Not this again, don't ever base a company on one product. Its like saying Google only does Android OS and compare it to everything else. Its silly and does not point to a company as a whole on how they operate.
AMD simply was lucky about TMSC 7nm PP vs Intel investing in a now failed but at the time very promising 10nm PP. Would have Intel had its 10nm out 2 years ago AMD would not have been at this point. Would have TMSC created another 20nm shit they would be fried by now.
So great job AMD for having created an architecture that is not a failure as the two previous ones, but the point in the market they occupy now is just due to Intel fails for having bet on the creation of a too optimistic PP.
Now see what will happen when Intel resolves its problems with the PP and will come back with: 1, complete new architecture (with Keller's contributions) 2. new buses for joining chiplets (something AMD has not) 3. 3D stacking (which AMD has not)
See that with a better PP that Intel can use now, AMD is challenging an architecture which is, read carefully, 9 YEARS OLD! And it's main advantage is just the power consumption provided by the new PP (which is merit of TSMC, not AMD). Performance related, Intel is in par if not still ahead of AMD achievements 9 years later.
Finally a person that thinks. I really don't understand why people say amd won because they are amazingly better. It is like saying that a tennis player is the champion after match where the opponent plays with a broken leg. For sure he will win. Zen 2 is a good architecture, no doubt about that but there is nothing special about it. It is a tad bit better in ipc compared to a 5 year old one that is Skylake. Ice lake, which was targeted for 2017 is 10% better than a 2019 and product, just to put things in context. The key ingredient to amd succes is tsmc. That process allowed them to cram so much capability into their products. Chiplet architecture was also a key point but just look at what the results were with a bad process, not amazing (talking about 2xxx series). So yeah, Intel is doing great now because they have a momentum and because they have support. Oems love to do their products as easy as possible and amd, even if they have great products now, they still are too small to work very closely with all the oems at the level Intel is a working now. If things will continue in this way, yes, in 2-3 years we might see Intel go quite a bit down and amd raise its capital significantly. But in the end, you can do so much with selling only CPUs and gpus. You need to diversify and Intel is staying afloat just because of that.
" Intel is doing great now because they have a momentum and because they have support. " they are ?? maybe with their financials, but when you over charge for your products....
I'm probably going to regret writing this comment, but ... yes and no. What you have written is a very simplistic analysis, maybe so simple that it borders on misleading. Yes, TSMC's 7nm is now playing a big part. However, original Ryzen was on TSMC's 10nm (14nm++++ -comparable) process and has some genuine architectural improvements such as Infinity Fabric. To claim otherwise is to do a disservice to some very ingenious engineers and to the architecture itself. The architecture was also very forward-looking... 3 generations on AM4, with big improvements per generation, is not to be scoffed at. As for Intel, there are organizational issues at work too. Krzanich took his eye off the CPU performance ball and Swan is keeping his eye firmly off that ball too. He wants to play in 30% of ALL silicon rather than 90% of CPUs, and the technology development is reflecting that. Foveros is nice, but apply it to CPUs and you've got a thermal nightmare that needs handling. Apply it to other silicon and you'll be fine. So the fact is that as I see it, Intel may not even want to compete at this level, and that makes perfect business sense to me. Diversify and there is much less business risk. Su is an engineer and that comes through clearly ... AMD actually WANTS the crown. Swan is a businessman who's been in a CFO role for most of his recent life.
To be honest, maybe this is too simplistic an analysis too. But at least it's a bit more reflective of reality...
"original Ryzen was on TSMC's 10nm" Source, please. As far as I know, Ryzen was built on Globalfoundries' 14 and 12 nm processes (licensed from Samsung).
part of it was TSMCs 7nm, and intel screwing up with its 10nm node. but who knows where cpus would really be if intel didnt spend the last 3 or 4 years screwing up. there is still a good cpu architecture in Zen. and why is intel using an architecture that is 9 YEARS OLD ? because they for LAZY. thats why... what did intel do for the cpu industry before zen ? NOTHING. they stagnated the cpu industry, stuck the mainstream at 4 CORES, and lets not forget how generous they were by giving us what was it, 10% or less performance increases year over year, while they kept increasing prices. thank you intel !!!! amd seems to be the one that innovates more then your beloved intel cicciob... so keep praising them, keep buying their over priced cpus...
One of these days, someone is going to write a plug-in that looks for awkward capitalization and superfluous punctuation and just filter out these posts out. And the world will have lost nothing of value.
One of these days technical forums will introduce a simple preliminary test to pass to be able to post and suddenly many clueless posters will disappear with none regretting them.
Dear AMD fan, it is not a question of praising a global company like Intel. My Intel shares will go up and down independently of whatever say here. So will do my AMD ones.
The one trying to praise a company (AMD) with moot reasons is you. Intel was using a 9 old architecture simply because there was nothing better than it on the market. The 10% performance increase is the same order of magnitude that AMD is bringing with Zen at its revisions. In fact once you have reached the maturity of an architecture you can but raise slowly its performance while spending lots of resources to do so. Or you can spare resources and gain more it.
AMD just filled the gap of 9 year old architecture. Just think about why they arrived now at par using what seems to be one of the best PP that TSMC has created up o now: they were so innovative fora these years? With which results? Stay behind 9 years with respect to the competition? However, Zen is only decent, as it still has difficulties in overcoming that same 9 year old architecture that Intel has been happily selling for all these years despite a better PP. Actually against Ice Lake, that still suffer Intel 10nm PP issues, Zen is still lagging.
AMD innovation before Zen leads it to completely abandon professional market both in CPU and GPU markets. Its product where so advanced that a 9 years old architecture today still wins in many markets. Its GPUs were so good that Nvidia has moved selling x60 mainstream GPU from 150 at Fermi time to 350 dollars Turing. And again AMD filled partially the gap with respect to the competitor using a better PP without which it would be 2 years behind.
I understand that after so many years of having hoped for a market change and see your preferred company coming out from the shit it has been all this time, you AMD fanboy are now happy to see this somewhat happen. But that does not change the reality and the real reasons we are at this point: AMD did a decent job with Zen while Intel completely messes up with 10nm. Moreover all that praising about multi billion company laziness and such statements which belong more to infantry school than to a technical forum like this, just show that you just are ignorant about how public quoted companies work and what are their aims. Guess what? AMD tries to make the same that Intel does hoping to have the same or even better position with a better economical balance sheet than it has now. This year better than the previous, next one better than this. Shortly: multi-billion quoted companies wants to increase their income, and they do that the better they can. Innovation, new products, selling prices including discounts and margins, are all weapons to be used for that. Some companies have to use some of them, other companies other weapons depending on their strength, capacity, skill and position.
Just guess why Intel has a gross margin of 58.8 while AMD is below 40%. In your childish thoughts, do you just believe that it is because AMD is less greedy than Intel? Or just because they can't charge as much? And do you think they won't charge as much is Intel position?
bla bla bla bla... keep trying to justify intels screw ups.. lazyness and market stagnation. sticking the mainstrean at quad core when they could of offered more cores... while over charging for minimal performace increases.. you are so intel biased is not funny...
Zen is out for 3 years. Intel should have done something big, not keep pushing the same arch on 14nm+++ only adding 2 more cores and skyrocket the real TDP - for which they have to change socket to supply more current.
Or at least they should work for a winter release. At least we need a heater in winter.
Coulda woulda shoulda Intel messed this up. They werent prepared for competition at all. They still pressed overpriced 4-core desktop CPUs onto us just a few years ago, with no plans going anywhere beyond that, even though everyone begged them on their knees. Ryzen comes out and bam, Intel gives us 6, 8 and now 10 cores, and even lowers prices massively. They were completely dumbfounded, so much that they cant even get their security flaws issue under control or even give proper information about when they will be fixed. Not to mention still being on 14 nm. Thats a laugh.
And as already said, Intel is much bigger than AMD. They should have been able to cope with that easily. But they didnt.
Intel is still far away from getting anything like AMD has right now. 7 nm will still take at least until 2023 or longer. And even 10 nm is still a year away.
The Skylake architecture is less than 5 years old. Still far too old for a company like Intel, if thats what you were trying to say........
I have not sure how much Keller actually contributed to the new Intel architectures. it take years for a new architecture to go into place and we only seen the blip of it with some laptops in U series.
It odd how time repeats itself, before the i series came out we had Pentium 4 and AMD got ahead with new memory architecture and 64 bit, and for years Intel look unbeatable and no doubt the 10nm production has hit Intel hard but thankfully those days are over with.
But we need to be honest, how much more we need - especially in cores and where is the primary market. Gamer and 3d graphics markers seems to drive technology but they are not average consumer.
and then thers is hstewarts intel bias.. " we only seen the blip of it with some laptops in U series. " this is NOT a new architecture. this is the same one they have been pushing for the last few years.. is it was new.. it would be gen 1.. NOT 10, come on hstewart.. is your intel bias that bad ?? " thankfully those days are over with " it is ??? BS you only say that because intel is behind on this.. you still believe intels bs that mainstream only needs 4 cores dont you ??? and all the other bs intel has fed and lied about as well...
1. Intel will also suffer in the long term if fabless is the way to go. 2. Zen2 are already 15% faster than Coffeelake clock by clock. Intel holds the ground by higher clock.
Business IT is mostly driven by political than technical reasons which is why they love buying Intel so much. Nobody on paychecks wants to be that black sheep to be blamed for buying AMD when things goes south for whatever reason. Job security >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU price/performance.
You are unbelievably cancerous and dumb. You still don’t realize that the AMD hype is attributed to a vocal few while the majority are still buying Intel. And yes, as others have stated: Intel is not just a consumer CPU company. But you be you and keep that AMD banner as high as possible.
The DIY market is less that 10% of the whole market. AMD needs to CONVINCE OEMs and corporations to start using it's chips and until now this is NOT happening. Unfortunately, because no one with at least two brain cells alive and no Intel shares in the pockets, wants this.
I'd say far less than 10%. If you include small time builders like mom and pop computer shops in the DIY market - people that buy parts at or close to retail - it probably doesn't even account for 1% of total CPU sales. When companies like Cisco order 8 million units of product that contains a CPU for networking hardware or when HP sells 400K units of laptops to a single business buyer, the one-off gamers and enthusiasts putting together a PC to save money or enjoy their hobby don't account for more than a little nibble of the total market pie.
Guess you misread the part where their Datacenter group, the highest growth per high profit group, had a net income around 7x what AMD profited across ALL division (which includes GPU's)
This, and other markets like IoT, is where AMD has little to no presence. Even if they had a decent datacenter CPU (which they arguably do) it's a long road ahead to deliver what Intel does. It isn't just about performance per watt.
they are estimating revenue and EPS increase. Considering Intel is conservative when it comes to long term projections(look at 2019 projections and actuals), 2020 is shaping to be solid year despite AMD having strong server, desktop and in 2020 laptop CPUs.
Intel is also in markets where AMD has no presence like automotive, 5G edge, FPGA, ASIC etc. So they are not apples to apples company.
Plus this process issue wont be there for ever. I am willing to bet with 7nm they will be back on track. THey have the resources to fix the issues. Then any advantage that AMD has will go away.
That said I am not predicting doom for AMD either. Market is big enough to support Intel, Nvidia, AMD and few other chip makers. Specially this decade with 5G, IOT and cloud continuing to grow at a fast rate.
" I am willing to bet with 7nm they will be back on track. THey have the resources to fix the issues. " oh really ?? like they kept saying 10nm was on track ?? they may have the resources . but they still couldnt fix 10nm.. the article AT did on intels process projections.. is useless.. just to try to save face.. until intel actually releases products in volume.. its " believe it.. when it happens..
Which is the thing I am not happy about AMD, Intel is still selling as much as they could make, to the point they are delaying all low margin product production and shift to higher margin DC chip.
Comparatively speaking AMD's marketing and sales, as well as forecasting department are child's play compared to Intel.
Personally I haven't built an AMD system in over a decade, because the last 3 I built all burned me one way or another. From flaky chipsets to buggy BIOSes to software compatibility issues to generally poor performance, yes I get that AMD is NOW making what is essentially a superior value in a number of segments, but the burn still itches the same way the only GM vehicle I had was such a turd I'll never own another GM product again.
Yes, reliability is something many kids forgot when deciding what to buy. Loosing a single work day because the BIOS/driver/compatibility creates issues is enough to make people, who WORKS WITH their PCs and do not simply play games or use a browser with it, buy the most reliable product vs the one that has 5% more performance in some selected benchmarks.
And guess who has constantly provided almost issue free systems in the last 10 years?
carmen00, cicciob doesnt know how to do that.. going by is previous posts.. he is an intel fan boy all the way.. and just like a few others.. will do and say what he can to make intel seem and appear better... while posting little proof.. or where he gets his proof
cicciob " And guess who has constantly provided almost issue free systems in the last 10 years? " you serious ?? like carmen said.. who has suffered the most from various bugs like meltdown and spectre ?? i read an article on that, which was linked to in another article on here, i think the count is something like 216 issues for intel, and 20 or less for amd. so who's more reliable ?? better yet, who's more secure ?????? to be fair.. i have had issues with both amd and intel cpus over the years. but keep praising your beloved intel cicciob...
not intel anyway, intel has a great marketing team and in the early days they just threw money at oems and system builder until they were caught and fined, those old school buyers are now end of career in many cases and new younger buyers are starting to change the landscape, look again this time next year. in 2016 A?MD had 16% of the market in Q3 2019 they had 32% and Ryzen (see what i did there) anyway competition is good for us all but intel has been well and truly facepalmed and AMD will be making hay especially now they hjave the 4000 series mobile cpus out
Yeah well, same with me, and even almost 20 years ago, when the AMD hype was as big as it is now. I was completely disappointed with all the issues of AMD CPU *and* GPUs.
But shouldnt the have improved a lot by now? Especially since the last console generation was all AMD. Compatibility shouldnt be an issue anymore. But as you I havent tried it yet. And I still hesitate, even though I could use a new PC (still running 4 cores). Fanboys are silent about such problems. I remember when I mentioned mine in forums. I was bashed into a red pulp for daring to mention it.
I am just saying that it was that bad that it still holds me back nowadays, because I know how fanboys silence critics, like youre trying to do right now.
he does have a point.. i have both system sill in use now.. and just built a new ryzen comp a few weeks ago for a friend.. the board didnt support ryzen 3k out of the box ( older bios ) messaged amd.. they sent me a 1st gen apu so i could update the bios, for free.. set the system up with the ryzen 3k.. no issues at all. works great.. the friend is veey happy with it..
see am the opposite the only cpu i ever had fail was an intel 4 core which just died no reason it just stopped posting alternate cpu in the mobo posted fine, never built an intel since but have bought prebuilt out of necessity, all my self builds are AMD and never had one CPU fail had a GPU changed under warranty though due to a bad power plug
I genuinely hate articles like this, while seeing their necessity and appreciating them for what they are. No matter WHAT the article says, it brings all the worms out of the woodwork.
For anyone who reads this: Intel had a good year, financially. Good for them. Happy 2020, and reddit is the place for your AMD-vs-Intel opinions. If you have a financial analysis or company analysis to contribute (this is, after all, an article about finances), please do comment. If you would like to comment on what you thought Intel's performance would be, and whether you were correct or not and why, your comment is also welcome.
This is not an AMD article. This is an Intel article. Thank you.
"Notebook platform volumes were down 1% in this quarter, with average selling prices staying flat, but desktop platform volumes were up 7%"
This is what is stated in article and my guess waiting on 10nm hurt above - but I felt it was odd that desktop went up - maybe AMD help Intel in that area
get real AMD haven't successfully convinced OEMS to use more AMD chips why is Intel still greater than 90%. OEMS & Intel definitely want to milk the customers. Market wont change
Assuming OEMs can charge the same for a computer with a similarly performing AMD chip that costs less to purchase, then the OEM can actually drive per unit margins upward by switching CPU vendors if everything else remains otherwise equal. The wrinkle is that everything else doesnt remain otherwise equal and there are things that change with CPU origin. Power consumption, consumer perception, motherboard and cooling design, iGPU performance, and so forth all move the bar around. And there is nothing but Intel's own margins to consider if they determine they can raise or lower prices based on the competitive landscape in order to land a deal with a particular OEM.
While I would like to see a more competitive industry because competition favors consumers, it isnt just a matter of having a good product at the right price these days. There is other secret sauce in the recipe.
Just goes to show the AMD circle jerk is nothing more than a vocal minority. Also, tech writers who have AMD stocks shouldn't be allowed to write about tech. They usually try to spin AMD in a good light while smearing against Intel and Nvidia in hopes their BS articles can boost AMD stock prices. Pathetic.
oh.. like the various intel bias posters do in the amd articles on here ?? " Also, tech writers who have AMD stocks shouldn't be allowed to write about tech. " theb the ones who have stock intel should do the same...
" let the world appretiate a simple reliable supplier " that would be left to do what ever and charge what ever it wants ?? yea right...are you crazy ????
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
67 Comments
Back to Article
eva02langley - Thursday, January 23, 2020 - link
Sure, but what happens in 2020... will be hard to have shortage when people are buying the competition.imaheadcase - Thursday, January 23, 2020 - link
Not this again, don't ever base a company on one product. Its like saying Google only does Android OS and compare it to everything else. Its silly and does not point to a company as a whole on how they operate.Makaveli - Thursday, January 23, 2020 - link
This.Intel makes more in a quarter than AMD does for the year. Even with the success of Ryzen this is still David vs Goliath.
Korguz - Thursday, January 23, 2020 - link
yep.. but look what amd did with alot less cash then what intel did.... much for efficient with the funds they haveCiccioB - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
AMD simply was lucky about TMSC 7nm PP vs Intel investing in a now failed but at the time very promising 10nm PP.Would have Intel had its 10nm out 2 years ago AMD would not have been at this point.
Would have TMSC created another 20nm shit they would be fried by now.
So great job AMD for having created an architecture that is not a failure as the two previous ones, but the point in the market they occupy now is just due to Intel fails for having bet on the creation of a too optimistic PP.
Now see what will happen when Intel resolves its problems with the PP and will come back with:
1, complete new architecture (with Keller's contributions)
2. new buses for joining chiplets (something AMD has not)
3. 3D stacking (which AMD has not)
See that with a better PP that Intel can use now, AMD is challenging an architecture which is, read carefully, 9 YEARS OLD! And it's main advantage is just the power consumption provided by the new PP (which is merit of TSMC, not AMD). Performance related, Intel is in par if not still ahead of AMD achievements 9 years later.
yeeeeman - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Finally a person that thinks. I really don't understand why people say amd won because they are amazingly better. It is like saying that a tennis player is the champion after match where the opponent plays with a broken leg. For sure he will win.Zen 2 is a good architecture, no doubt about that but there is nothing special about it. It is a tad bit better in ipc compared to a 5 year old one that is Skylake. Ice lake, which was targeted for 2017 is 10% better than a 2019 and product, just to put things in context. The key ingredient to amd succes is tsmc. That process allowed them to cram so much capability into their products. Chiplet architecture was also a key point but just look at what the results were with a bad process, not amazing (talking about 2xxx series).
So yeah, Intel is doing great now because they have a momentum and because they have support. Oems love to do their products as easy as possible and amd, even if they have great products now, they still are too small to work very closely with all the oems at the level Intel is a working now. If things will continue in this way, yes, in 2-3 years we might see Intel go quite a bit down and amd raise its capital significantly. But in the end, you can do so much with selling only CPUs and gpus. You need to diversify and Intel is staying afloat just because of that.
Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
" Intel is doing great now because they have a momentum and because they have support. " they are ?? maybe with their financials, but when you over charge for your products....Carmen00 - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
I'm probably going to regret writing this comment, but ... yes and no. What you have written is a very simplistic analysis, maybe so simple that it borders on misleading. Yes, TSMC's 7nm is now playing a big part. However, original Ryzen was on TSMC's 10nm (14nm++++ -comparable) process and has some genuine architectural improvements such as Infinity Fabric. To claim otherwise is to do a disservice to some very ingenious engineers and to the architecture itself. The architecture was also very forward-looking... 3 generations on AM4, with big improvements per generation, is not to be scoffed at. As for Intel, there are organizational issues at work too. Krzanich took his eye off the CPU performance ball and Swan is keeping his eye firmly off that ball too. He wants to play in 30% of ALL silicon rather than 90% of CPUs, and the technology development is reflecting that. Foveros is nice, but apply it to CPUs and you've got a thermal nightmare that needs handling. Apply it to other silicon and you'll be fine. So the fact is that as I see it, Intel may not even want to compete at this level, and that makes perfect business sense to me. Diversify and there is much less business risk. Su is an engineer and that comes through clearly ... AMD actually WANTS the crown. Swan is a businessman who's been in a CFO role for most of his recent life.To be honest, maybe this is too simplistic an analysis too. But at least it's a bit more reflective of reality...
Rudde - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
"original Ryzen was on TSMC's 10nm"Source, please. As far as I know, Ryzen was built on Globalfoundries' 14 and 12 nm processes (licensed from Samsung).
Carmen00 - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Apologies for misinformation, Rudde is correct. It was 14nm / 12nm. Thanks for the correction.Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
part of it was TSMCs 7nm, and intel screwing up with its 10nm node. but who knows where cpus would really be if intel didnt spend the last 3 or 4 years screwing up. there is still a good cpu architecture in Zen. and why is intel using an architecture that is 9 YEARS OLD ? because they for LAZY. thats why... what did intel do for the cpu industry before zen ? NOTHING. they stagnated the cpu industry, stuck the mainstream at 4 CORES, and lets not forget how generous they were by giving us what was it, 10% or less performance increases year over year, while they kept increasing prices. thank you intel !!!! amd seems to be the one that innovates more then your beloved intel cicciob... so keep praising them, keep buying their over priced cpus...MarcusMo - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
One of these days, someone is going to write a plug-in that looks for awkward capitalization and superfluous punctuation and just filter out these posts out. And the world will have lost nothing of value.CiccioB - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
One of these days technical forums will introduce a simple preliminary test to pass to be able to post and suddenly many clueless posters will disappear with none regretting them.Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
like you there cicciob ?? all you do is type intel biased fud do defend your beloved intel...CiccioB - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Dear AMD fan,it is not a question of praising a global company like Intel.
My Intel shares will go up and down independently of whatever say here.
So will do my AMD ones.
The one trying to praise a company (AMD) with moot reasons is you.
Intel was using a 9 old architecture simply because there was nothing better than it on the market.
The 10% performance increase is the same order of magnitude that AMD is bringing with Zen at its revisions. In fact once you have reached the maturity of an architecture you can but raise slowly its performance while spending lots of resources to do so. Or you can spare resources and gain more it.
AMD just filled the gap of 9 year old architecture. Just think about why they arrived now at par using what seems to be one of the best PP that TSMC has created up o now: they were so innovative fora these years? With which results? Stay behind 9 years with respect to the competition?
However, Zen is only decent, as it still has difficulties in overcoming that same 9 year old architecture that Intel has been happily selling for all these years despite a better PP.
Actually against Ice Lake, that still suffer Intel 10nm PP issues, Zen is still lagging.
AMD innovation before Zen leads it to completely abandon professional market both in CPU and GPU markets. Its product where so advanced that a 9 years old architecture today still wins in many markets. Its GPUs were so good that Nvidia has moved selling x60 mainstream GPU from 150 at Fermi time to 350 dollars Turing. And again AMD filled partially the gap with respect to the competitor using a better PP without which it would be 2 years behind.
I understand that after so many years of having hoped for a market change and see your preferred company coming out from the shit it has been all this time, you AMD fanboy are now happy to see this somewhat happen. But that does not change the reality and the real reasons we are at this point: AMD did a decent job with Zen while Intel completely messes up with 10nm.
Moreover all that praising about multi billion company laziness and such statements which belong more to infantry school than to a technical forum like this, just show that you just are ignorant about how public quoted companies work and what are their aims.
Guess what? AMD tries to make the same that Intel does hoping to have the same or even better position with a better economical balance sheet than it has now. This year better than the previous, next one better than this.
Shortly: multi-billion quoted companies wants to increase their income, and they do that the better they can. Innovation, new products, selling prices including discounts and margins, are all weapons to be used for that. Some companies have to use some of them, other companies other weapons depending on their strength, capacity, skill and position.
Just guess why Intel has a gross margin of 58.8 while AMD is below 40%.
In your childish thoughts, do you just believe that it is because AMD is less greedy than Intel?
Or just because they can't charge as much? And do you think they won't charge as much is Intel position?
Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
bla bla bla bla... keep trying to justify intels screw ups.. lazyness and market stagnation. sticking the mainstrean at quad core when they could of offered more cores... while over charging for minimal performace increases.. you are so intel biased is not funny...wilsonkf - Monday, January 27, 2020 - link
Zen is out for 3 years. Intel should have done something big, not keep pushing the same arch on 14nm+++ only adding 2 more cores and skyrocket the real TDP - for which they have to change socket to supply more current.Or at least they should work for a winter release. At least we need a heater in winter.
Beaver M. - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Coulda woulda shouldaIntel messed this up. They werent prepared for competition at all.
They still pressed overpriced 4-core desktop CPUs onto us just a few years ago, with no plans going anywhere beyond that, even though everyone begged them on their knees. Ryzen comes out and bam, Intel gives us 6, 8 and now 10 cores, and even lowers prices massively.
They were completely dumbfounded, so much that they cant even get their security flaws issue under control or even give proper information about when they will be fixed. Not to mention still being on 14 nm. Thats a laugh.
And as already said, Intel is much bigger than AMD. They should have been able to cope with that easily. But they didnt.
Intel is still far away from getting anything like AMD has right now. 7 nm will still take at least until 2023 or longer. And even 10 nm is still a year away.
The Skylake architecture is less than 5 years old. Still far too old for a company like Intel, if thats what you were trying to say........
HStewart - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
I have not sure how much Keller actually contributed to the new Intel architectures. it take years for a new architecture to go into place and we only seen the blip of it with some laptops in U series.It odd how time repeats itself, before the i series came out we had Pentium 4 and AMD got ahead with new memory architecture and 64 bit, and for years Intel look unbeatable and no doubt the 10nm production has hit Intel hard but thankfully those days are over with.
But we need to be honest, how much more we need - especially in cores and where is the primary market. Gamer and 3d graphics markers seems to drive technology but they are not average consumer.
Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
and then thers is hstewarts intel bias.." we only seen the blip of it with some laptops in U series. " this is NOT a new architecture. this is the same one they have been pushing for the last few years.. is it was new.. it would be gen 1.. NOT 10, come on hstewart.. is your intel bias that bad ??
" thankfully those days are over with " it is ??? BS
you only say that because intel is behind on this.. you still believe intels bs that mainstream only needs 4 cores dont you ??? and all the other bs intel has fed and lied about as well...
wilsonkf - Monday, January 27, 2020 - link
1. Intel will also suffer in the long term if fabless is the way to go.2. Zen2 are already 15% faster than Coffeelake clock by clock. Intel holds the ground by higher clock.
StrangerGuy - Thursday, January 23, 2020 - link
Business IT is mostly driven by political than technical reasons which is why they love buying Intel so much. Nobody on paychecks wants to be that black sheep to be blamed for buying AMD when things goes south for whatever reason. Job security >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU price/performance.liquid_c - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
You are unbelievably cancerous and dumb. You still don’t realize that the AMD hype is attributed to a vocal few while the majority are still buying Intel. And yes, as others have stated: Intel is not just a consumer CPU company. But you be you and keep that AMD banner as high as possible.Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
vocal few ?? seems most reviews are adding to that hype to.. not just consumers...yannigr2 - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
The DIY market is less that 10% of the whole market. AMD needs to CONVINCE OEMs and corporations to start using it's chips and until now this is NOT happening. Unfortunately, because no one with at least two brain cells alive and no Intel shares in the pockets, wants this.PeachNCream - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
I'd say far less than 10%. If you include small time builders like mom and pop computer shops in the DIY market - people that buy parts at or close to retail - it probably doesn't even account for 1% of total CPU sales. When companies like Cisco order 8 million units of product that contains a CPU for networking hardware or when HP sells 400K units of laptops to a single business buyer, the one-off gamers and enthusiasts putting together a PC to save money or enjoy their hobby don't account for more than a little nibble of the total market pie.Samus - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Guess you misread the part where their Datacenter group, the highest growth per high profit group, had a net income around 7x what AMD profited across ALL division (which includes GPU's)This, and other markets like IoT, is where AMD has little to no presence. Even if they had a decent datacenter CPU (which they arguably do) it's a long road ahead to deliver what Intel does. It isn't just about performance per watt.
trivik12 - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
they are estimating revenue and EPS increase. Considering Intel is conservative when it comes to long term projections(look at 2019 projections and actuals), 2020 is shaping to be solid year despite AMD having strong server, desktop and in 2020 laptop CPUs.Intel is also in markets where AMD has no presence like automotive, 5G edge, FPGA, ASIC etc. So they are not apples to apples company.
Plus this process issue wont be there for ever. I am willing to bet with 7nm they will be back on track. THey have the resources to fix the issues. Then any advantage that AMD has will go away.
That said I am not predicting doom for AMD either. Market is big enough to support Intel, Nvidia, AMD and few other chip makers. Specially this decade with 5G, IOT and cloud continuing to grow at a fast rate.
Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
" I am willing to bet with 7nm they will be back on track. THey have the resources to fix the issues. " oh really ?? like they kept saying 10nm was on track ?? they may have the resources. but they still couldnt fix 10nm.. the article AT did on intels process projections.. is useless.. just to try to save face.. until intel actually releases products in volume.. its " believe it.. when it happens..
CajunArson - Thursday, January 23, 2020 - link
Just wait until RyZen launches!!Oh wait..
Amandtec - Thursday, January 23, 2020 - link
Ha ha ha AMD fanboys. Nobody cares about the performance. It is just about the sticker on the box!Irata - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
I really hope this is a poor attempt at sarcasm. If not, do you realize how sad what you posted is?Makaveli - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
I think his parents forgot to tuck him in and its way past his bedtime. The adults are speaking son run along.yetanotherhuman - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Certainly any OEM building a nice laptop thinks that.ksec - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Which is the thing I am not happy about AMD, Intel is still selling as much as they could make, to the point they are delaying all low margin product production and shift to higher margin DC chip.Comparatively speaking AMD's marketing and sales, as well as forecasting department are child's play compared to Intel.
Samus - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Personally I haven't built an AMD system in over a decade, because the last 3 I built all burned me one way or another. From flaky chipsets to buggy BIOSes to software compatibility issues to generally poor performance, yes I get that AMD is NOW making what is essentially a superior value in a number of segments, but the burn still itches the same way the only GM vehicle I had was such a turd I'll never own another GM product again.CiccioB - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Yes, reliability is something many kids forgot when deciding what to buy.Loosing a single work day because the BIOS/driver/compatibility creates issues is enough to make people, who WORKS WITH their PCs and do not simply play games or use a browser with it, buy the most reliable product vs the one that has 5% more performance in some selected benchmarks.
And guess who has constantly provided almost issue free systems in the last 10 years?
Carmen00 - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Is it the manufacturer that suffered most from Meltdown & Spectre?Opinion is great, but please, let's keep the facts in view.
Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
carmen00, cicciob doesnt know how to do that.. going by is previous posts.. he is an intel fan boy all the way.. and just like a few others.. will do and say what he can to make intel seem and appear better... while posting little proof.. or where he gets his proofKorguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
cicciob " And guess who has constantly provided almost issue free systems in the last 10 years? " you serious ?? like carmen said.. who has suffered the most from various bugs like meltdown and spectre ?? i read an article on that, which was linked to in another article on here, i think the count is something like 216 issues for intel, and 20 or less for amd. so who's more reliable ?? better yet, who's more secure ?????? to be fair.. i have had issues with both amd and intel cpus over the years. but keep praising your beloved intel cicciob...Makaveli - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
anecdotal evidence doesn't really mean anything.I still have an Socket 939 AMD Opteron system that still runs fine to this day and is stable.
alufan - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
not intel anyway, intel has a great marketing team and in the early days they just threw money at oems and system builder until they were caught and fined, those old school buyers are now end of career in many cases and new younger buyers are starting to change the landscape, look again this time next year.in 2016 A?MD had 16% of the market in Q3 2019 they had 32% and Ryzen (see what i did there)
anyway competition is good for us all but intel has been well and truly facepalmed and AMD will be making hay especially now they hjave the 4000 series mobile cpus out
wilsonkf - Monday, January 27, 2020 - link
Are you talking about CPU or GPU?Intel GPU ... issue free? serious?
yetanotherhuman - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
I like GM and recently built an AMD system. It's like a mirror.Makaveli - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
If you haven't built an AMD system in 10 years what your posting isn't really relevant for today is it?Beaver M. - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Yeah well, same with me, and even almost 20 years ago, when the AMD hype was as big as it is now. I was completely disappointed with all the issues of AMD CPU *and* GPUs.But shouldnt the have improved a lot by now? Especially since the last console generation was all AMD. Compatibility shouldnt be an issue anymore. But as you I havent tried it yet. And I still hesitate, even though I could use a new PC (still running 4 cores). Fanboys are silent about such problems. I remember when I mentioned mine in forums. I was bashed into a red pulp for daring to mention it.
Beaver M. - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
GPUs being ATI, sorry.Makaveli - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
So your opinion is based on products from 20 years ago?Beaver M. - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
I am just saying that it was that bad that it still holds me back nowadays, because I know how fanboys silence critics, like youre trying to do right now.Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
he does have a point.. i have both system sill in use now.. and just built a new ryzen comp a few weeks ago for a friend.. the board didnt support ryzen 3k out of the box ( older bios ) messaged amd.. they sent me a 1st gen apu so i could update the bios, for free.. set the system up with the ryzen 3k.. no issues at all. works great.. the friend is veey happy with it..alufan - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
see am the opposite the only cpu i ever had fail was an intel 4 core which just died no reason it just stopped posting alternate cpu in the mobo posted fine, never built an intel since but have bought prebuilt out of necessity, all my self builds are AMD and never had one CPU fail had a GPU changed under warranty though due to a bad power plugyannigr2 - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
"their chip shortage to be over by the end of this fiscal year"In real calendar when is this?
wrkingclass_hero - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Maybe I'm crazy, but now seems like the perfect time to sell.Carmen00 - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
I genuinely hate articles like this, while seeing their necessity and appreciating them for what they are. No matter WHAT the article says, it brings all the worms out of the woodwork.For anyone who reads this: Intel had a good year, financially. Good for them. Happy 2020, and reddit is the place for your AMD-vs-Intel opinions. If you have a financial analysis or company analysis to contribute (this is, after all, an article about finances), please do comment. If you would like to comment on what you thought Intel's performance would be, and whether you were correct or not and why, your comment is also welcome.
This is not an AMD article. This is an Intel article. Thank you.
Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
but its ok to comment about intel, in amd articles.. i see how it works :-)T1beriu - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
If you look deep in Intel's financials you'll see that it lost -6% in desktops, -5% in notebooks and -3% in servers in volume vs 2018.HStewart - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Where do you see that information, also remember that PC industry is also downHStewart - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
"Notebook platform volumes were down 1% in this quarter, with average selling prices staying flat, but desktop platform volumes were up 7%"This is what is stated in article and my guess waiting on 10nm hurt above - but I felt it was odd that desktop went up - maybe AMD help Intel in that area
HStewart - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
But since 2018 - total client group was up 2% - it was programmable logic group that took a hit.Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
maybe he looked at the actual finaancials not this article ?? come one hstewart....Krayzieka - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
get real AMD haven't successfully convinced OEMS to use more AMD chips why is Intel still greater than 90%. OEMS & Intel definitely want to milk the customers. Market wont changePeachNCream - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Assuming OEMs can charge the same for a computer with a similarly performing AMD chip that costs less to purchase, then the OEM can actually drive per unit margins upward by switching CPU vendors if everything else remains otherwise equal. The wrinkle is that everything else doesnt remain otherwise equal and there are things that change with CPU origin. Power consumption, consumer perception, motherboard and cooling design, iGPU performance, and so forth all move the bar around. And there is nothing but Intel's own margins to consider if they determine they can raise or lower prices based on the competitive landscape in order to land a deal with a particular OEM.While I would like to see a more competitive industry because competition favors consumers, it isnt just a matter of having a good product at the right price these days. There is other secret sauce in the recipe.
dwade123 - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
Just goes to show the AMD circle jerk is nothing more than a vocal minority. Also, tech writers who have AMD stocks shouldn't be allowed to write about tech. They usually try to spin AMD in a good light while smearing against Intel and Nvidia in hopes their BS articles can boost AMD stock prices. Pathetic.Korguz - Friday, January 24, 2020 - link
oh.. like the various intel bias posters do in the amd articles on here ??" Also, tech writers who have AMD stocks shouldn't be allowed to write about tech. " theb the ones who have stock intel should do the same...
scineram - Saturday, January 25, 2020 - link
AMD should have gone bankrupt and let the world appretiate a simple reliable supplier.Korguz - Monday, January 27, 2020 - link
" let the world appretiate a simple reliable supplier " that would be left to do what ever and charge what ever it wants ?? yea right...are you crazy ????zodiacfml - Monday, January 27, 2020 - link
Well, that exceeded my expectations. I predicted Intel is going to be fine once AMD 7nm CPUs comes out. Sad though