AMD's Ryzen CPUs (Ryzen/TR/Epyc) & Vega/Polaris/Navi GPUs

The difference isn't enough to wait for, or to not buy now, it's a gradual improvement and a commitment by AMD to constantly be innovating and improving the performance overall and to provide day one optimized drivers for new game releases.

The performance between AMD and Nvidia game play are usually due to one company or the other sponsoring developers so they focus on that companies driver optimization and get better performance at release, but over time the improvements occur for both GPU brands through drivers and game updates.

If you watched the evolution of the RX series, you'll see game performance improvements that allowed the RX 480 / RX 580 to match then exceed the GTX 1060, but even so gaming on both cards at launch was still good enough and with FreeSync you may not even know the difference except by looking at the new benchmark results.

The same performance improvements happened with the RX Vega series, and I would expect that of the RX Vega VII (is the RX still a thing with the Vega VII?).

I think this reminder that AMD improves performance over time is a good thing. It helps people understand the difference between Nvidia and AMD, the commitment AMD has to customer satisfaction and long term support that Nvidia seems to not emphasize.

It's also a good time to mention that AMD doesn't require logins to use their software management of download and tuning, and AMD doesn't track your location or collect telemetry on your gaming and computer usage like Nvidia does.

 

If you check my reply, you will notice I did mention that the performance updates are usually expected with driver updates (like with anything else), but similarly Nvidia will release new drivers that will improve performance on their gpu's which should maintain parity in gaming between the two... unless of course NV already maxed it out (in which case, Radeon VII might be able to surpass it)... however, as JasonLLS mentioned (and I already took into account), Radeon VII is basically same as Vega 64 with extra compute for AI calculations.
Essentially it gives the compute performance of 2080ti and gaming performance of 2080... I doubt the GPU sports anything new apart from that architecture-wise (probably not), and I'm not sure how devs can use AI compute hardware in Radeon VII for games - they certainly hadn't used any compute hardware in Vega 56 and 64 for that (let alone Polaris).
So, don't see how many more optimisations we can expect considering that V56/64 were already out for a while. Certainly AMD has a few bugs and other things to take care of, but I guess we will see.

And yes, I know about latest drivers... I already installed them, but sadly, since LaptopsDirect sold me a dud and Asus kept repairing it (giving it me back with a GPU that underperforms badly due to a mess up in either thermal application, faulty sensor, faulty gpu, or all of those combined) I can't exactly test/use it as I'd like.

 

Buildzoid's thoughts on the AMD Radeon VII
Actually Hardcore Overclocking
Published on Jan 13, 2019

 

Well, this is another one of those things that could turn out to be BS, or it could be a legitimate leak from someone that got access to hardware before release.

I've found such things before, and some check out and some don't so as always be wary of things too good to be true. This will likely get picked up elsewhere, let's see where it goes. It's been up for 14 hours so far...

IDK where he got the hardware, initially I thought he might be using the AMD published numbers and making the comparison against Nvidia hardware he has, but nope, there are tests at resolutions AMD hasn't published yet, and he lists the hardware in the test system specifications.

I'll update when it becomes clear which way this test falls, in real or not real category.

RTX 2060 6GB vs RTX 2080 Ti 11GB vs AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB vs AMD Radeon VII 16GB 1080p 1440p 4K
TheSpyHood
Published on Jan 14, 2019
This is a huge pc gaming benchmark between RTX 2060 6GB vs RTX 2080 Ti 11GB vs AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB vs AMD Radeon VII 16GB in 10 latest pc games in 1080p 1440p and 4K.

Spoiler: Games Index + Testing Hardware

Games are tested listed below :

Assassin's Creed Odyssey - 0:00
Battlefield V - 0:32
Far Cry 5 - 1:01
Assassin's Creed Origins - 1:33
Hitman 2 - 2:06
Just Cause 4 - 2:34
Kingdom Come Deliverance - 3:05
Need For Speed Payback - 3:41
Quantum Break - 4:16
Shadow of the Tomb Raider - 5:03
Vampyr - 5:37
Watch Dogs 2 - 6:31

System Specifications :

MOTHERBOARD : Asrock Z370 TAICHI
CPU : Intel core i7-9700K 3.6GHz (stock)
GPU 1 : NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB
GPU 2 : NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB
GPU 3 : AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB
GPU 4 : AMD Radeon VII 16GB 1TB Bandwidth
RAM : 16GB DDR4 3200MHz

 

AMD Radeon VII Interview with Scott Herkelman
Kyle Bennett, Monday, January 14, 2019
https://www.hardocp.com/article/2019/01/14/amd_radeon_vii_interview_scott_herkelman/

"We had the opportunity to talk to Scott Herkelman at AMD about the new Radeon VII GPU at CES 2019, and he was kind enough to answer questions that we had. We get his thoughts on the new Radeon VII, its full specifications and die size, FreeSync, multi-GPU, 16GB of HBM2, AMD getting back into direct retail sales of video cards, and more..."

AMD Radeon VII Will Ship Without Double-Precision
by Zhiye Liu January 14, 2019 at 9:22 AM
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-vii-double-precision-disabled,38437.html

Why is this a surprise, or newsworthy? Professional cards from Nvidia shipped as gaming cards also have the non-gaming professional features disabled. I would expect AMD to differentiate their gaming and professional cards by disabling features not needed in gaming, this isn't a surprise or news.

 

A Sprinkle of Salt: AMD Radeon VII Reported to Only be Available in Reference Design, no Custom Treatment
Techpowerup.com | Today, 12:16

A report via Tom's Hardware.de says that AMD's plans for the upcoming Radeon VII are somewhat one-dimensional, in that only reference designs will be available for this particular rendition of the Vega architecture. And this doesn't mean"initial availability" only on reference cards, like NVIDIA has been doing with their Founder's editions; the report claims that at no point in time will there actually be a custom-designed Radeon VII. The quantity of Radeon VII GPUs will apparently be "strictly limited" come launch - a likely result of the decision to make use of TSMC's 7 nm process, which will have to serve not only AMD's Ryzen 3000 and Epyc CPUs when those are actually launched, but all of TSMC's other clients.

 

That last part in the article is ********. TSMC already has said they have excess capacity on 7nm for the first half of the year.

Instead, I think it was to test the waters, get attention, and partly to give a lower cost option relative to the mi-50 Radeon instinct. This is because AMD mentioned they might produce more later. It also could be to clear defective dies from making the instinct mi-50 and mi-60.

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/281816-tsmcs-7nm-node-supposedly-running-below-capacity

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Here's something of interest:

AMD: Radeon VII Has Excellent Results with DirectML; We Could Try a GPGPU Approach for Something NVIDIA DLSS-like
https://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-vii-excellent-result-directml/

Well maybe now we will finally see some use from all that compute that's been lying mostly dormant in Vega (and Polaris?) when it comes to games.
Polaris and Vega both have a pretty big advantage in this area over NV gaming GPU's in regards to raw TF power which is usually a tier above equivalent NV gaming GPU, but at a lower price (depending on which GPU's you're looking at... RX 580 has the compute power of 1070, whereas Vega 64's compute surpasses 1080ti).

AMD claims it has built enough Radeon VII GPUs to “meet demand from gamers”
https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/amd-radeon-vii-availability-custom-cards-amd-response

"January 16, 2019 This story has been updated with AMD’s statement on stock rumours surrounding Radeon VII"

Reports suggest AMD will be offering only reference design Radeon VIIgraphics cards at launch and that numbers may be limited. Board partners have tacitly implied that they will not be offering third-party designs at launch, or maybe ever, and that the quantity of Radeon VII is “strictly limited.”

However, AMD has now come out and countered the rumours. At least partially, anyways. “While we don’t report on production numbers externally,’ the statement reads, “we will have products available via AIB partners and AMD.com at launch of Feb. 7, and we expect Radeon VII supply to meet demand from gamers.”

This should also put some of those rumors to rest in regards to AMD's production capacity... as we know that TSMC reported it will be running below full capacity... so, meeting demand won't be an issue.

 

AMD Converting Parts of Epyc to X570 Chipset, Dropping ASMedia
Gamers Nexus
Published on Jan 18, 2019
News from AMD's partners about X570 chipset plans, the dropping of ASMedia, and transplanting of Epyc into X570. B550 is also discussed briefly.
Article: https://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/3428-amd-converting-epyc-to-x570-dropping-asmedia
GamersNexus learned of X570 and B550 launch plans while at CES last week, working with AMD's industry partners to discuss timelines for the year. It sounds like the Ryzen 3000 series will likely see actual availability in June (although an announcement may be sooner), with X570 chipset completion determining some of the launch scheduling. Learn more about X570 in our original news video: Also in this post below...

AMD X570 + PCIe 4 Challenges, Vega VII Boost Retooling
Gamers Nexus
Published on Jan 9, 2019
We have more information on Vega VII & Ryzen 3000 after meeting with AMD at CES. The Vega VII boosting behavior will be retooled from Vega 56/64. We also spoke with AMD about VBIOS lock-downs (and avoiding them), X570 chipset details, and spoke with separate sources about product release timing and challenges with PCIe 4.0.

 

Not far from my guess

 

Lisa Su (AMD CEO) | AMD Radeon Vega + VII | AMD Ryzen 3000 | Interview [English]
PC Games Hardware
Published on Jan 18, 2019
After her CES keynote, AMD CEO Lisa Su asked questions from a small group of journalists. We were fortunate to be able to attend and even recorded some questions in the video.
PCGH article on the video article:
▶ The complete video: http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-Grafikkarte-255597/Specials/Lisa-Su-Interview-1273322/

 

MSI CEO Dishes on Intel Shortage, AMD Growth, Taking Share from Apple

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/msi-ceo-interview-intel-shortage-amd,38473.html

And this is one of the reasons why I don't want to get an Intel/NV laptop.
The CEO was actually honest and kudos to him for admitting it, but that kind of behavior (of not using AMD hardware in laptops) is really off-putting... Intel bought off most other OEM's before, and some of them (MSI in particular) seem to remain 'brand loyal' and fear losing continuing monetary support.

AMD should really consider making their own laptops with all their hardware... optimize the heck of the base model and use it as a template to make more.
Seriously, their reference laptops which they used to demo all kinds of things in the past were better than what most OEM's had the ability to pull off with same hardware.

 

Except your guess didn't point out a May launch would be a 13 month cadence, which I mentioned around the same time, and you keep pushing at lack of chips, lack of yield, etc. The lack of chips/yield and fab capacity I keep proving you wrong on TIME & TIME AGAIN. Now if that is what you meant by not far from your guess, or only referring to the timeline, please ignore, as that was accurate. But, there are two issues related to this that explain having to wait for summer:

1) as gamers nexus pointed out, there are arguments over implementation of the new chipset. Dropping Asmedia is a good thing overall, which we all can agree with (and Intel should follow with their entire lineup, as both companies have been caught exposed security-wise to Asmedia's boondoggles in the past). Also, concerns on backwards implementation of PCIe 4.0, something Intel isn't even doing and that AMD is beating them to the punch on, and when new boards can be ready, which it seems the chips could be ready before the MB vendors are ready for X570, while looking out 4-6 months (can you guess who said MB partners were to blame for a **** X370 launch: this guy). But MB manufacturers already proved they changed to a degree with X470 and also laughed at Intel on MBs for the Intel 28-core OCable Xeon boards being ready and widely available in December. So both sides are being hit by that.

2) we have to look at the origin of the I/O chip. AdoredTV with some of the better AMD leakers said that there was ONLY one I/O die being made at GF and it was massive (meaning the I/O die of EPYC). Ian Cuttress, when talking to Mark Papermaster, mentioned the die looked symmetrical, while AMD have not discussed that chip much at all. AdoredTV, which I agree with, mentioned those may be able to be cut into quadrants and then individually binned. This is a distinct possibility, which would then mean that you would have to wait on Epyc to create enough I/O dies binned and cut down to be ready for the mainstream chip release.

Now, adding to that news AMD could use the extra 10-20% capacity TSMC has on 7nm this spring, as cell manufacturers cut their production on a softening in cell phone projections, partially due to the competitive pricing by Huawei in China, and it seems like AMD is missing an opportunity waiting for the new boards to be ready with the launch.

So kudos on timeline, just not the other crap that came with it.

Edit: and for those that don't know, around that same time frame, I got the release WRONG, expecting a March or April launch. May was at the late end, with Computex being expected for higher core count chips and motherboards, once the x570 with PCIe 4.0 at computex rumors came out. So more correct on what the hardware was, wrong on timeline.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Why AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen & Zen 2 Should Get You VERY Excited!
HardwareCanucks
Published on Jan 20, 2019
AMD's 3rd generation Ryzen processors are almost being launched and in this video we go over some of Ryzen 3 and Zen 2 features and possible performance. There's A LOT to get excited about.

 

Four Versions of AMD Navi appeared in MacOS update
21. January 2019 Florian Maislinger
https://www.pcbuildersclub.com/en/2019/01/four-versions-of-amd-navi-appeared-in-macos-update/

"The AMD Navi graphics cards are expected to launch in the second half of 2019. For the first time, MacOS source code now contains references to Navi.

Spoiler: Details...

Navi, AMD’s large 7nm attack
In 2019, AMD is the first processor and graphics card manufacturer to set its sights on 7nm on a large scale. While Intel and Nvidia still use 14nm and 12nm respectively, AMD gradually converts all products to 7nm. The graphics card sector makes the start with the Vega 20 chip. This chip is found in the server graphics cards Radeon Instinct MI60 and MI50 as well as in the new Radeon VII. The processor section also receives the first processor dies with a 7nm structure width through Zen 2. The server area also starts with this. In this case, Epyc 2 comes onto the market with up to 64 cores. In the middle of the year Ryzen 3000 will follow, possibly with up to 16 cores on AM4.

However, customers are expecting the next generation of graphics cards, codenamed Navi, almost even more eagerly. While Vega 20 is only a 7nm version of the 14nm Vega 10 GPU, Navi is the first graphics card generation based exclusively on the 7nm process. With the new generation AMD wants to replace 2019 the whole product portfolio and bring it to 7nm. It replaces the Polaris and Vega graphics cards. Whether Navi will also replace the Radeon VII is still unknown. There will also be solutions based on the new generation for the mobility market. This is now also indicated by the source code of a MacOS update.

Four Navi GPUs appeared in MacOS Mojave
In the TonyMacx86 forum (via Videocardz) a user discovered something in the MacOS Mojave source code. In a file called “AMDRadeon6000HWServiceskext” the GPUs Navi 9, Navi 10, Navi 12 and Navi 16 can be found. The chip might always be the same, while the names only indicate variants or expansion levels. It is still uncertain which expansion stages are involved. However, the number could be the number of compute units, which is why the Navi graphics cards in the source code are probably mobile GPUs. The largest of these GPUs could therefore have 1,024 shader units. Another theory is that these are already the finished chip names, which is why Navi 10 could also be the top model with 64 CUs.

The fact that Apple is already adapting the first lines of code to Navi could also mean that the new graphics cards will come onto the market much earlier than previously assumed. Six weeks before the launch of Vega, the MacOS source code showed signs of it for the first time. Other sources mention a presentation of the Navi graphics cards at E3 2019 in June. It is possible that AMD might launch the mobile versions earlier, while the desktop versions will follow at a later date."

AMD Radeon Navi
https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/336366-amd-radeon-navi/

Navi Patch in macOS Mojave update (includes device ID and mentions Navi 9, Navi 10, Navi 12, and Navi 16)
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ai5j31/navi_patch_in_macos_mojave_update_includes_device/

The AMD Radeon VII supports DLSS via DirectX 12
21. January 2019 Florian Maislinger
https://www.pcbuildersclub.com/en/2019/01/the-amd-radeon-vii-supports-dlss-via-directx-12/

"A feature of the Nvidia Turing graphics cards beside raytracing is DLSS. The AMD Radeon VII also supports this technique via the DirectML API.

Spoiler: Details...

DLSS: 4K appearance, Full HD gaming load
At the presentation of the new Turing graphics cards in August last year, there were several improvements and new techniques to see. The focus was of course on raytracing. The ray calculation results in much more realistic images, but the required hardware is expensive and has to be very strong. Gaming on UHD and high frame rates is practically no longer possible. However, the effects are very breathtaking, which is why it is a useful addition for some.

The other technology in focus was Deep Learning Super Sampling (DLSS). This is a new kind of edge smoothing. Super Sampling has been a topic for several years now and is handled by every graphics card. With Turing Nvidia takes the technology to a new level. In its own data centers, hundreds of Tesla V100 graphics cards are used to completely calculate games with the help of Deep Learning. The neural network is trained for the games. The final calculation then takes place on the Turing graphics cards. The smoothing of the edges is far superior to a conventional anti-aliasing technique. With the Turing GPUs and activated DLSS, the image is only rendered in a low resolution and then upscaled to 4K and significantly improved by the edge smoothing. The result is a 4K image that does not require the computing power of a 4K image. Thus, the FPS increase, in some cases DLSS is even more beautiful than native 4K.

The AMD Radeon Vega VII also masters DLSS
DLSS is such a topic with the Turing generation because they have built in Tensor and RT cores in addition to normal shader cores for the first time. The Tensor cores perform the inferencing and thus do not impact the shaders. These Tensor cores are currently still completely missing from the competition represented by AMD. However, DLSS could become a topic again with the new Radeon VII. The graphics card is significantly stronger than the previous Radeon graphics cards. So the way for DLSS via the DirectML API could be free. The API was developed by Microsoft and is directly integrated into DirectX 12. Through the API, deep learning optimization can also take place via the shaders without the need for Tensor cores. The DirectML API also works with Nvidia’s Tensor cores. So while the DLSS alternative on the Radeon Vega VII would run on the shaders, Turing graphics cards could continue to run it on the Tensor cores without putting load on the CUDA shaders.

The question is, as always, the support of the game developers. They are currently reluctant to integrate Nvidia’s DLSS into games. Whether a further alternative can prevail at all is rather uncertain. AMD wants to research in the future also in the direction of Raytracing to bring own graphics cards on the market and whether DLSS over the DirectML-API will be a topic in this case, must be shown first."

The AMD Radeon VII supports DLSS via DirectX 12
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ai9ryx/the_amd_radeon_vii_supports_dlss_via_directx_12/

 

Patents show AMD’s post-Navi GPU could use an Nvidia-like architecture
https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/amd-next-gen-graphics-card-architecture-arcturus

AMD Radeon 7 Will Have Day One Linux Support
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasone...will-have-day-one-linux-support/#130734bd2869

 

Papermaster: AMD's 3rd-Gen Ryzen Core Complex Design Won’t Require New Optimizations
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ryzen-amd-third-gen-7nm-processor,38474.html

 

I said this few years ago. Most of them prefer gaming on GPUs rather than amateur crypto currency mining or data mining on GPU which AMD excels.
In my opinion, they should create a profile that Optimises AMD GPU for Gaming, Compute, Gaming+Compute, Gaming+Content creation mode for consumer cards to optimise the performance of their GPUs.

 

Hm.. I wouldn't call AMD's compute capability 'amateur'.
Professional areas for example (AI learning, medical imaging, GPU accelerated workloads) are something where AMD's compute functions can really shine (provided the devs actually optimize the software for it... but NV with its deep pockets did corner the market and got a lot of devs to use closed-source features as opposed to open ones from AMD which do the same if not better with less of a stress on the hardware).

However, I do agree that if AMD has a compute heavy uArch like Vega (or Polaris even), they would do well to for example simply disable a portion of compute capability which would leave room open for increasing core and VRAM clocks for example.
Obviously higher clocks on core and VRAM will only take you so far. Nvidia can technically achieve same or better results in games because they pack their GPU's with more gaming relevant hardware (such as more ROP's, texture units, etc).

What I find interesting though is that Vega reaches Nvidia's gaming performance (at least in regards to second best top end GPU) with lower core clocks than what Nvidia comparable parts need.

To me, this suggests that if AMD might have an advantage in raw IPC with GCN... and if they simply disabled via BIOS say 20-30% of compute capability, and ramped up the clocks to Nvidia levels or beyond, it could probably match Nvidia's top end gaming GPU in both gaming and efficiency (possibly even surpass it unless AMD optimizes the voltages from factory).

But, I don't see what's the big idea in using for example MI50/Radeon VII as a baseline and then just a certain amount of compute so they can increase the clocks.
It would be like using different profiles indeed, only on a software level (plus, something like this was done before in the past when the PRO cards were turned into gaming GPU's via drivers).

 

I did say Amd consumer card excels in amateur crypto currency mining and data mining tasks. Used to do it earlier when LTC was doing great!

 

Sapphire and XFX Preps 7nm AMD Radeon VII Graphics Cards
AIB Partners Plan to Sell Radeon's Latest Graphics Card!
Published: 24th January 2019 | Source: Sapphire and XFX | Author: Mark Campbell
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/gp...xfx_preps_7nm_amd_radeon_vii_graphics_cards/1

"Sapphire and XFX Prep 7nm AMD Radeon VII Graphics Cards
AMD is set to release their Radeon VII (Radeon 7) graphics card on February 7th, delivering the world's first 7nm graphics card and the largest amount of graphics performance that AMD has offered to date.

Both XFX and Sapphire have revealed that they will be releasing Radeon VII graphics cards under their brand names, though at this time both company only seem to be selling AMD's reference design.

Earlier this week, images of ASRock's Radeon VII graphics card leaked onto the web, though it is worth noting that the company has not listed the graphics card on their website. Bost Sapphire and XFX have listed the Radeon VII on their respective websites, which is pretty much as official as it gets.

Strangely, XFX's Radeon VII webpage does not include any images of the company's boxart or their version of the Radeon VII. Stranger still is the fact that XFX lists the wrong specifications for the graphics card ( link), making it possible that their listing is a placeholder. At the time of writing XFX's Radeon VII webpage lists the specifications of AMD's RX Vega 56.

Sapphire, conversely, has revealed their custom boxart for their Radeon VII and a graphics card that appears to lack any distinct Sapphire branding, maintaining the clean look of AMD's reference design. The company has also listed the correct specifications for the graphics card, listing a 1,400MHz base clock, a 1750MHz boost clock, 16GB of HBM2 VRAM and 1TB/s of total memory bandwidth.

AMD's Radeon VII graphics cards will release on February 7th with an MSRP of $699. These graphics cards will be available on AMD.com and from AMD's AIB partners."

 

@ajc9988

https://twitter.com/TUM_APISAK/status/1088264161191022593

scroll down a bit for ST performance, do we possibly have a new crown CPU here? if estimate scales like what its shown in the tweet then TY AMD.

i'll take a 4.6ghz OC equivalent to an INTEL ~4.8 to 4.9ghz OC, but I'll get 16 cores instead.

 

Give me 65W TDP Zen 2 8c/16th that's equivalent to i9900K with ability to upgrade GL702ZC to that thing, and I'd be set (provided of course I hadn't bought a first version 'dud' which broke down twice because Asus couldn't be bothered to do proper quality control).

 

AMD EPYC™ — “Rome” C-Ray Demo
AMD
Published on Jan 24, 2019
One 2nd Generation AMD EPYC™ 64 core CPU beats two Intel Xeon Platinum 8180M CPUs on the C-Ray benchmark.

AMD EPYC™ for High Performance Computing
AMD
Published on Jan 24, 2019
AMD EPYC™ delivers outstanding performance for high performance computing workloads.

Spoiler: Click to See Video

AMD EPYC™ Delivers Outstanding Value for Virtualized IT Environments
AMD
Published on Jan 24, 2019
The average age of servers in many datacenters today is 3-5 years old. These servers may be less performance and require more maintenance and need to be replaced. AMD EPYC™ processors provide excellent solutions to replace aging server and storage infrastructure.

Spoiler: Click to See Video

AMD EPYC™ Available from Leading Cloud Providers
AMD
Published on Jan 24, 2019
Take advantage of AMD EPYC™ solutions now available from leading cloud providers.

Spoiler: Click to See Video

AMD 7 nm-EPYC-Rome-64-Core CPU_Cinebench-Benchmark Performance_1
https://www.nordichardware.se/nyhet...64-core-cpu_cinebench-benchmark-performance_1

 

too much performance, intel too much hurt!

 

Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) Stock May Consolidate Before It Springs Into Action, Says Baird
Scott Fields, Editor- January 18, 2019, 11:51 AM EDT
https://www.smarteranalyst.com/anal...bet-against-advanced-micro-devices-amd-stock/

"Advanced Micro Devices ( AMD) has made a big push into the CPU server market with its EPYC chips.

Estimates for how much server market share AMD has gained through EPYC most normally come in around 5%, or in the mid-single-digit range.

With the launch of new 7nm EPYC Rome chips, AMD projects to keep stealing share from Intel in 2019, and expects market share to rise from 5% in 2018, to 10% in 2019..."

 

Very meticulous and consistent IPC gains which we expect from gen to gen from most companies. If 90% of server environment switch to AMD for increased compute and decreased footprint then it is a win-win situation. With that fund they can re-hire Jim Keller,Raja Koduri, partner with Qualcomm to amp up their GPUs.

 

Nah, those guys are near retirement, they'll enjoy their AMD stock fueled leisure time, if all works out for them, and I hope it does.

The question is, as AMD wins Epyc sales and start the transition for even larger adoption at each site, will the 7nm++ and 5nm follow on kill Intel at the same - or even higher levels? It could get doubly worse for Intel pretty quickly.

If 10nm server CPU's don't show up in 2020, and Intel can't progress 10nm performance to keep pace with AMD / TSMC+Samsung, then Intel's gonna need help.

I don't think adding "ARM" compute units to Intel's CPU's is gonna help much in any market I can see. Intel is gonna need to whip up some mighty fine architectural improvements to outpace process performance loss through lagging behind the rest of the industry.

Given the Spectre+ mitigations hanging over their head through 10nm as it apparently will be - in hardware / firmware - Intel needs to toss out some new magic to get ahead again.

Intels time to shine needs to come sooner than later...

Update: Yipe!!:

Intel misses on revenue and gives weak guidance — stock falls after hours

• Intel 's fourth-quarter revenue was light, as was its revenue forecast for 2019.
• Intel has been on the hunt for a permanent CEO for more than six months.
• The company announced new desktop PC chips in the quarter.

Jordan Novet | @jordannovet
Published 1 Hour Ago Updated 5 Mins Ago
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/24/intel-earnings-q4-2018.html

"...
The business segment that generates the most revenue for Intel, the Client Computing Group that includes PC chips, hit $9.82 billion in revenue in the fourth quarter, up 10 percent but below the $10.01 billion consensus estimate among analysts polled by FactSet.

Intel's Data Center Group, which includes chips for cloud providers, did $6.07 billion in revenue, below the $6.35 billion FactSet analyst estimate, while Non-Volatile Memory Solutions Group revenue totaled $1.11 billion, just under the $1.12 billion estimate.

Within the Data Center Group, growth from cloud fell sequentially from 50 percent to 24 percent. Cloud providers are currently "absorbing capacity," Intel said in its quarterly presentation to investors.

With respect to guidance, Intel said it expects to post 87 cents in earnings per share, excluding certain items, on around $16 billion in revenue in the first quarter of 2019. Analysts had been looking for $1.01 per share, excluding certain items, on $17.35 billion in revenue, according to Refinitiv.

And for the full fiscal year, Intel predicted $4.60 in earnings per share, excluding certain items, on about $71.5 billion in revenue. The Refinitiv consensus was earnings of $4.54 per share, excluding certain items, and revenue of $73.19 billion."

 

Also, the industry devs might be more prompted to optimize software for Zen uArch and open-source features AMD uses (on both CPU and GPU fronts)

 

Using that video as a basis, AMD already demonstrated EPYC 64c CPU against Intel Xeon's in identical configuration with same results.
At the time of that test, ROME's clocks were NOT finalized.

 

So it looks like a Ryzen 3000 benchmark showed up online.

https://hothardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-zen-2-matisse-12-core-beast-cpu-leaks

If AMD can get close to the 13% IPC increase, they are in for a good year.

 

Keller's good, but why Raja? He had his chance, didn't come up with a backup plan for memory controller on Vega, then tried to pass the blame off when he left. Vega was his baby, came in expensive, and performance was mediocre. Doesn't mean it was bad, just not worth it at the original price when launched and AMD had to subsidize it for a good while, losing money on every card (not that ryzen didn't make up for it in spades, not that costs come down over the life of the product). But, I'd say leave raja be!

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ajt1fd/james_prior_has_left_amd/

"Looking forward to my new adventure, a 2019 filled with #family, #fun, and good #work. PS I no longer work for AMD. More to come! #adventure #thebestisyettocome #letsdothis"

Next stop Intel? Seems to be where many of ex-AMD employees are headed.

 

Funny how you don't mention that AMD is also doing an organizational shift with lots of promotions from within, that they are tying Ryzen and Radeon divisions in sales together, etc., instead focusing on one Person leaving.

With that said, I wish him well. He was on the team that created TR, meaning a damn fine engineer, especially as chiplets make their way to the mainstream stack.

Now, we will see where he goes, but even with all the talent Intel has stolen over the years, none of that prevented them losing the process lead, delivering late on 10nm, and releasing skylake 3 TIMES when a former head engineer told them to make plans to port sunny cove to 14nm back in 2016 when the problem could have been addressed.

Stop being a fanboy as bad as papusan. It really just makes you look small!

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

I wonder if Intel will buy AMD as a whole to compete with nvidia solely whilst killing the new CPU AMD made. I think Govt. will ban takeover of CPU so as not to create a monopoly.

 

LOOL

I won't pick up the topic fanboys as some of you is so hung up into this (I have seen more than enough of that spoke in this and other threads). But AMD has nothing to offer if you want max overclock - max performance + best graphics performance in today or tomorrow's laptops. Nothing! More like Dead end.

But it can't be good for any company lose their valuable/talented/skillede employees (to it's competitors) all the time.

 

Really? Come at me, brah! I have shown you to be a fanboy so many times it isn't funny. I also currently have products from all companies and have explained my viewpoints in excruciating detail, predicted decently accurately what to expect from the different companies, etc.

And, considering I was one of the early ones here to dump Clevo for a desktop machine, you know what I'll say in response to the laptop comment. It is a selective response against a change that is coming.

Hell, I noticed you didn't chime in about Intel's earnings this week, but at the end of Q3, you acted like you could dance on my grave with those results. A $350M miss and a guidance of revenue for Q1 being over $1B lower than analysts expect is no minor task, with an immediate drop of as low as 8% in after hours trading.

This is why I call you shill, troll, fanboy, etc. No matter what, you don't acknowledge the full field, ups and downs of each product on it's own merit, etc. Instead, you act and spew like a brand loyalist company Rep. If you didn't act that way, I wouldn't treat you that way.

Meanwhile, I don't care that you and others have called me an AMD fanboy. Go back to the ZM thread for my work there. Then consider my 1950X as one of the things that helped push Mr. Fox to get HEDT. Or go look at my HWBot getting 4x8GB stocks running over 4000MHz on my skylake which Mr. Fox didn't touch until coffee lake with better IMCs and MBs that made it easier. If you look, I don't have any AMD graphics cards on there and only one AMD CPU.

I literally predicted a lot long before it happened on here, and I actually admit when I get it wrong, like Foveros. Do you do that? No. Why? You are a fanboy! So move along!

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Antitrust laws prevent that. Considering AMD was created to prevent monopoly and give alternatives for x86, literally Intel could not buy AMD.

Now, if they bought ARM, that may or may not be allowed. But that gets into a deeper discussion on whether that would violate the regulations on market consolidation by percentage.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

The personal attacks need to stop in this thread. Everyone has opinions and people need to respect each others. Enough of the childish bickering.

 

Hm... given how many troubles Intel experienced with 10nm to date, its possible they may just decide to cut their losses, decide to release 10nm products on a limited basis (such as for low power parts) and shift their focus towards 7nm/5nm instead?

It seems as if Intel may not even have anything ready with 10nm this year, which means that AMD could have free reign for the majority of 2019 with 7nm parts and will soon progress to 7nm+ (2020).
This is actually good for AMD as it might be a much needed reprieve for them to regain a large portion of market share and also get the OEMs on board (I see that OEM's are jumping ahead with integrating Intel and even NV's new 2060 into laptops practically since the moment of release... and yet for AMD mobile GPU's and CPU's, we end up waiting 6 months to a year for anything to show up in the market - plus, there's still a huge bias present with majority of the OEM's and they aren't using AMD parts, or they use incredibly low power parts that end up throttling because the OEM's can't be bothered to design a cooling around the hardware and will actually LIMIT the APU's even to their lower configurable end - Asus and Acer actually did a good thing with GL702ZC and Helios 500 all AMD hw, but the GPU's have been unnecessarily castrated whereas they could have been better optimized from a voltage and frequency point of view).

 

AMD Ryzen Mobility 7nm Zen 2 CPUs Rumored For Late 2019 Launch
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.hothardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-mobility-7nm-zen-2-cpus-late-2019

Exclusive: AMD 7nm Mobility Supported OEMs And Current Roadmap
https://wccftech.com/exclusive-amd-7nm-mobility-supported-oems-and-current-roadmap/

Once again the mobile users are left in the lurch and OEMs like clevo and msi are apparently passing by amd 7nm (before its even released) due to lack of 'support' (if the articles in question are correct - though they do build up on the previous interview with MSI CEO who said pretty much the same thing).

Translation: AMD can't afford to pay us what Intel and NV do so we won't use their mobile products.

Meanwhile we are stuck with OEMs that either cannot execute proper cooling for AMD mobile parts, end up artificially limiting the tdp of some parts which limits their performance because they can't be bothered to integrate better designs... and of course, lets not forget lack of laptops shipping with high enough RAM in dual-channel mode, lack of support for high speed mobile RAM, etc.

GL702ZC was a good attempt but Asus botched the cooling somewhere in its initial batch apparently (or the issue is persistent through the line which is waiting to escalate due to poor thermal application) - doesn't ship with dual-channel RAM, 0 BIOS updates for Zen+ and Zen 2.
HP on the other hand limits APU's TDP's to minimum levels and uses generic cooling used in Intel/NV configurations - doesn't ship with dual-channel

Acer... decent execution of all AMD in Helios 500 as far as recent reports indicate (a bit too low clocks on Vega 56 though - unnecessarily so - could have gotten away with similar to desktop clocks and just drop the voltage).

Acer with AMD APU's - limits TDP too much when it comes to using the thing for gaming on the IGP - instead of allowing the whole APU to go all out, either the CPU throttles to no end, or the GPU is incapable of reaching its full potential.

Plus, OEM's tend to overprice AMD hardware in laptops... which is plain annoying.

Quality control remains questionable in various cases.

Sigh.
I'm thinking going with a desktop at this point (which is ridiculously inconvenient and impractical for me).

 

As much as I hate to say it, I do not think we will see a high-end, AMD-based notebook for a long time. OEM's, and consumers, tend to still look at AMD as the "budget" option and it is hard to convince people otherwise. That may change is Zen 2 does actually pass Intel in terms of IPC but it is a tough belief to shake because it has been true for so long.

 

Honestly, I would push away AMD mobility if I was ODM unless AMD makes those socketed. In that case mobile AMD would mean same desktop but of better yield and better performance/power optimizations. But if those are soldered then why would I bother with those trash when I already have hustle with Intel based motherboards??? Make it good or make go away, AMD. And if Clevo and Co pushes back socketed designs then, well, stupid decision for being too catious.

 

Intel's CPU with iGP are to a large degree BGA.
Not sure if AMD's 2500u or 2700u versions are socketed or not.
As for the 1700 in GL702ZC and 2700 in Helios 500, those are fully socketed CPU's.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but AMD only makes the chips... they don't decide whether a component is soldered or not - except in the case of consoles I think, but that's a special scenario.
Its OEM's that decide whether or not to make the hardware socketed or not.... AMD has no say on that matter.

Anyway, that's not the reason OEM's avoid AMD... they avoid them because AMD cannot afford to bribe them as Intel/NV do.

 

I'm more than sure that even if OEMs make requirements about socket types, AMD/Intel makes final decision and I doubt that big notebooks like Clevo need BGAs.
Also, I heard that OEMs have 2 reasons to change their mind: it's shortage levels from Intel and increased prices.

 

The 2500u and 2700u are ultra low power parts.
Ultra low power parts are almost always soldered to the motherboard and not representative of the mobile platform in general.

How do you think socketed laptop CPU's are made?
OEM's usually take desktop parts and put them into the laptop with lowered frequencies if Intel or AMD hadn't already specifically made higher powered CPU's for laptops.

Same idea is applied to the GPU's, only the OEM's choose to fully solder them into the motherboard or not.
AMD already created an MXM version of RX 580 and yet that hadn't even been used by any OEM's.

OEM's have been avoiding more powerful AMD solutions for a while now due to Intel for example paying them to use only Intel solutions (which was proven) and heck, Nvidia is a huge company with cash to spare, so of course they can throw money at OEM's to use their GPU's.
AMD doesn't have that kind of cash at their disposal, so OEM's will not go for a company that won't be able to give them money upfront (regardless of how good and powerful/efficient their hardware is).

What's been stopping them from integrating say full 2200g and 2400g into laptops with dedicated GPU's?
Nothing much apart from AMD being unable to bribe them into paying them like Intel and NV do.

Also, the mobile world is increasingly shifting towards BGA/soldered products anyway... so AMD's design has nothing to do with this.
And if BGA/soldered designs are so bad (which, admittedly, some are), why do OEM's then use garbage low power Intel CPU/IGP solutions to create a plethora of cheap and decently cooled laptops but cannot do the same for AMD?

Better yet, OEM's will be bending over themselves to integrate full desktop GTX 1080 into a laptop with adequate cooling (furthermore, they will jump on the bandwagon to use the NEW RTX 2xxx NV gpu's into laptops mere days after the official release date of those GPU's, but seemingly can't make a quiet and efficient cooling for a 65W TDP limited RX 580 and will effectively wait 6 months to a year before some of them decide to use them).

Who the heck is the guilty party here exactly?
AMD has no influence over what kind of hardware configuration OEM's decide to use... they certainly cannot force OEM's to use AMD hardware.
Instead, we get a market saturated with Intel/NV options that are quite frankly boring, overpriced and same old, same old.

 

You mean GL720ZC and Acer Helios 500 with Ryzen/Vega not withstanding?
Because, those are the only two high-end AMD based laptops right now (and their launch price tags remain a bit too high for my liking - though still cheaper than Intel/NV equivalents).

GL702ZC is no longer available to buy in UK as it apparently reached the end of its lifespan (and Asus botched the cooling in the initial batch or had really bad quality control).. so for now, the only potential viable alternative would be Helios 500 Ryzen/Vega.

I like that Asus and Acer are trying, but there needs to be higher emphasis on quality control (especially on their lower end of the spectrum where Acer is offering 2500u and 2700u with severely limited TDP - that TDP should have been left intact at the original specs and not configurable so that Acer and HP could limit the 2700u to perform worse than 2500u - not to mention the lack of shipping these units without dual-channel RAM pre-configured).

 

They were relatively high-end but, like you said, they were still cheaper than Intel counterparts. The OEMs seem to think that people looking to save money on high-end laptops will be okay with mediocre cooling, crappy screens, and terrible battery life.

 

Don't think 'AMD is budget' has anything to do with it.
Many people are interested in getting AMD laptops... the problem lies in (poor) OEM execution of designs that use AMD hardware (cooling, TDP limits, lack of dual-channel or better parts in general), not to mention artificially high prices they slap on those designs (£1000 or $1000 for 2700u with a touch screen? I don't think so... that's MAYBE worth half of that), and of course, availability of laptops with AMD hardware (which brings us back to the problem of certain OEM's avoiding AMD simply because AMD cannot afford to pay OEM's to the same degree as NV/Intel can).

To me it looks like a heavily biased market because the damage was already done by NV/Intel.
First it started with bribery (paying OEM's to use their hardware of course) and now, those same OEM's fear losing that nice source of income if they 'dare' using AMD (regardless of how good it is).

They're basically prostituting themselves to Intel/NV for cash.