Article "AMD Has Lost"

[DigDog]

somebody please help me link this because my browser isn't being helpful:

Why AMD’s best days are behind it

AMD had a shot to catch Intel and blew it.

www.marketwatch.com

Accoridng to Daniel Newman, principal analyst at Futurum Reseach, AMD "has lost".

I'll directy you straight away to the .. humorous video of Gamers Nexus who are extremely perplexed at the amount of lies and bad facts in said article, to the point where nobody with a bit of knowledge of the current market could make those mistakes. Video starts at 2:40

I really, REALLY hope this isn't a marketing tactic sponsored by Intel because that would .. be disgusting, but also suggest that things are much worse than expected, in Intel.

I hope this is satisfactory.

Iron Woode
Super Moderator

 

[DigDog]

thank you @Iron Woode

 

[Zstream]

It’s market tactics. It’s sad that hit jobs like that actually have an impact

 

[Hitman928]

Most financial analysts in the tech industry honestly don't understand squat about the industry they claim to be experts in. So you get a lot of either skepticism for a non-blue blood player, or you get an over eagerness to jump on hot up and comers with big promises and little technical foundation to support those promises.

I mean, just look at his AMD analysis from August to see that he doesn't understand what's actually happening with AMD (and Intel).

The one area where AMD had been doing the best was in PCs, but with Intel’s recent launch of its 11th generation ice Lake processors, Intel could potentially pull back some of AMD’s small market share gains here as well.

Investors are still too bullish on AMD’s stock

AMD has yet to make the hoped-for gains in market share, and until then, fatter profits are unlikely to follow.

www.marketwatch.com

This prediction did not age well at all.

And his summary from that time?

Be skeptical. . . Regardless of the popular sentiment and market hype around its improved products supposedly aiding in AMD’s competitiveness against the likes of Intel and Nvidia, the market share gains haven’t been there and that means fatter profits are unlikely to be follow. And until there are solid signs that AMD can deliver in that way, the stock price is inflated. I believe investors would be better served to put their money elsewhere.

AMD stock closed Aug 6 at $29.19. This last Friday it closed at $49.73 with a recent peak of $52.81. So if you listened to Mr. Newman back in Aug. and stayed away from AMD, you would have missed out on a 70.4% return on investment compared to someone who bought AMD shares that day and held them until now, 6 months later. Granted, semiconductor companies as a whole did really well, but for comparison, Intel gained 41.4% in that time frame and Nvidia is up 63.5%.

To be fair to Mr. Newman, his financial analysis in terms of fundamentals and AMD's pricing racing ahead of its hard number foundation is by and large accurate. What he fails to realize is that this isn't like other industries and you have to really understand the tech the companies are producing and what they have on their roadmaps to see why AMD is traded at such a premium compared to their fundamentals. So far, AMD has been delivering very consistently both on their technical side as well as their financial projections. Right now, it won't take too much for their price to take a big hit if AMD starts to falter, but if they keep delivering as they project, their stock price is only going to keep going up.

 

[soresu]

If AMD had blown their load on Zen2 and RDNA1 then maybe this might be true, but I HIGHLY doubt that.

For CPU they have a roadmap to at least Zen5, and likely RDNA4/5 too - they won't be doing quite as well when Intel finally punches back properly, but even competing on an even keel is enough for those in the industry who are keen to promote competition between them by buying from both.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Maybe someone should come out with a "hit piece" on Intel. "Does the Intel (of today) even have enough strength to 'punch back' against AMD? Will they ever?"

Personally, I have my serious doubts, and it has to do with the corporate culture inside of Intel, and how for many years, they skimped on their tech., as far as security went, and now we're finally seeing the fall-out of such behavior of "rock-star engineers", that cared more about boosting performance in the early years, and then re-using designs of sub-components to save on R&D funding (one factor that led to the "Pentium Bug"), rather than making fundamentally sound tech. in their CPUs, with new exploits for Intel-architecture chips seemingly every week.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Maybe someone should come out with a "hit piece" on Intel. "Does the Intel (of today) even have enough strength to 'punch back' against AMD? Will they ever?"

Nah, matching lies with more lies is not the right way to go. Gotta love the bit about 5G PCs. 5G PCs!!!!!! zomg! Anyway, do you want garbage on that level being spewed in defense of AMD? No, just . . . no.

 

[CHADBOGA]

If one assumes that the author of the article is talking about stock price only, his analysis isn't completely crazy, at least not yet.

I remember when Intel's stock price dipped below $50, I thought it could be years before they got back over $50, as I expected AMD to hurt them more than appears to be the case, so far.

If Intel fix 10nm and launch 7nm in a timely manner, the stock price of AMD could come crashing down.

However I am very skeptical that any version of 10nm by Intel will be that good and how can anyone at this stage have faith that 7nm will be without significant issues?

Still, if one were to go back 5 years, it is harder to imagine Intel would have stuffed up 10nm as badly as they have, compared to the notion that they will launch a trouble free 7nm range, yet here we are, so who knows if things will now swing in the other direction.

 

[DrMrLordX]

If one assumes that the author of the article is talking about stock price only, his analysis isn't completely crazy, at least not yet.

It kind of is though. If you watch the Gamer's Nexus vid, you'll notice that he called for skepticism about AMD's future stock price in August 2019. The stock has since climbed over 70%. He clearly missed the mark then. Now he's claiming that Intel has solved all their problems and that they're back on-track. What?

2020 is going to be a pretty bad year for Intel, at least in terms of what technology they can sell to the public. They might still make a lot of money . . . or they might not. But recommending their stock (and trying to trash AMD's) when their core business is still in chaos seems like bad advice.

 

[CHADBOGA]

It kind of is though. If you watch the Gamer's Nexus vid, you'll notice that he called for skepticism about AMD's future stock price in August 2019. The stock has since climbed over 70%. He clearly missed the mark then. Now he's claiming that Intel has solved all their problems and that they're back on-track. What?

2020 is going to be a pretty bad year for Intel, at least in terms of what technology they can sell to the public. They might still make a lot of money . . . or they might not. But recommending their stock (and trying to trash AMD's) when their core business is still in chaos seems like bad advice.

The smart money always seems to be well ahead of the curve, so if Intel has solved their problems(which I have my doubts about), if you wait till that is obvious, the share price will have already appreciated markedly and one misses out.

 

[sandorski]

Dude's probably Shorting or something.

 

[yeshua]

Some financial analyst on some random website spreads mostly falsehoods about both Intel and AMD. Do we really need new threads for each of such cases? I don't even want to talk about the fact that there's an unhealthy trend of bashing Intel in every thread here on Anandtech almost each day. Hey guys, why don't you do something good instead? Bashing is oh so simple, "Intel is bad, they screwed their fabrication process, they can't produce cr*p, this and that" ad infinitum. This issue is somewhat exacerbated by the fact that some moderators are partial to AMD for some reasons and some people have been banished from these forums because of that which is quite ugly to say the least.

Is this a technical forum about tech or this is "We love AMD, Intel are worthless" forum?

Tell me, what's the point of:

Article - "AMD vs. Intel CPU Market Share Q4 2019: EPYC and Ryzen Growth Decelerate, Mobile Ryzen Up" - Tom's

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-vs-intel-cpu-market-share-q4-2019-epyc-and-ryzen-growth-decelerate-mobile-ryzen-up AMD dominated Intel in Amazon's most popular CPU rankings during Black Friday and Cyber Monday, often occupying the top ten spots. However, this reminds us that the retail...

forums.anandtech.com

Question - Anybody remember the Pentium III 1133?

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-admits-problems-pentium-iii-1,235.html AMD had Intel on the run with the Athlon. There was a race to 1GHz, then there was a 1100 Athlon and then a Pentium III 1133 appeared. But it was unstable and they all had to be recalled. Intel is rarely behind...

forums.anandtech.com

News - [Digitimes] Intel shortage likely to continue through 2020

https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20200117PD203.html Ooh, this is bad. Doubly bad is that it seems that OEMs are finally fed up and are starting a push to AMD now. The shortage of course is because of the really awful 10 nm yield and the 14 nm die hog that is Cooper Lake.

forums.anandtech.com

You have to realize that if Intel doesn't solve its issues AMD will quickly ramp up their prices and slow down their progress as was seen with Intel which made very little progress between Sandy Bridge and Sky Lake, and their largely reworked Sunny Cove uArch was the first real break through in many many years. Could people here stop parroting the same things over and over again?

Without healthy competition we, as customers, are screwed. AMD is not a charity and if they become the sole purveyor of fast CPUs, trust me, you won't like what will happen.

Here's an idea. Why don't we create a topic called "AMD is great, Intel sucks" where people can express their admiration to one vendor and their hatred towards the other because it surely looks like we're missing it.



Mod callouts are not allowed.
Have an issue? Make a thread in MD. It's the only place to do so.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[Thunder 57]

Some financial analyst on some random website spreads mostly falsehoods about both Intel and AMD. Do we really need new threads for each of such cases? I don't even want to talk about the fact that there's an unhealthy trend of bashing Intel in every thread here on Anandtech almost each day. Hey guys, why don't you do something good instead? Bashing is oh so simple, "Intel is bad, they screwed their fabrication process, they can't produce cr*p, this and that" ad infinitum. This issue is somewhat exacerbated by the fact that some moderators are partial to AMD for some reasons and some people have been banished from these forums because of that which is quite ugly to say the least.

Is this a technical forum about tech or this is "We love AMD, Intel are worthless" forum?

Tell me, what's the point of:

Article - "AMD vs. Intel CPU Market Share Q4 2019: EPYC and Ryzen Growth Decelerate, Mobile Ryzen Up" - Tom's

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-vs-intel-cpu-market-share-q4-2019-epyc-and-ryzen-growth-decelerate-mobile-ryzen-up AMD dominated Intel in Amazon's most popular CPU rankings during Black Friday and Cyber Monday, often occupying the top ten spots. However, this reminds us that the retail...

forums.anandtech.com

Question - Anybody remember the Pentium III 1133?

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-admits-problems-pentium-iii-1,235.html AMD had Intel on the run with the Athlon. There was a race to 1GHz, then there was a 1100 Athlon and then a Pentium III 1133 appeared. But it was unstable and they all had to be recalled. Intel is rarely behind...

forums.anandtech.com

News - [Digitimes] Intel shortage likely to continue through 2020

https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20200117PD203.html Ooh, this is bad. Doubly bad is that it seems that OEMs are finally fed up and are starting a push to AMD now. The shortage of course is because of the really awful 10 nm yield and the 14 nm die hog that is Cooper Lake.

forums.anandtech.com

You have to realize that if Intel doesn't solve its issues AMD will quickly ramp up their prices and slow down their progress as was seen with Intel which made very little progress between Sandy Bridge and Sky Lake, and their largely reworked Sunny Cove uArch was the first real break through in many many years. Could people here stop parroting the same things over and over again?

Without healthy competition we, as customers, are screwed. AMD is not a charity and if they become the sole purveyor of fast CPUs, trust me, you won't like what will happen.

Here's an idea. Why don't we create a topic called "AMD is great, Intel sucks" where people can express their admiration to one vendor and their hatred towards the other because it surely looks like we're missing it.

Intel did screw up. AMD has been executing well lately. I'm sorry if you don't like facts.

I don't think any rational person hates Intel and wants them to fail. We have seen what happens when there is weak competition. I don't think many are feeling too bad about Intel at the moment because of how they abused their position for years. If Intel had a Bulldozer moment and AMD became the bad guy, believe me people's opinions would change fast.

 

[yeshua]

Intel did screw up. AMD has been executing well lately. I'm sorry if you don't like facts.

I don't think any rational person hates Intel and wants them to fail. We have seen what happens when there is weak competition. I don't think many are feeling too bad about Intel at the moment because of how they abused their position for years. If Intel had a Bulldozer moment and AMD became the bad guy, believe me people's opinions would change fast.

I love facts. I don't like the facts being shoved in every thread every day. We've known about Intel issues with the 10nm node for four years now. How much rampant fanboyism is enough? Can we please go back to discussing CPUs and products instead of discussing companies and their failures? Or extremely dubious marketwatch opinions about AMD? What is this site even? How does it relate to CPUs and overclocking? Or should we rename the "CPUs and Overclocking" subforum to "Intel has failed, AMD is great again"? And how cheap your words are about competition if instead of admitting that the forum has become less technical and more damning you're again repeating the same old inanities. God, that's so ridiculously pathetic it's just cringeworthy.

Speaking of Bulldozer. I've followed the battle between AMD and Intel for over 25 years now. AMD has always been favoured no matter how much it screwed up because people just love the underdog. People even vindicated the FX-8150 CPU which was simply a failure: https://www.newegg.com/amd-fx-series-fx-8150/p/N82E16819103960 - see, it's rated 5 out of five despite the fact that it devoured power like crazy and wasn't close enough to Intel CPUs at the time at any metric.

Have you ever visited the WCCFtech comments sections? AMD fanboys want Intel to fail hard. And they also hate NVIDIA even though r/AMD is full of people who have been burnt by Navi hard. You can't imagine how many people have Navi GPUs which are ridiculously unstable (BSODs, black screens, slow downs, crashes, etc.) Do we have a single tech site covering these issues? No. Talk about bias.

Spoiler: FX-8150 power consumption

I'm gonna finish with "AMD is great no matter what" just because it's what you're expected to say even on AnandTech.




Use of the word Fanboy, is not allowed.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[DrMrLordX]

I love facts. I don't like the facts being shoved in every thread every day.

Then what do you want? Crickets?

 

[Furious_Styles]

I love facts. I don't like the facts being shoved in every thread every day. We've known about Intel issues with the 10nm node for four years now. How much rampant fanboyism is enough? Can we please go back to discussing CPUs and products instead of discussing companies and their failures? Or extremely dubious marketwatch opinions about AMD? What is this site even? How does it relate to CPUs and overclocking? Or should we rename the "CPUs and Overclocking" subforum to "Intel has failed, AMD is great again"? And how cheap your words are about competition if instead of admitting that the forum has become less technical and more damning you're again repeating the same old inanities. God, that's so ridiculously pathetic it's just cringeworthy.

Speaking of Bulldozer. I've followed the battle between AMD and Intel for over 25 years now. AMD has always been favoured no matter how much it screwed up because people just love the underdog. People even vindicated the FX-8150 CPU which was simply a failure: https://www.newegg.com/amd-fx-series-fx-8150/p/N82E16819103960 - see, it's rated 5 out of five despite the fact that it devoured power like crazy and wasn't close enough to Intel CPUs at the time at any metric.

Have you ever visited the WCCFtech comments sections? AMD fanboys want Intel to fail hard. And they also hate NVIDIA even though r/AMD is full of people who have been burnt by Navi hard. You can't imagine how many people have Navi GPUs which are ridiculously unstable (BSODs, black screens, slow downs, crashes, etc.) Do we have a single tech site covering these issues? No. Talk about bias.

Spoiler: FX-8150 power consumption

I'm gonna finish with "AMD is great no matter what" just because it's what you're expected to say even on AnandTech.

I agree this forum does seem to have a bit of angst toward intel. Discussing AMD stock prices and valuation is kind of comical. However I'm sure there are fools out there who think $900 tesla stock price also makes total sense.

I will give one piece of advice to everyone and that's ignore marketwatch, motley fool, seeking alpha, etc. articles because 99% of them are junk.

 

[Thunder 57]

I love facts. I don't like the facts being shoved in every thread every day. We've known about Intel issues with the 10nm node for four years now. How much rampant fanboyism is enough? Can we please go back to discussing CPUs and products instead of discussing companies and their failures? Or extremely dubious marketwatch opinions about AMD? What is this site even? How does it relate to CPUs and overclocking? Or should we rename the "CPUs and Overclocking" subforum to "Intel has failed, AMD is great again"? And how cheap your words are about competition if instead of admitting that the forum has become less technical and more damning you're again repeating the same old inanities. God, that's so ridiculously pathetic it's just cringeworthy.

Speaking of Bulldozer. I've followed the battle between AMD and Intel for over 25 years now. AMD has always been favoured no matter how much it screwed up because people just love the underdog. People even vindicated the FX-8150 CPU which was simply a failure: https://www.newegg.com/amd-fx-series-fx-8150/p/N82E16819103960 - see, it's rated 5 out of five despite the fact that it devoured power like crazy and wasn't close enough to Intel CPUs at the time at any metric.

Have you ever visited the WCCFtech comments sections? AMD fanboys want Intel to fail hard. And they also hate NVIDIA even though r/AMD is full of people who have been burnt by Navi hard. You can't imagine how many people have Navi GPUs which are ridiculously unstable (BSODs, black screens, slow downs, crashes, etc.) Do we have a single tech site covering these issues? No. Talk about bias.

Spoiler: FX-8150 power consumption

You're not going to make any friends by shouting fanboyism and calling mods biased. Who are you to claim the forum has become less technical when you have been participating less than a year? The only thing cringeworthy here is the nonsense you are spewing.

Show me a CPU that has a low rating. I don't think I'eve ever seen one. People who buy these things trend to rate them highly to help them feel good about their purchasing decision.

The WCCFTech comment section is just toxic and should be avoided. There are probably more NVIDIA fans than AMD fans. Hardly any Intel fans though it seems. If that Navi stuff you said were even half true it would be all over the credible websites. Believe it or not, there is not some grand conspiracy among the tech websites to hide AMD failures under the rug. The fact that you would even suggest that makes me question how sincere you are in all of this.

I see you just added this:

I'm gonna finish with "AMD is great no matter what" just because it's what you're expected to say even on AnandTech.

Jeez, did AMD steal your fidget spinner or something?

 

[coercitiv]

You have to realize that if Intel doesn't solve its issues AMD will quickly ramp up their prices and slow down their progress as was seen with Intel which made very little progress between Sandy Bridge and Sky Lake, and their largely reworked Sunny Cove uArch was the first real break through in many many years. Could people here stop parroting the same things over and over again?

Once upon a time in Anandtech forums, during the great and prosperous days of the empire, when many moderators and posters openly admired Intel's products, some AMD fans kept spewing this competition "nonsense" at them in an effort to educate. Care to know what answers they got in return?

Read this next part carefully, it's a gem of sorts: some very educated people on this forum (no sarcasm here, read literally), both engineers and business analysts, actually attempted to convince us that competition hinders innovation on a global scale due to waste of resources (R&D money and personnel are limited, hence duplicated work is a waste) and inherent race to the bottom in terms of pricing (lower margins, less R&D). Moreover, they were convinced that the lack of competition would not influence product performance since CPU manufacturers would be under constant pressure from the market to release ever faster tech. (or demand would fall of a cliff)

Crazy right? Hindsight makes their arguments ever more ridiculous. What's even more ridiculous is people who believe this forum is AMD biased. This forum as a whole is performance and innovation biased. There will always be rabid fans around, maybe more AMD today just like there were more Intel a few years ago (cuz fashion), but these people do not represent the community. It only seems the community resonates more with them today because of the technological status quo.

Keep in mind this is an open forum. You might be talking to a 70 year old engineer with a background in IT, or a 17 year old enthusiastic student. Some will be fans, some will use hyperbole, some will confuse the silicon tech field with celebrity sport matches.

Keep calm and read the tech threads you're interested in. We don't own any of these brands our allegiance.

 

[Shivansps]

What? there is a TL;DR version?

 

[CHADBOGA]

Once upon a time in Anandtech forums, during the great and prosperous days of the empire, when many moderators and posters openly admired Intel's products, some AMD fans kept spewing this competition "nonsense" at them in an effort to educate. Care to know what answers they got in return?

Read this next part carefully, it's a gem of sorts: some very educated people on this forum (no sarcasm here, read literally), both engineers and business analysts, actually attempted to convince us that competition hinders innovation on a global scale due to waste of resources (R&D money and personnel are limited, hence duplicated work is a waste) and inherent race to the bottom in terms of pricing (lower margins, less R&D). Moreover, they were convinced that the lack of competition would not influence product performance since CPU manufacturers would be under constant pressure from the market to release ever faster tech. (or demand would fall of a cliff)

Crazy right? Hindsight makes their arguments ever more ridiculous. What's even more ridiculous is people who believe this forum is AMD biased. This forum as a whole is performance and innovation biased. There will always be rabid fans around, maybe more AMD today just like there were more Intel a few years ago (cuz fashion), but these people do not represent the community. It only seems the community resonates more with them today because of the technological status quo.

Keep in mind this is an open forum. You might be talking to a 70 year old engineer with a background in IT, or a 17 year old enthusiastic student. Some will be fans, some will use hyperbole, some will confuse the silicon tech field with celebrity sport matches.

Keep calm and read the tech threads you're interested in. We don't own any of these brands our allegiance.

You are absolutely spot on about how ridiculous the people who should have known better were, for suggesting that competition leads to less effective outcomes because of some utopian reasoning that would never apply, but you are mistaken to suggest there is no AMD bias in this forum.

Obviously there aren't many cases where I feel it currently makes sense to buy an Intel CPU(except for mobile), but that doesn't mean a good deal of the AMD advocates, aren't biased towards AMD.

 

[Gideon]

Read this next part carefully, it's a gem of sorts: some very educated people on this forum (no sarcasm here, read literally), both engineers and business analysts, actually attempted to convince us that competition hinders innovation on a global scale due to waste of resources (R&D money and personnel are limited, hence duplicated work is a waste) and inherent race to the bottom in terms of pricing (lower margins, less R&D). Moreover, they were convinced that the lack of competition would not influence product performance since CPU manufacturers would be under constant pressure from the market to release ever faster tech. (or demand would fall of a cliff)

Ahh good old ShintaiDK. Yeah, i also remember him saying that cause Intel has a process lead (in 2015 or so) the other foundries will all die off inevitably. Now obviously a lot of them have, but all? He constantly spinned Intel stuff in the best possible light and AMDs as the worst.

Though I must admit, that there was also a boatload of denial here about how bad the bulldozer even before it was released. Lots of users defended it very rigorously at launch and acouple of years afteer that. Some of them got very angry, if anyone dared to mention how much better Sandy Bridge just is better for a ridiculous amount of tasks. Their statements were especially stupid once you also counted overclocking.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Honestly, I have a lot of pent-up resentment for Intel, due to the way that they coerced industry in their favor in the past ("800 pound gorilla"), to the detriment of innovation and technological progress. (They wanted to keep selling Pentium IV, Ha!)

And seeing what I perceive to be literally new Intel-architecture hardware-related exploits discovered every week, well, it makes me sick, that I ever supported such a technologically-poor company in the past. I have a whole storage unit full of PCs, many of which have older Intel processors, and if they weren't worth much due to their obsolecence, they're basically worthless because of the exploits that the processors have.

And in seeing that, I do see Intel as a virtually worthless CPU company. Until such time as they can come up with a CPU internal architecture that is NOT exploitable (*as AMD's Zen architecture appears to be), I will AVOID their products.

Intel == Worthless. (Edit: Meant "to me".) Until they clean up their architecture design, and make it robust in the security dept.

 

[coercitiv]

you are mistaken to suggest there is no AMD bias in this forum.

What I said is there is no more AMD bias on the forum today than there was Intel bias a few years ago. We always had fans from both camps, but the tech status quo dictates who gets to be more vocal. The forum tends to resonate with arguments for the brand with better products. Look at the GPU forum: would you say there is more AMD bias there than Nvidia? At some point it all got so heated up they had to split the GPU section in half.

I'm convinced that once Intel launches something worthy, the forum will shift from this one sided shell bombardment to a more even exchange. Maybe some of the old guard will make a come-back as well. Kinda miss some of them.

The irony is the hardcore AMD fans were used to the battering, some of the other folk were not.

PS: look at the rising Apple "bias" in the forums, the power in those phones is just too alluring.

 

[yeshua]

Honestly, I have a lot of pent-up resentment for Intel, due to the way that they coerced industry in their favor in the past ("800 pound gorilla"), to the detriment of innovation and technological progress. (They wanted to keep selling Pentium IV, Ha!)

And seeing what I perceive to be literally new Intel-architecture hardware-related exploits discovered every week, well, it makes me sick, that I ever supported such a technologically-poor company in the past. I have a whole storage unit full of PCs, many of which have older Intel processors, and if they weren't worth much due to their obsolecence, they're basically worthless because of the exploits that the processors have.

And in seeing that, I do see Intel as a virtually worthless CPU company. Until such time as they can come up with a CPU internal architecture that is NOT exploitable (*as AMD's Zen architecture appears to be), I will AVOID their products.

Intel == Worthless. Until they clean up their architecture design, and make it robust in the security dept.

Ice Lake has just one more HW vulnerability than AMD: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transient_execution_CPU_vulnerabilities

They have already fixed eight and I'm quite sure TGL will be comparable to AMD if not better. In no way older Intel CPUs have become worthless and as many tests show in real life scenarios all the mitigations applied mean less than 10% performance loss which can be hardly perceived unless your workflow is running benchmarks all day long. I have two Intel based PCs which work fine and one of them is 13 years old and it's perfectly capable.

I'm going to ask if we have a technical forum here where people are supposed to be knowledgable, unbiased and factual? Then why "Intel == worthless" even though Ice Lake has a better IPC than Zen 2? Why wortless if Zen 2 desktop CPUs have an idle power consumption which is up to ten (!) times higher than of Intel's despite being produced using a much better node? How can a company which invented the x86 instruction set in the first place be called worthless?

Why so many exaggerations and falsehoods?

Again, why are we discussing this useless article from God knows where? Should we create a topic on every inanity spelled on the internet in regard to either Intel or AMD?

 

[VirtualLarry]

I don't like the facts being shoved in every thread every day.

and as many tests show in real life scenarios all the mitigations applied mean less than 10% performance loss which can be hardly perceived unless your workflow is running benchmarks all day long.

Intel's Mitigation For CVE-2019-14615 Graphics Vulnerability Obliterates Gen7 iGPU Performance - Phoronix

www.phoronix.com

But the open-source continuation of Enemy Territory saw its frame-rate more than halved with its mitigation. With all of the other games tested were very sizable hits to the frame-rates.
When taking the geometric mean of the i7-4790K, the mitigated results for this new vulnerability saw the HD Graphics 4600 performance drop down to 58% the performance prior to mitigating this single vulnerability.

Funny how you don't like facts showed in every thread. Maybe because they counter your biased BS.

Want more? How about TomsHardware?

Intel Loses 5X More Average Performance Than AMD From Mitigations: Report

The hardware reviews and news website Phoronix has found that Intel's security mitigations for all exploits since Spectre reduces performance by 16% on average, and even more with Hyper-Threading disabled.

www.tomshardware.com

"If looking at the geometric mean for the tests run today, the Intel systems all saw about 16% lower performance out-of-the-box now with these default mitigations and obviously even lower if disabling Hyper Threading for maximum security. The two AMD systems tested saw a 3% performance hit with the default mitigations."

Why so many exaggerations and falsehoods?

Maybe you should answer that question yourself. Or accuse both Phoronix and TomsHardware of lying.