Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Flying Fox, morphine
Airmantharp wrote:Which form?
The challenge for AMD is not just catching up, which they haven't yet done, but also keeping up. This is where companies like Intel and Nvidia differ: they continue to execute. Further, they've been competing well with themselves, absent real competition from AMD.
bwoodring wrote:I don't know how much that matters for the consumer space
bwoodring wrote:I think most people just buy whatever is best in a current generation. I don't really care if the successor to Ryzen gets smoked by the next Intel chip, that's a decision for the next build.
The exception to this would be reliability issues. Back in the Athlon days, it really did take AMD awhile to get the kind of reliable Mobo/chipset support - and in many ways they never quite did. I haven't heard much about Ryzen chipsets, but it's all be pretty good so far.
In short, I think Ryzen is going to do really well with the kind of people who frequent this site - they're more likely to appreciate high thread-count performance and would feel more comfortable dealing with chipset/mobo issues that could come with a new platform.
For system builders (esp laptops which require a lot of design and investment) and enterprises, I would agree - a track record needs to be rebuilt. If I am Dell, and I expect my next Laptop design to last through a few CPU generations, I think I would need a little more data before I committed to designing around Zen. (But I'd jump on desktops, that's easy).
ultima_trev wrote:Zen has now saturated all markets, excluding Mobile (which should be by the end of the year). Between Ryzen 3-7, Threadripper, Epyc, and the next gen Zen+/Zen 2 (to use the same chipset as Zen 1), does AMD have any chance of achieving "a double digit percentage share of the market?" (I do believe Dr. Lisa Su said that was their goal)
Despite that AMD's best can easily seem to deliver 85% or more of Intel's best (depending on the application being benched), which is much, MUCH better than any of the Bulldozer derivatives, is it too late to proclaim any sort of return to competition has been acheived?
HERETIC wrote:I think a lot will depend on upcoming APU's.
Airmantharp wrote:Honestly, if they can just properly execute round two, they're gonna get sustainable marketshare.
That is if round two fixes the initial issues, like high-speed RAM compatibility, clockspeeds, efficiency at higher clockspeeds, and internal latency. That last one is killer for the server market and they don't overclock. And that's the easy stuff: they need to kick their IPC and single-core performance into gear too. That sets their performance ceiling.
And if they can run a version with a 'light' Radeon APU that can match Intel's while still bringing the cores (and adding the above) to every consumer/non-HEDT product alongside their bare parts, that'd be nice too. Even as a gaming enthusiast, I regularly use IGPs, even for everyday computing, even while gaming on real GPUs.
Welch wrote:It's like their drivers for GPUs, people seem to have complained about their drivers but for about 3 years it's been Rock solid since they hired a bunch of talent. It's started to give people the feeling it's not second rate crap.
Kougar wrote:Welch, I hear ya. Rather odd issue and it sucks NVIDIA won't address it. Makes me wonder if NVIDIA will begin to cede away the lowest-end of the market to APUs and stick to 750 / 1050 class hardware in a few more years.
strangerguy wrote:If returning to form means having a decent CPU offering against Intel while massively dropping the ball on the dGPUs and even more so on the HPC side, yeah.
strangerguy wrote:If returning to form means having a decent CPU offering against Intel while massively dropping the ball on the dGPUs and even more so on the HPC side, yeah.
Waco wrote:strangerguy wrote:If returning to form means having a decent CPU offering against Intel while massively dropping the ball on the dGPUs and even more so on the HPC side, yeah.
As an HPC guy, I'm pretty excited about EPYC.
FlamingSpaceJunk wrote:Waco wrote:strangerguy wrote:If returning to form means having a decent CPU offering against Intel while massively dropping the ball on the dGPUs and even more so on the HPC side, yeah.
As an HPC guy, I'm pretty excited about EPYC.
How so?
I'm on the fence. Intel's per core performance is still better, and we're only doing a small investment into GPU for the next iteration. The AVX512 stuff was already out of the budget anyway.
FlamingSpaceJunk wrote:Waco wrote:strangerguy wrote:If returning to form means having a decent CPU offering against Intel while massively dropping the ball on the dGPUs and even more so on the HPC side, yeah.
As an HPC guy, I'm pretty excited about EPYC.
How so?
I'm on the fence. Intel's per core performance is still better, and we're only doing a small investment into GPU for the next iteration. The AVX512 stuff was already out of the budget anyway.