough *cough

[GoldenLag]

Would be interesting if intel did a BIGlittle core design. Big cores for singlethreaded and smaller ones to take on multithreaded.

[Humbug]

54 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

It's not the result I'm shocked by, it's how quickly AMD seemed to have leapfrogged Intel and the fact Intel don't seem to have any way of responding to this.

 

I think we all knew Ryzen would shake things up but I didn't think it would have this kind of impact. Maybe that was just me being naive?

It's not really surprising that Intel cannot respond fast.

Before Ryzen released a lot of people were viewing Intel as some kind of God company. People would post things on these forums like

 

"it doesn't matter how good Zen is I am sure Intel has lots of secret sauce new architectures in their R&D department that they can unleash at any time"

 

I used to argue that this is a ridiculous notion.

 

Intel will come back with a bang obviously but not overnight. We have to give them time to sort out both their manufacturing and architectural issues. Meanwhile they easily have the majority market share in all segments of x86 computing and they have much stronger channel partnerships than AMD, they will rely on this to get them through the period where AMD leads in server performance.

[vanished]

14 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Would be interesting if intel did a BIGlittle core design. Big cores for singlethreaded and smaller ones to take on multithreaded.

I've only wanted that for 4 years now

[Humbug]

1 hour ago, NelizMastr said:

In regard to threadripper I doubt they really need to.

 

It's a very small segment with low yields, low sales, just high profit per sale, much like server gear.

Threadripper enthusiast CPUs are a small segment.

 

Epyc server CPUs are a very big segment. AMD needs this market. Just getting 5% of this market will be a huge deal for AMD in terms of cashflow.

 

Both are high margin as you say, the genius in AMDs implementation is using infinity fabric to circumvent the low yield issue. Which means that Intel cannot make high core CPUs as cheaply as AMD does until they implement something similar.

[LAwLz]

35 minutes ago, schwellmo92 said:

The Intel 28 core chip isn't out yet.

32 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Ah, alright then.  I thought it was.  Well good job then AMD, they can quite comfortably claim the thrown on this one for now.

Worth noting that the 2990 isn't out either.

 

So this is AMD posting their own benchmarks, comparing their unreleased chip against an Intel processor which has been on the market for almost a year now, and it's a single benchmark at that.

Fairly meaningless and nothing to get hyped about if you ask me.

[GoldenLag]

7 minutes ago, Humbug said:

Threadripper enthusiast CPUs are a small segment.

 

Epyc server CPUs are a very big segment. AMD needs this market. Just getting 5% of this market will be a huge deal for AMD in terms of cashflow.

 

Both are high margin as you say, the genius in AMDs implementation is using infinity fabric to circumvent the low yield issue. Which means that Intel cannot make high core CPUs as cheaply as AMD does until they implement something similar.

It also means Intel cant lower prices to kill AMD with Atrition. AMD can more or less sell Zen at consumer prices while still making money

[JuztBe]

6 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Worth noting that the 2990 isn't out either.

 

So this is AMD posting their own benchmarks, comparing their unreleased chip against an Intel processor which has been on the market for almost a year now, and it's a single benchmark at that.

Fairly meaningless and nothing to get hyped about if you ask me.

It's pretty much nvidia situation. "Most powerful gpu in the world". They always get some free marketing from that. AMD might as well do ot while they have a chance 

[Humbug]

5 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

It also means Intel cant lower prices to kill AMD with Atrition. AMD can more or less sell Zen at consumer prices while still making money

Yes... unless Intel is willing to totally cut their own margins in order to prevent AMD gaining market share. Unlikely as shareholders won't like it but it's a possibility just for the next two years as this period won't last forever.

[GoldenLag]

Just now, Humbug said:

Yes... unless Intel is willing to totally cut their own margins in order to prevent AMD gaining market share. Unlikely as shareholders won't like it but it's a possibility just for the next two years as this period won't last forever.

Idk. 1200$ for 32 core is very hard to beat. I think they can do 800$ if they reaaaly wanted to

[Kukielka]

1 minute ago, Humbug said:

Yes... unless Intel is willing to totally cut their own margins in order to prevent AMD gaining market share. Unlikely as shareholders won't like it but it's a possibility just for the next two years as this period won't last forever.

Problem is, Intel is manufacturing huge monolithic dies, by design the costs are much higher and the yields are much lower. Long-term this is not sustainable 

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, Kukielka said:

Problem is, Intel is manufacturing huge monolithic dies, by design the costs are much higher and the yields are much lower. Long-term this is not sustainable 

Thats the point of cost cuts. They have the money to win a monolithic war of attrition. Problem for intel is that the war isnt monolithic.

 

An 8 core 1 CCX CPU from AMD costs 300$ in the consumer market. Thats roughly 1250$ for an 32 core at consumer margins. They can cut it lower. 

[Humbug]

11 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Idk. 1200$ for 32 core is very hard to beat. I think they can do 800$ if they reaaaly wanted to

 

9 minutes ago, Kukielka said:

Problem is, Intel is manufacturing huge monolithic dies, by design the costs are much higher and the yields are much lower. Long-term this is not sustainable 

Indeed it's not sustainable.

It's just an interim thing that they can do for the next two years until they have new architectural and process developments. They can take that hit financially for now (because they can afford it) if they want to completely block AMD from getting a foothold in the server market. I am not saying they will do this, I am just saying it's one option if they want to shut out AMD from the lucrative server market.

 

I agree the more likely scenario is that they will continue to sell their server CPUs at profit and maximize cash-flow, and resign themselves to the fact that AMD is going to get 5-10% CPU server market share.

 

The latter scenario is what AMD wants, because just these few percentage points of market share means loads of money for AMD. And it means they have got into the big data centers around the world and built the right relationships with server guys like Dell, HP etc. Breaking into the server market again is not easy, so this first hurdle is the biggest one for AMD.

[Taf the Ghost]

4 hours ago, GoldenLag said:

Tbh, threadripper is more about mindshare than marketshare and profits. Just look at the boxes they come in. The newest box can literally be used as a case

Yes, plus introducing Premium Product marketing to the CPU space. There is enough of a market for it to be worth the trouble.

4 hours ago, GoldenLag said:

Do the 7980XE have that much of a clockspeed advantage? Even when overclocked, very few go past 4.2 ghz. (At least according to what ive heard).

 

At stock speeds, slightly, but Cinebench R15 actually doesn't scale greatly beyond about 24 threads. The efficiency per additional thread starts dropping off pretty fast in the 20s, so it's not the great test to demonstrate with, at least at that many cores. Blender would have been more interesting, but R15 is repeatable enough that people have an idea what it means.

 

Oddly enough, Jayz2centz got his recently to post at 4.9 Ghz all-core on the i9-7980XE, and generally stable at 4.8 Ghz. However, he was doing 750w load in R15. So there's Stock, then there's ridiculous-level cooling options. Ryzen will hit the wall around 4.3 Ghz (on these parts), but 4.2 Ghz all-core, for 32 cores, should be interesting.

[Taf the Ghost]

3 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Ah, alright then.  I thought it was.  Well good job then AMD, they can quite comfortably claim the thrown on this one for now.

A Series parts is probably November.

[leadeater]

4 hours ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

Maybe their SVP, which just happens to be Jim Keller might have a plan. 

Jim Keller vs Jim Keller, who you will? Jim Keller .

[Taf the Ghost]

2 hours ago, Humbug said:

Yes... unless Intel is willing to totally cut their own margins in order to prevent AMD gaining market share. Unlikely as shareholders won't like it but it's a possibility just for the next two years as this period won't last forever.

Intel also probably doesn't want to be the ones, right now, to see what the DoJ might do with serious anti-competitive practices cases. Other thing is, as the market leader, they will normally seek to dictate prices. When you have a very dominant position, you don't slash prices, as all you do is actually kill your margins.

[MMKing]

2 hours ago, Humbug said:

 

Indeed it's not sustainable.

It's just an interim thing that they can do for the next two years until they have new architectural and process developments. They can take that hit financially for now (because they can afford it) if they want to completely block AMD from getting a foothold in the server market. I am not saying they will do this, I am just saying it's one option if they want to shut out AMD from the lucrative server market.

 

I agree the more likely scenario is that they will continue to sell their server CPUs at profit and maximize cash-flow, and resign themselves to the fact that AMD is going to get 5-10% CPU server market share.

 

The latter scenario is what AMD wants, because just these few percentage points of market share means loads of money for AMD. And it means they have got into the big data centers around the world and built the right relationships with server guys like Dell, HP etc. Breaking into the server market again is not easy, so this first hurdle is the biggest one for AMD.

AMD have been in the process of establishing themselves to the server market for the last year already. AMDs flagship server CPU, the Epyc 7601 32 core 64 thread 2.2 GHZ base, 2.7GHZ all core turbo, 3.2 GHZ single core turbo. The CPU cost around 35-40% of what Intels flagship 28 core does, and it performs within 90% of what Intel offers. Now the 2990WX beats the Intel 28 core by 25%, and it costs less than 20% of what the Intel 28 core does.

 

The 7601 peaked the interest in the server market with it's competitive performance and significantly lower price. The 2990WX is in a completely different league compared to what Intel is offering at the moment. Even if it does not retain the performance throne, the price is insane and i don't think AMD is selling it at low margins.