This is still to me the most surprising story of the year. AMD steals Intel's lunch on the desktop with 7nm parts, and Intel still cannot meet 14nm demand.
Oems get competitive prices given the fact that they buy a lot of CPUs. And till 8 cores CPUs you cannot say that Intel is shit and AMD is amazing, they are close in performance, Intel is better in gaming, AMD better in some productivity stuff. Power consumption is also close, 9900k is not that much thirsty compared to 3700x. For laptops I don't think we need to discuss, Intel is clearly better, at least for now. As for workstation, starting with the new threadripper lineup, yes, they might lose some orders. In the server space also. But OEMs will keep using Intel products, since the prices Intel sells the CPUs to them are much lower than what we pay and in general it is hard for an OEM to change platform. You need to redesign stuff, change things, it is not worth it until a certain point.
"9900k is not that much thirsty compared to 3700x" -- you sure about that? I can't find a review that doesn't have an overclocked 3700x consuming less power than a stock 9900k under load. The 3700x is considerably more efficient in every review I have seen.
Note that a 9900K can pull up to 250w (at the socket - not full system) at stock clocks under heavy AVX load. Check Tom's Hardware 9900k review if you have doubts.
Shipments are up overall and both companies are selling every chip they can make, they're not really competing much in the sense of one losing out. AMD are focusing on high-margin chips due to supply constraints (at least on 7nm)just like intel is.
The story is next year Pc market will go severely down. Tell me a single reason for Intel to enlarge 14nm production when there is a bad forecast on 2020 cpu demand.
Demand for Intel chips is very high. and AMD has again failed to move in HPC as they had hoped. In fact, their sales there have been disappointing, and below their forecasted numbers.
While AMDs stock is at highs due to their chip lines advancing the way they have been, and yes, sales in some areas have risen, it’s again in the lower profit lines. and is just not going anywhere other than in lower priced products, as usual.
Intel is now producing 10nm in quantity, and increasing production there. They are also increasing 14nm production, but that’s likely a temporary boost until 10nm reaches parity with 14nm. As we all know, whether we’re happy with it or not, that Intel’s limes are more advanced than the competition in that their 14nm is about where 10nm is for everyone else, and that their new 10nm line, despite setbacks, is close to 7nm from everyone else.
The fact that they can have parity, sometimes better, and sometimes a bit worse, in single core performance shows that. If AMD can’t pull substantially ahead in single core performance and power draw, which it hasn’t, with a second generation 7nm process,, then their tech isn’t as good as some would like to believe. And everyone in the industry knows that.
Not that Intel stand still in core development. Willow Cove look nice with a stunning 1.25 MB of L2 and a finally larger L3. Bet AMD have to ship Zen 4 to meet Willow in IPC. But at that time Golden Cove will be out.
Zen3 is on track for next year, and Intel just released some more 2015-era Skylake cores. By the time Golden Cove is here, Zen5 will be shipping. See, I can do this too, except mine actually has some truth to it.
Your comment is a load of rubbish, sorry hon. You're either financially invested in Intel or delusional. EPYC is doing extremely well in HPC and it's early days so it'll get better as time goes on. Intel is heavily entrenched and it's going to take a while to dismantle their grip on the entire industry.
I don't know where you get the idea that Zen2 isn't 'substantially ahead' in power draw/efficiency, because you're blatantly incorrect - factually so. This isn't an opinion, it's a fact. Xeon is completely outclassed in performance per watt, and even absolute performance, and all other metrics such as platform features, core density and performance per dollar.
Intel's single core advantage is on destkop and HEDT, and it is because of the clock speed cieling of the 14nm++++ process, which they have been refining for for about 4 years, so go figure. In Server, Xeon actually has worse single-core performance in a lot of cases, and absolutely abysmal MT/W and MT/$ perf in everything else.
I don't know I bothered to type this out, but just wanted to point out your blatant lies/bending of the truth to suit your (likely financial) agenda.
Zen 2 has a higher IPC, about 7-10%, than Sky Lake based Intel. The only reason Intel has a few ST applications with better performance is the CPU clocks >10% higher. The Ice Lake based CPUs are only available in mobile and will probably never be ported to desktop and will only be moved to servers in 2H2020. By that time Zen 3 will be out which is rumored to have another 7+% IPC increase. Power draw is another space where Zen is far better than Core. The Core architecture was only power efficient with 4 cores or less. The 12 core 3900X draws less power than the 8 core 9900K.
AMD isn't really popular with most users,, commercial and consumer. I know, because I’ve seen it for decades, that AMD supporters are always talking about how AMD is going to “dethrone” Intel whenever they have some advantage. But it’s not going to happen. Most users willl just wait for,Intel to,catch up, and surpass AMD, which always happens.
And, believe it or not, cheaper prices, and more cores aren’t going to do it. I mentioned in another article, about and, the other day here, that industry sales are struggling because of a lack of Intel chips. Companies can move to and, but very few will.
yea ok melgross...no one i know who currently have intel cpus in their desktops.. are staying with intel when they upgrade in the coming months.. they are all going with amd...
gondalf.. here is a thought.. maybe its not that the desktop market is shrinking.. but its the fact that with intel stagnating the market for the last few years, there was no reason to upgrade because the performance over current systems wasnt worth it for the price.. but now.. with amd and ryzen.. it is.
You might be right, but, then again, many tech companies have suffered from being overconfident.
I will not be surprised if this turns out into Balmer's "statistical error" gaff, back in the days when he was underplaying iPhone.
Industry has a lot of inertia, but inertia also has two edges. It is slow to start changing, but once it starts, it is equally slow to reverse changes. AMD is nowhere close to that point - yet - but I think they are moving in that direction. Among products we are offering to customers, we are seeing HP Elitedesk and Probooks with AMD tech, as well as first Surface units based on AMD. With Microsoft, it might be just an experiment or effect of their console dealings with AMD, but HP already has quite a few different AMD SKUs, and quite sharply priced, at that.
@melgross "AMD isn't really popular with most users,, commercial and consumer." - when was the last time you actually tried to verify this "fact"?
Three computer tech publications have published articles on how its been noticed that out of the top 10 best selling CPUs on Amazon 8 are Ryzen and two are Intel with the top four spots goind to AMD.
As I check Amazon.com right now 9 out of 10 are Ryzen and one is a Threadripper part. Threadripper outselling most of Intel desktop parts. Apparently it has been like this for some time already. So your comment is at best way out of date.
"Most users will just wait for,Intel to,catch up" - I think they might be waiting for a while the way things seem to be going ... I think you are underestimating the momentum of this transition. Its not happening overnight, but the weight behind it is huge.
I just watched three of the most popular Youtube CPU tech reviewers / enthusiast just risk their ability to get review samples (with that expectation and not caring) to express their extreme disappointment with Intel products of late. These channels have millions of viewers ...
I don't think you have enough awareness on the topic to give a valid and honest consideration.
Jimbo Jones melgross is just trying to make intel look good.. when all intel can claim now, is the higher clocks. you wont get any reply from him for anything.
Qasar -- yeah its all a bit funny ... I have noticed that the "fanbois" comment sentiment has shifted away from "Intel has the best products!" to things like "CPUs don't really matter that much anyway!"(literally read that from an Intel fanboi) and "But Intel makes 100x more money!" and "Intel still has majority of the market share!"
Its actually hilarious ... Come'on people, the next few rounds in this fight is going to AMD whether you like it or not. Making ridiculous claims just makes you look uneducated.
Jimbo Jones you forgot how they also tout the clock speeds intel gets over amd, or how amd lies about their clocks, and, how its ok that intel use more power then they state, but when amd did it, it was a crime .....
Again, more rubbish. We've seen many major companies like Amazon and Twitter, etc moving to EPYC based systems. Ryzen 3000 is outselling Intel's lineup by an absolutely huge amount. You may like iron-fisted monopoly on the CPU industry, stagnation, no innovation and obscene prices, but apparently consumers don't.
What if Intel can't 'catch up'? If AMD keeps this momentum we could see a huge shift in long-term x86 processor leadership, away from Chipzilla.
I'm finding it a bit odd that consumer desktop parts seem to have no shortages at all -- in stock everywhere and have been since 9900k launched. There is NO desktop part shortage. Is Intel really sacrificing the production of their extremely high margin sever parts, angering all their best customer, just so they can meet demand for desktop parts?
They just launched an entirely new 14nm HEDT desktop line, that was announced only a couple months ago. Wouldn't it make sense to delay that launch and give priority to server customers, like Dell and HP who are "blaming" Intel shortages on their greatly reduced guidance?
Are we to believe that Intel is giving their largest partners the middle finger saying "hey pal, we got a non-competitive HEDT line to launch, screw your Xeons!"
Something is not right about this at all ... its starting to look like they are trying to convince their investors that "shortages" are to blame for them losing market share to AMD, to try to hide the fact they are losing share to AMD at a rather high rate of speed. At least THAT would make some sense.
The reason is simple: To compete in any meaningful way with AMD Intel had to make bigger and bigger chips - that means each chips eats more supply and yields go down exponentially with size, so defect rates skyrocket with the "larger chips to compete" strategy.
No, not really. AMD is still very small comparatively and are mostly noted by the enthusiast crowd. Standard enterprise desktops and normal consumer PC’s is still massively dominated by Intel. But AMD is moving up, and the longer they remain both faster, cheaper and Intel cannot deliver, the more influense they might get on the likes of Dell, HP and the other big brand names.
Here’s hoping they will take advantage of the situation instead of hiking up prices. That last batch of higher end SKU’s unfortunately suggest they are going for the money. That will be their downfall when Intel retaliates in a year or two (once their new architechture is ready and their 10 and 7nm comes properly online). The need to get a very strong foothold in the market to not start suffering again when Intel is back.
I work at a global company (hundreds of thousands employees) with HQs in europe and US. This year, for the first time ever, our lease replacement laptops are HP elitebooks with Ryzen U series instead of Intel.
AMD definitely made some inroads, now they have to keep executing for the next few years and get their battery life competitive to Intel 15W parts. Personally I believe AMD have the upper hand on performance/power metrics today, but they don't have their sleep/idle fully sorted out.
The key success in the business market is continued execution. The major oems will only use AMD in the business side if they can continue to execute. The OEMs survive on thin margins so they arent going to spend design money on new CPUs unless they can keep using that design for multiple generations.
Exactly. I think chassis are recycled every 3 generations for Dell and every 2 generations for HP. But the internals are strikingly different and almost nothing is interchangeable.
The HP Elitebook G1/G2 (4000\5000 series) share the same chassis but almost nothing is compatible other than the keyboard\LCD\battery. G3/G4 (6000/7000 series) modified the chassis to be slightly thinner, losing the eject cover on the bottom opting for a place with 12 screws. Again, the G3 and G4 offers little interchangeability. And it got really radical with the G5 (Coffee Lake) where the chassis actually has interior modifications for the L shaped motherboard while the G6 has an incompatible chassis with the G5 motherboard, presumably due to the cooling design.
In short its a wreck for OEM's. Every Ryzen notebook, is, all the Elitebook 745's, all have the same chassis, and the later models that got thinner, can still mount the G1 motherboard (and vice versa) because the board is essentially the same. They all take DDR4, simply have different revisions of the same chipset, and the cooling envelope is unaltered while Intel implemented TDP-up with Skylake which wrecked havoc on cooling systems (requiring some substantial firmware tweaking at the expense of sustained performance.)
They are not going for the money. You, yourself says they need to be noted. So, that's what they are doing. They are trying to be noted by professionals. And the only way to do that, is to sell at premium prices models that Intel can NOT offer.
Both companies are using the relatively small HEDT market to pass different messages. Intel is trying to convince people that it's latest models offer double performance per dollar and AMD is trying to make people see that they are the premium brand today, not Intel.
But in the mainstream market and the server market, where both companies make all their money, things have NOT change. AMD is still the cheaper, more value for money brand.
So, you are wrong about AMD. They didn't became Intel just because they released two "expensive" models. And no, they can NOT be noticed by certain type of consumers if they keep selling EVERYTHING cheap. Some people see the price of a model to come to conclusions about it's performance. They don't check benchmarks. They don't know how. What you pay is what you get and if it cheaper, it can NOT be better.
They can not buy enough amd cpus to fullfill the demand... TSMC just can not produce enough Zen2 cpus to fullfill what would be needed if companies moves to amd cpus... As it has been said above amd is too small company to compete with Intel in production volumes...
First off, Ryzen mobile CPUs are GloFO, so AMD is having WAY ENOUGH offering if Dell, HP or Acer want to go all in... the issue here is Intel threatening these OEMs from doing so with anti competitive practices. These companies are going to pay the price for the next 2 years.
you do realize that intel shortage has benn going on for over a year a now? nvm the 5g shitshow, the security flaws, and the 10nm disaster now in its 5th year. if u still have confidence in intel thats not AMD's problem.
It's Dell's own fault. They refuse to offer any AMD config that would threaten their Intel offerings - they won't risk their favored status / rebates / incentive payments from Intel.
An anecdotal story: Originally Dell was developing the Opiplex 5055 as a Ryzen R5 1600 and up and our organization was excited to buy. We kept being told by our sales rep that it was still in validation. Finally after 6 months waiting he was told that those options were canceled as not being financially viable? But "amazingly" we could get an intel equivalent system for $300 "below cost" instead.
Stranger still, the Optiplex 5055 returned for sale this year again, but you can't order it with anything with more than 4 (8 threads)... basically anything where Ryzen's price/perf really start to hurt Intel.
This I sadly agree with. AMD needs to get their new APU's out ASAP before they even have a chance to compete with Intel power wise. And even then it's going to take a good few years because Intel has had so much time to get things integrated down and especially software tweaked to scrape down to the last milliwatt.
Renoir will be released most likely in CES with Vega graphics. I do feel AMD missed the opportunity to capitalise the shortage of Intel CPU since mobile CPU is a big opportunity for AMD to capture the market. Hope they do it right this time with LPDDR4X support.
intel shortage is going to get a lot worse in 2020 once they are forced to compete with rome. 10nm is still broken and intel's EUV node is for late 2021, most likely with many delays.
Seems like the presumed CES Renoir announcement is the place to look for if anyone's offering more Ryzen models.
More models cost money and take lead time, but possible this has gone on long enough an OEM or two has started the work. The last para of the story here on ASUS's statement on shortages (https://www.anandtech.com/show/15114/asus-intel-cp... ) has their latest word on this.
Intel still seems to do better at low-load/idle power management, but still, chips > no chips.
It was a typical economist reasoning decision (Swan). "Not enough capacity, let's build more factories"... not understanding competition is going to eat a good chunk of their deficit in capacity and their lack of competing products will drive the demand down. Also the fact those factory will take 2 years to built is just mind blowing.
Intel is having too many markets however their bread and butter are CPUs. By not focusing on what they are the best, they are losing their edge and we see it now. I don't believe that intel can come back at this point if AMD keep executing like they are.
Asking seriously? One quite commonly mentioned aspect is AMD competition caused to increase the average shipped number of cores per CPU considerably. So since years what Intel was shipping to most consumers were 2 and 4-core CPUs, while currently average core count increased to 4-6? max is around 8? That's around 2x increase.
Intel mentioning multi-billion investments to increase production capacity by 25%, still when you increase your core count like by up to 100% - you just cannot deliver so many wafers more.
Intel is in a bad spot due to AMD. Now I'm not talking about performance, I'm talking about manufacturing.
Before Ryzen, Intel had a few manufacturing processes, which made chips for desktops, laptops, LCC servers, HCC servers, and XCC servers.
Now, Intel has so many varying chip sizes, all needing 14nm space, that it cannot manufacture enough for the demand. Demand probably went up due to Intel finally having a processor worth upgrading too, thanks to Ryzen, but it's putting a big strain on their 14nm production having so many different products to manufacture. Intel is masking this as a demand problem, but it's more they can't manufacture that many different products, and Intel has only themselves to blame for having products that can't scale as well. That's where AMD got super smart. They can just order as many 7nm chiplets they need, then mate them to an IO die. What they mate it to is what the product will be. And how many they mate also. The modularity of AMD's design is a huge strength.
I am in Europe and I cannot buy an Ice Lake Lenovo X1 Carbon that I want. Generally I see no Ice Lake thin/light/long-battery laptops available on the market, bar Dell 13 2-in-1, which I do not want.
I would buy an AMD-powered laptop but the battery life on them is shorter than on Intel-powered machines, therefore no buy.
TSMC has as well announced delayed shipments (3x increase in production lead times) for 7nm due to strong demand and AMD is not at top of the pecking order for TSMC. Thus AMD is most likely not able to (at least not fully) use this as an opportunity to grab some important wins from Intel.
That's where you are wrong, TSMC KNOWS that AMD is a huge partner even if the volume is not as important because AMD is bringing expertise in compute products for TSMC. Also, they stand by them with EPYC. Not only this, but Apple and QCOM are going to move to 5nm soon leaving a lot of capacity that AMD has already secured.
This isn't surprising. The enterprise and corporate sectors are having exceedingly high cycling this quarter due to Windows 7 retirement in January: they aren't upgrading old pc's and instead buying new ones.
And because all these OEM's are shortsighted in their diversity, they don't carry enough AMD products to offset Intel's supply.
So what the fuck is that all about? I work for 2 dozen clients in the corporate sector and they don't give a shit what CPU is in the PC as long as it joins a domain, runs Outlook and accesses QuickBooks.
Enterprise images are much more portable within a CPU brand. Windows 10 will successfully boot on an i7 Skylake+ with an image built on a Sandy i3. From personal anecdote, I've had quite a few issues trying to use an Intel image on AMD.
lmcd " I've had quite a few issues trying to use an Intel image on AMD. " the BETTER question to ask your self is WHY would you even think of doing that ?? putting an image from one cpu maker to another, should tell you right then and their you would have problems, and are just wasting your time. you want to make more work for your self ??? do that, im sorry to say, is just dumb
Run both chips @4.5 GHz or 4.3 GHz and see which comes on top.
Of course it is AMD and of course that's how IPC is measured.
AMD Ryzen 3000 has much better power efficiency than anything Intel has in the desktop, HEDT and server markets.
Anybody saying otherwise and not posting a few different sources to backup his words is lying.
What is this nonsense "many companies just like Intel better"?!
Many companies have a few stupid people , yes, but you can't claim all these companies are smart, while entire countries of people are stupid for buying AMD : https://www.techpowerup.com/261618/amd-cpus-domina...
Companies are stuck sometimes with Intel and sometime don't have the brains and talent to do better.
I know 2 example I have consulted on this week:
1) Big company, not in IT, has over 260,000 laptops and desktops and 20,000 servers.
Managing the obsolescence, they will renew quite a few machines.
Apparently they will pay 48% more and get half the performance and go Intel, instead of AMD.
Reason given: well, we don't know if we might run into compatibility issues and we're afraid our tech people will be slacking and get a tendency of blaming any future issues on this "AMD move" .
IMHO that is sooo damn stupid.
2) Developer company paying over double (207%) to stay Intel and pay more for power and cooling and get less performance.
Reason?! : Most of our code is not optimised for AMD.
We fixed some of it, we like the results, but we don't have the time to fix and test all of it, before the move to PROD.
Maybe next gen .../
That is again so damn stupid, IMHO.
And this is just a week of consulting with just 2 clients :(
So many idiots and so many stupid lies in the comments sometimes.
Basically in corporate world there is the adage "No one was ever fired for buying Intel." I see it all the time and it will be that way until AMD has the marketing to improve their image.
Until AMD invests properly in Software stack and quality assurance, Intel will always remain #1. Sorry AMD, I just built my new PC using Intel+Nvidia and the laptop I'll be buying in 2020 will be Intel based as well.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
82 Comments
Back to Article
Sttm - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
This is still to me the most surprising story of the year. AMD steals Intel's lunch on the desktop with 7nm parts, and Intel still cannot meet 14nm demand.yeeeeman - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Oems get competitive prices given the fact that they buy a lot of CPUs. And till 8 cores CPUs you cannot say that Intel is shit and AMD is amazing, they are close in performance, Intel is better in gaming, AMD better in some productivity stuff. Power consumption is also close, 9900k is not that much thirsty compared to 3700x. For laptops I don't think we need to discuss, Intel is clearly better, at least for now. As for workstation, starting with the new threadripper lineup, yes, they might lose some orders. In the server space also. But OEMs will keep using Intel products, since the prices Intel sells the CPUs to them are much lower than what we pay and in general it is hard for an OEM to change platform. You need to redesign stuff, change things, it is not worth it until a certain point.Jimbo Jones - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
@yeeeeman"9900k is not that much thirsty compared to 3700x" -- you sure about that? I can't find a review that doesn't have an overclocked 3700x consuming less power than a stock 9900k under load. The 3700x is considerably more efficient in every review I have seen.
Note that a 9900K can pull up to 250w (at the socket - not full system) at stock clocks under heavy AVX load. Check Tom's Hardware 9900k review if you have doubts.
AshlayW - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
9900K is sometimes nearly twice the power use of 3700X for 15-20% more performance.schujj07 - Monday, December 2, 2019 - link
The 3700X is most of the time within 5% of the stock 9900K in gaming and leads in more than half of productivity tasks, while using 1/3 the power.ArcadeEngineer - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Shipments are up overall and both companies are selling every chip they can make, they're not really competing much in the sense of one losing out. AMD are focusing on high-margin chips due to supply constraints (at least on 7nm)just like intel is.Gondalf - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
The story is next year Pc market will go severely down.Tell me a single reason for Intel to enlarge 14nm production when there is a bad forecast on 2020 cpu demand.
melgross - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Demand for Intel chips is very high. and AMD has again failed to move in HPC as they had hoped. In fact, their sales there have been disappointing, and below their forecasted numbers.While AMDs stock is at highs due to their chip lines advancing the way they have been, and yes, sales in some areas have risen, it’s again in the lower profit lines. and is just not going anywhere other than in lower priced products, as usual.
Intel is now producing 10nm in quantity, and increasing production there. They are also increasing 14nm production, but that’s likely a temporary boost until 10nm reaches parity with 14nm. As we all know, whether we’re happy with it or not, that Intel’s limes are more advanced than the competition in that their 14nm is about where 10nm is for everyone else, and that their new 10nm line, despite setbacks, is close to 7nm from everyone else.
The fact that they can have parity, sometimes better, and sometimes a bit worse, in single core performance shows that. If AMD can’t pull substantially ahead in single core performance and power draw, which it hasn’t, with a second generation 7nm process,, then their tech isn’t as good as some would like to believe. And everyone in the industry knows that.
Gondalf - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Not that Intel stand still in core development. Willow Cove look nice with a stunning 1.25 MB of L2 and a finally larger L3.Bet AMD have to ship Zen 4 to meet Willow in IPC. But at that time Golden Cove will be out.
Korguz - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
melgross/gondalf...care to post some links/proof of your claims ??? cause your posts.. sound more like pro intel opinions then anything
AshlayW - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
Zen3 is on track for next year, and Intel just released some more 2015-era Skylake cores. By the time Golden Cove is here, Zen5 will be shipping. See, I can do this too, except mine actually has some truth to it.AshlayW - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
Your comment is a load of rubbish, sorry hon. You're either financially invested in Intel or delusional. EPYC is doing extremely well in HPC and it's early days so it'll get better as time goes on. Intel is heavily entrenched and it's going to take a while to dismantle their grip on the entire industry.I don't know where you get the idea that Zen2 isn't 'substantially ahead' in power draw/efficiency, because you're blatantly incorrect - factually so. This isn't an opinion, it's a fact. Xeon is completely outclassed in performance per watt, and even absolute performance, and all other metrics such as platform features, core density and performance per dollar.
Intel's single core advantage is on destkop and HEDT, and it is because of the clock speed cieling of the 14nm++++ process, which they have been refining for for about 4 years, so go figure. In Server, Xeon actually has worse single-core performance in a lot of cases, and absolutely abysmal MT/W and MT/$ perf in everything else.
I don't know I bothered to type this out, but just wanted to point out your blatant lies/bending of the truth to suit your (likely financial) agenda.
schujj07 - Monday, December 2, 2019 - link
Zen 2 has a higher IPC, about 7-10%, than Sky Lake based Intel. The only reason Intel has a few ST applications with better performance is the CPU clocks >10% higher. The Ice Lake based CPUs are only available in mobile and will probably never be ported to desktop and will only be moved to servers in 2H2020. By that time Zen 3 will be out which is rumored to have another 7+% IPC increase. Power draw is another space where Zen is far better than Core. The Core architecture was only power efficient with 4 cores or less. The 12 core 3900X draws less power than the 8 core 9900K.melgross - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
AMD isn't really popular with most users,, commercial and consumer. I know, because I’ve seen it for decades, that AMD supporters are always talking about how AMD is going to “dethrone” Intel whenever they have some advantage. But it’s not going to happen. Most users willl just wait for,Intel to,catch up, and surpass AMD, which always happens.And, believe it or not, cheaper prices, and more cores aren’t going to do it. I mentioned in another article, about and, the other day here, that industry sales are struggling because of a lack of Intel chips. Companies can move to and, but very few will.
Like it or not, that’s the way it is.
Korguz - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
yea ok melgross...no one i know who currently have intel cpus in their desktops.. are staying with intel when they upgrade in the coming months.. they are all going with amd...gondalf.. here is a thought.. maybe its not that the desktop market is shrinking.. but its the fact that with intel stagnating the market for the last few years, there was no reason to upgrade because the performance over current systems wasnt worth it for the price.. but now.. with amd and ryzen.. it is.
Zagor Te Nay - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
You might be right, but, then again, many tech companies have suffered from being overconfident.I will not be surprised if this turns out into Balmer's "statistical error" gaff, back in the days when he was underplaying iPhone.
Industry has a lot of inertia, but inertia also has two edges. It is slow to start changing, but once it starts, it is equally slow to reverse changes. AMD is nowhere close to that point - yet - but I think they are moving in that direction. Among products we are offering to customers, we are seeing HP Elitedesk and Probooks with AMD tech, as well as first Surface units based on AMD. With Microsoft, it might be just an experiment or effect of their console dealings with AMD, but HP already has quite a few different AMD SKUs, and quite sharply priced, at that.
Industry does have a lot of inertia, but
Zagor Te Nay - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Apologies for poor formatting :)abufrejoval - Monday, December 2, 2019 - link
Well said!Jimbo Jones - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
@melgross "AMD isn't really popular with most users,, commercial and consumer." - when was the last time you actually tried to verify this "fact"?Three computer tech publications have published articles on how its been noticed that out of the top 10 best selling CPUs on Amazon 8 are Ryzen and two are Intel with the top four spots goind to AMD.
As I check Amazon.com right now 9 out of 10 are Ryzen and one is a Threadripper part. Threadripper outselling most of Intel desktop parts. Apparently it has been like this for some time already. So your comment is at best way out of date.
"Most users will just wait for,Intel to,catch up" - I think they might be waiting for a while the way things seem to be going ... I think you are underestimating the momentum of this transition. Its not happening overnight, but the weight behind it is huge.
I just watched three of the most popular Youtube CPU tech reviewers / enthusiast just risk their ability to get review samples (with that expectation and not caring) to express their extreme disappointment with Intel products of late. These channels have millions of viewers ...
I don't think you have enough awareness on the topic to give a valid and honest consideration.
Qasar - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Jimbo Jones melgross is just trying to make intel look good.. when all intel can claim now, is the higher clocks. you wont get any reply from him for anything.Jimbo Jones - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
Qasar -- yeah its all a bit funny ... I have noticed that the "fanbois" comment sentiment has shifted away from "Intel has the best products!" to things like "CPUs don't really matter that much anyway!"(literally read that from an Intel fanboi) and "But Intel makes 100x more money!" and "Intel still has majority of the market share!"Its actually hilarious ... Come'on people, the next few rounds in this fight is going to AMD whether you like it or not. Making ridiculous claims just makes you look uneducated.
Qasar - Saturday, November 30, 2019 - link
Jimbo Jones you forgot how they also tout the clock speeds intel gets over amd, or how amd lies about their clocks, and, how its ok that intel use more power then they state, but when amd did it, it was a crime .....AshlayW - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
Again, more rubbish. We've seen many major companies like Amazon and Twitter, etc moving to EPYC based systems. Ryzen 3000 is outselling Intel's lineup by an absolutely huge amount. You may like iron-fisted monopoly on the CPU industry, stagnation, no innovation and obscene prices, but apparently consumers don't.What if Intel can't 'catch up'? If AMD keeps this momentum we could see a huge shift in long-term x86 processor leadership, away from Chipzilla.
Jimbo Jones - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
I'm finding it a bit odd that consumer desktop parts seem to have no shortages at all -- in stock everywhere and have been since 9900k launched. There is NO desktop part shortage. Is Intel really sacrificing the production of their extremely high margin sever parts, angering all their best customer, just so they can meet demand for desktop parts?They just launched an entirely new 14nm HEDT desktop line, that was announced only a couple months ago. Wouldn't it make sense to delay that launch and give priority to server customers, like Dell and HP who are "blaming" Intel shortages on their greatly reduced guidance?
Are we to believe that Intel is giving their largest partners the middle finger saying "hey pal, we got a non-competitive HEDT line to launch, screw your Xeons!"
Something is not right about this at all ... its starting to look like they are trying to convince their investors that "shortages" are to blame for them losing market share to AMD, to try to hide the fact they are losing share to AMD at a rather high rate of speed. At least THAT would make some sense.
Jimbo Jones - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Correcting myself on Intel desktop stock ... "... in stock everywhere and have been since 9900k shortages ended..."M O B - Friday, December 6, 2019 - link
Certainly a HEDT shortage. 10980XE has an estimated shipping date of mid-Feb 2020 now. How many were actually sold at launch? A few thousand?7xxx and 9xxx had shortages as well in the last 18 months, no doubt as they are competing for Xeon silicon, while lower-end isn't.
Father Time - Sunday, December 1, 2019 - link
The reason is simple: To compete in any meaningful way with AMD Intel had to make bigger and bigger chips - that means each chips eats more supply and yields go down exponentially with size, so defect rates skyrocket with the "larger chips to compete" strategy.Der Keyser - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
No, not really. AMD is still very small comparatively and are mostly noted by the enthusiast crowd. Standard enterprise desktops and normal consumer PC’s is still massively dominated by Intel. But AMD is moving up, and the longer they remain both faster, cheaper and Intel cannot deliver, the more influense they might get on the likes of Dell, HP and the other big brand names.Here’s hoping they will take advantage of the situation instead of hiking up prices. That last batch of higher end SKU’s unfortunately suggest they are going for the money. That will be their downfall when Intel retaliates in a year or two (once their new architechture is ready and their 10 and 7nm comes properly online). The need to get a very strong foothold in the market to not start suffering again when Intel is back.
PEJUman - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
I work at a global company (hundreds of thousands employees) with HQs in europe and US. This year, for the first time ever, our lease replacement laptops are HP elitebooks with Ryzen U series instead of Intel.AMD definitely made some inroads, now they have to keep executing for the next few years and get their battery life competitive to Intel 15W parts. Personally I believe AMD have the upper hand on performance/power metrics today, but they don't have their sleep/idle fully sorted out.
rahvin - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
The key success in the business market is continued execution. The major oems will only use AMD in the business side if they can continue to execute. The OEMs survive on thin margins so they arent going to spend design money on new CPUs unless they can keep using that design for multiple generations.Jorgp2 - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
Laptops usually require new motherboards every generation.The chassis can be recycled, but they still have to redo board layout
Samus - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Exactly. I think chassis are recycled every 3 generations for Dell and every 2 generations for HP. But the internals are strikingly different and almost nothing is interchangeable.The HP Elitebook G1/G2 (4000\5000 series) share the same chassis but almost nothing is compatible other than the keyboard\LCD\battery. G3/G4 (6000/7000 series) modified the chassis to be slightly thinner, losing the eject cover on the bottom opting for a place with 12 screws. Again, the G3 and G4 offers little interchangeability. And it got really radical with the G5 (Coffee Lake) where the chassis actually has interior modifications for the L shaped motherboard while the G6 has an incompatible chassis with the G5 motherboard, presumably due to the cooling design.
In short its a wreck for OEM's. Every Ryzen notebook, is, all the Elitebook 745's, all have the same chassis, and the later models that got thinner, can still mount the G1 motherboard (and vice versa) because the board is essentially the same. They all take DDR4, simply have different revisions of the same chipset, and the cooling envelope is unaltered while Intel implemented TDP-up with Skylake which wrecked havoc on cooling systems (requiring some substantial firmware tweaking at the expense of sustained performance.)
melgross - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Yours is a very unusual company then.yannigr2 - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
They are not going for the money. You, yourself says they need to be noted. So, that's what they are doing. They are trying to be noted by professionals. And the only way to do that, is to sell at premium prices models that Intel can NOT offer.Both companies are using the relatively small HEDT market to pass different messages. Intel is trying to convince people that it's latest models offer double performance per dollar and AMD is trying to make people see that they are the premium brand today, not Intel.
But in the mainstream market and the server market, where both companies make all their money, things have NOT change. AMD is still the cheaper, more value for money brand.
So, you are wrong about AMD. They didn't became Intel just because they released two "expensive" models. And no, they can NOT be noticed by certain type of consumers if they keep selling EVERYTHING cheap. Some people see the price of a model to come to conclusions about it's performance. They don't check benchmarks. They don't know how. What you pay is what you get and if it cheaper, it can NOT be better.
sharath.naik - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
Stop complaining and go with AMD. What is stopping Dell other than underhanded dealings with Intel? AMD is a better processor right now anyway.haukionkannel - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
They can not buy enough amd cpus to fullfill the demand... TSMC just can not produce enough Zen2 cpus to fullfill what would be needed if companies moves to amd cpus... As it has been said above amd is too small company to compete with Intel in production volumes...eva02langley - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
First off, Ryzen mobile CPUs are GloFO, so AMD is having WAY ENOUGH offering if Dell, HP or Acer want to go all in... the issue here is Intel threatening these OEMs from doing so with anti competitive practices. These companies are going to pay the price for the next 2 years.Jorgp2 - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
You do realize that it takes weeks to produce CPUs right?AMD can't magically decide to order more and have them the next day.
azfacea - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
you do realize that intel shortage has benn going on for over a year a now? nvm the 5g shitshow, the security flaws, and the 10nm disaster now in its 5th year. if u still have confidence in intel thats not AMD's problem.xrror - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
It's Dell's own fault. They refuse to offer any AMD config that would threaten their Intel offerings - they won't risk their favored status / rebates / incentive payments from Intel.An anecdotal story: Originally Dell was developing the Opiplex 5055 as a Ryzen R5 1600 and up and our organization was excited to buy. We kept being told by our sales rep that it was still in validation. Finally after 6 months waiting he was told that those options were canceled as not being financially viable? But "amazingly" we could get an intel equivalent system for $300 "below cost" instead.
Stranger still, the Optiplex 5055 returned for sale this year again, but you can't order it with anything with more than 4 (8 threads)... basically anything where Ryzen's price/perf really start to hurt Intel.
https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/shop/desktop-and-a...
Sttm - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
The AMD laptop chips are inferior. Who wants a 12nm Ryzen model? AMD needs to get out 7nm for Laptops.xrror - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
This I sadly agree with. AMD needs to get their new APU's out ASAP before they even have a chance to compete with Intel power wise. And even then it's going to take a good few years because Intel has had so much time to get things integrated down and especially software tweaked to scrape down to the last milliwatt.0iron - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
Renoir will be released most likely in CES with Vega graphics. I do feel AMD missed the opportunity to capitalise the shortage of Intel CPU since mobile CPU is a big opportunity for AMD to capture the market. Hope they do it right this time with LPDDR4X support.azfacea - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
intel shortage is going to get a lot worse in 2020 once they are forced to compete with rome. 10nm is still broken and intel's EUV node is for late 2021, most likely with many delays.nandnandnand - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
40 days until the start of CES 2020.The new chips are supposed to have up to 8 cores, finally.
Smell This - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
**The AMD laptop chips are inferior. Who wants a 12nm Ryzen model? AMD needs to get out 7nm for Laptops.**__________________________________________
Uhhh. No.
Zen+ 12nm 'Picasso' mobile is knocking on Intel's door. Can you hear them knocking?
Chipzillah will have their doors knocked-down with Renoir at 7nm Zen2, even with Vega on board ....
twotwotwo - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
Seems like the presumed CES Renoir announcement is the place to look for if anyone's offering more Ryzen models.More models cost money and take lead time, but possible this has gone on long enough an OEM or two has started the work. The last para of the story here on ASUS's statement on shortages (https://www.anandtech.com/show/15114/asus-intel-cp... ) has their latest word on this.
Intel still seems to do better at low-load/idle power management, but still, chips > no chips.
melgross - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
No underhanded dealings. Most people and companies just don’t want AMD.Korguz - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
yea.. ok.. sureQasar - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
and you have proof of this " fact " melgross ??? yea.. i didnt think you did.. maybe YOU just dont want amd..eva02langley - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link
Let's hope it get worst so stakeholders can give OEMs a major WAKEUP call.yannigr2 - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Dell, don't worry.Just keep saying to yourselves: "There is no AMD".
s.yu - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
With the projected contraction of the PC market Intel should probably be reluctant to invest in new fabs, even with the recent shortages.eva02langley - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
It was a typical economist reasoning decision (Swan). "Not enough capacity, let's build more factories"... not understanding competition is going to eat a good chunk of their deficit in capacity and their lack of competing products will drive the demand down. Also the fact those factory will take 2 years to built is just mind blowing.Intel is having too many markets however their bread and butter are CPUs. By not focusing on what they are the best, they are losing their edge and we see it now. I don't believe that intel can come back at this point if AMD keep executing like they are.
etre - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Intel has been on 14nm for some years now. How is that it has problems meeting demand ?dlum - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Asking seriously?One quite commonly mentioned aspect is AMD competition caused to increase the average shipped number of cores per CPU considerably. So since years what Intel was shipping to most consumers were 2 and 4-core CPUs, while currently average core count increased to 4-6? max is around 8? That's around 2x increase.
Intel mentioning multi-billion investments to increase production capacity by 25%, still when you increase your core count like by up to 100% - you just cannot deliver so many wafers more.
eva02langley - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
I didn't thought about that, it is quite logical when you think about it.Xyler94 - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Intel is in a bad spot due to AMD. Now I'm not talking about performance, I'm talking about manufacturing.Before Ryzen, Intel had a few manufacturing processes, which made chips for desktops, laptops, LCC servers, HCC servers, and XCC servers.
Now, Intel has so many varying chip sizes, all needing 14nm space, that it cannot manufacture enough for the demand. Demand probably went up due to Intel finally having a processor worth upgrading too, thanks to Ryzen, but it's putting a big strain on their 14nm production having so many different products to manufacture. Intel is masking this as a demand problem, but it's more they can't manufacture that many different products, and Intel has only themselves to blame for having products that can't scale as well. That's where AMD got super smart. They can just order as many 7nm chiplets they need, then mate them to an IO die. What they mate it to is what the product will be. And how many they mate also. The modularity of AMD's design is a huge strength.
eva02langley - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Which I believe Intel will never surpass as long as they are producing monolithic chips.Peskarik - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
I am in Europe and I cannot buy an Ice Lake Lenovo X1 Carbon that I want. Generally I see no Ice Lake thin/light/long-battery laptops available on the market, bar Dell 13 2-in-1, which I do not want.I would buy an AMD-powered laptop but the battery life on them is shorter than on Intel-powered machines, therefore no buy.
visualzero - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
TSMC has as well announced delayed shipments (3x increase in production lead times) for 7nm due to strong demand and AMD is not at top of the pecking order for TSMC. Thus AMD is most likely not able to (at least not fully) use this as an opportunity to grab some important wins from Intel.eva02langley - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
That's where you are wrong, TSMC KNOWS that AMD is a huge partner even if the volume is not as important because AMD is bringing expertise in compute products for TSMC. Also, they stand by them with EPYC. Not only this, but Apple and QCOM are going to move to 5nm soon leaving a lot of capacity that AMD has already secured.lmcd - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
What on earth are you talking about? Apple and Nvidia are both ahead in TSMC priority, as AMD's been hedging with GloFo for the past couple years.Qasar - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
and you read this where, lmcd ????Samus - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
This isn't surprising. The enterprise and corporate sectors are having exceedingly high cycling this quarter due to Windows 7 retirement in January: they aren't upgrading old pc's and instead buying new ones.And because all these OEM's are shortsighted in their diversity, they don't carry enough AMD products to offset Intel's supply.
So what the fuck is that all about? I work for 2 dozen clients in the corporate sector and they don't give a shit what CPU is in the PC as long as it joins a domain, runs Outlook and accesses QuickBooks.
lmcd - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
Enterprise images are much more portable within a CPU brand. Windows 10 will successfully boot on an i7 Skylake+ with an image built on a Sandy i3. From personal anecdote, I've had quite a few issues trying to use an Intel image on AMD.Qasar - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
lmcd " I've had quite a few issues trying to use an Intel image on AMD. " the BETTER question to ask your self is WHY would you even think of doing that ?? putting an image from one cpu maker to another, should tell you right then and their you would have problems, and are just wasting your time. you want to make more work for your self ??? do that, im sorry to say, is just dumbTeckk - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
If Dell can't go to AMD for volume reasons Apple can't either, though they don't have as much volume compared to Dell I guess?lmcd - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
AMD still doesn't have a mobile chip with LPDDR4X support. Dunno why everyone's ignoring that in mobile, there's still a feature gap.Qasar - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
yet... you meanIGTrading - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
There's so much nonsense in some comments.AMD has better IPC than Intel now. Period.
Run both chips @4.5 GHz or 4.3 GHz and see which comes on top.
Of course it is AMD and of course that's how IPC is measured.
AMD Ryzen 3000 has much better power efficiency than anything Intel has in the desktop, HEDT and server markets.
Anybody saying otherwise and not posting a few different sources to backup his words is lying.
What is this nonsense "many companies just like Intel better"?!
Many companies have a few stupid people , yes, but you can't claim all these companies are smart, while entire countries of people are stupid for buying AMD : https://www.techpowerup.com/261618/amd-cpus-domina...
Companies are stuck sometimes with Intel and sometime don't have the brains and talent to do better.
I know 2 example I have consulted on this week:
1) Big company, not in IT, has over 260,000 laptops and desktops and 20,000 servers.
Managing the obsolescence, they will renew quite a few machines.
Apparently they will pay 48% more and get half the performance and go Intel, instead of AMD.
Reason given: well, we don't know if we might run into compatibility issues and we're afraid our tech people will be slacking and get a tendency of blaming any future issues on this "AMD move" .
IMHO that is sooo damn stupid.
2) Developer company paying over double (207%) to stay Intel and pay more for power and cooling and get less performance.
Reason?! : Most of our code is not optimised for AMD.
We fixed some of it, we like the results, but we don't have the time to fix and test all of it, before the move to PROD.
Maybe next gen .../
That is again so damn stupid, IMHO.
And this is just a week of consulting with just 2 clients :(
So many idiots and so many stupid lies in the comments sometimes.
schujj07 - Monday, December 2, 2019 - link
Basically in corporate world there is the adage "No one was ever fired for buying Intel." I see it all the time and it will be that way until AMD has the marketing to improve their image.Yojimbo - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
Why would they have to cut revenue forecasts due to stronger than expected demand? That makes no sense. They had forecast unexpectedly high demand?vladx - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
Until AMD invests properly in Software stack and quality assurance, Intel will always remain #1. Sorry AMD, I just built my new PC using Intel+Nvidia and the laptop I'll be buying in 2020 will be Intel based as well.Jimbo Jones - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
Sorry about your backside ... unless that's the way you like it ... ?Qasar - Saturday, November 30, 2019 - link
vladx " Until AMD invests properly in Software stack and quality assurance " huh ??vladx - Tuesday, December 3, 2019 - link
Meaning AMD's software stack sucks ass and the software testing is pretty much non-existent.Korguz - Wednesday, December 4, 2019 - link
that sounds more like personal opinion, then fact...Qasar - Wednesday, December 4, 2019 - link
sure does sound like his personal opinion... but hey.. if he thinks he can do better.....AshlayW - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link
People are buying Intel CPUs?Y Tho?
LinaJilly94 - Sunday, December 1, 2019 - link
https://luckypatcher.dev/Korguz - Sunday, December 1, 2019 - link
oh look.. another site to get trojans and other viruses !!!