Confirmed by AMD & Intel - Rivals Intel and AMD Team Up on PC Chips to Battle NVidia

[neblogai]

Bollocks. It's a chip going in Macbooks and such. You won't be able to get it anywhere else. It's an OS X product, not a Win10 product. AMD's APUs aren't even supported in that ecosystem. I doubt that you'll see these chips running Win10 (though you might seem some with hacked Linux installs). No consumer or OEM will look at "wintel" APUs as "low cost alternatives" compared to the Mac products featuring these Intel/AMD hybrid chips. They are not alternatives at all, since you can't really do the same thing with them.

If this was a product just for Apple - woudn't it be Apple making the announcement, not the Intel/AMD? To me, this looks like a direct successor (and upgrade) of Intel's high power products with Iris graphics, and sold to everyone. Also, Intel said they will be managing the drivers provided to them by AMD- which would not be needed if this was used just by Apple.

 

[PeterScott]

I still wanna know how this is Intel and AMD taking on Nvidia???

It isn't really, but we live in a clickbait world (with laudable exception of AnandTech).

This is more like a big rollout of EMIB technology, than any kind of integration between AMD and Intel.

As there is apparently no EMIB connection beteen CPU and GPU, and they are not more integrated, than when they sit separately on a laptop MB. PCIe MB traces are the real connection in either case.

 

[maddie]

Sorry, team green here as far as video goes. My 4 boxes have 750ti / 750 / 730 GDDR5 / 710 cards.

Other posters pointed out that this chip will still have the Intel IGP for low power use and would still need the Intel IGP drivers along with the Radeon drivers.

Now, that doesn't make any sense to me, but that is apparently the case.

This, if it becomes the norm, is the first of a new approach to IC complexity. One of the benefits mentioned years ago was disintegrating SOCs and reassembling them with interposer tech. EMIB is one type of interposer, as the EMIB is a mini interposer embedded in the organic substrate.

If successful financially, then we will most assuredly see an expanded series of products. Right now, client CPUs devote around 50% of their area to IGP. I can't see this continuing if this approach becomes widespread as the waste of die space is uneconomical. At most the integrated IGP will only need to run a couple desktops and probably decode video. Any more challenging task will use the off die GPU. This leads to a much smaller CPU die.

Intel must be thinking of 10nm and smaller nodes with their yield challenges. This is merely the transition period.

 

[neblogai]

They are allowing Intel to get a position in a market niche they could have all to themselves with Ryzen and Radeon on MCM. They are settling for OEM margins over selling their own solution into this market. Yes, an OEM deal, but not just another one. It serves interests of Radeon at the expense of the CPU group at AMD. They are effectively acting as a separate company at cross purposes with the rest of AMD.

AMD can always compete with cheaper (less exotic) configurations. I see this intended for most expensive and powerful ultrabooks- where Intel is sure to have longer battery life for tasks like playing video compared to Ryzen Mobile, and remains the obvious choice with AMD graphics or without.

 

[senseamp]

What if AMD & Ryzen already lost this OEM (Apple) bid for the CPU? Recuperating the GPU portion instead of a complete loss is still a great gain.

It would not have been a complete loss, since AMD was the only one who had the pieces in place to deliver this solution. But they have a bottom feeder mentality, so they settled for scraps off Intel's table.

 

[PeterScott]

What if AMD & Ryzen already lost this OEM (Apple) bid for the CPU? Recuperating the GPU portion instead of a complete loss is still a great gain.

But Apple only uses AMD GPUs already, so they really can't lose the GPU sales, since they have a monopoly on them.

 

[zinfamous]

But Apple only uses AMD GPUs already, so they really can't lose the GPU sales, since they have a monopoly on them.

Except in the parts where they were using Iris chips. Now, those are AMD sales that didn't exist before.

 

[PeterScott]

Except in the parts where they were using Iris chips. Now, those are AMD sales that didn't exist before.

Very unlikely that this would replace Iris. This is much more expensive, uses more power, and more board space than Iris. This is not an Iris replacement.

This is a replacement for current dGPU designs.

 

[maddie]

Very unlikely that this would replace Iris. This is much more expensive, uses more power, and more board space than Iris. This is not an Iris replacement.

This is a replacement for current dGPU designs.

For posterity.

 

[jpiniero]

For posterity.

The 13" MBP uses the 28W Iris Plus, with no dGPU. That would be tough to think they could get the power draw down to use both the 18W (?) KBR-H and the extra GPU unless they change the chasis. Which they could I guess but that doesn't seem likely.

Edit: So you would have the 15" MBP, possibly an iMac and also possibly a new Mac Mini.

 

[lobz]

It's definitely bad for AMD. It basically tells every OEM to never bother with Raven Ridge because you can always get something similar or better from intel. Maybe this is why they has so few OEM wins with raven ridge - OEMs already knew they could blow it off and wait for an intel chip with AMD gpu in same package.


I wrote $12 Nov 10 calls on all my shares. Hope I get exercised ASAP. I want off Dr. Su's wild ride.

Would you please enlighten us all, what on earth does RR to do with a chip that has a more than 1.5 times higher TFLOP graphics solution, HBM, higher power draw and an uncomparably higher price tag?

 

[lobz]

I wrote them because i want out of AMD NOW, but I want to sell at 12$. How do you suggest I do that today?


There are tons of other companies I can invest in that won't sell their own competitive advantage away to their biggest competitors for a slight uptick in revenue.

if only AMD had you as an advisor...

peace on Earth...

 

[senseamp]

It's opportunity cost. AMD could have made this MCM themselves and controlled this niche where Intel couldn't touch them. Instead they enabled their competitor for OEM margins or even worse, Apple subsistence margins. Apple has their own GPU team, so once they test the waters with AMD's money, if the volumes are good enough, they can replace them at any time.

 

[FIVR]

Would you please enlighten us all, what on earth does RR to do with a chip that has a more than 1.5 times higher TFLOP graphics solution, HBM, higher power draw and an uncomparably higher price tag?

Read the whole thread and you would have already read why Raven Ridge's prospects are hurt by this release. It diminishes AMD OEM and customer mindshare. AMD is basically telling everyone "our chips are for cheap craptops, buy intel chips if you want high-end stuff".

 

[lobz]

Read the whole thread and you would have already read why Raven Ridge's prospects are hurt by this release. It diminishes AMD OEM and customer mindshare. AMD is basically telling everyone "our chips are for cheap craptops, buy intel chips if you want high-end stuff".

I've read it. No post sheds any light on why is that anything more than your imagination - or to put it politely, your _very subjective_ opinion.

 

[FIVR]

I've read it. No post sheds any light on why is that anything more than your imagination - or to put it politely, your _very subjective_ opinion.

I'm sorry that you can't understand why AMD giving away its biggest competitive advantage to their biggest competitor could possibly be a bad thing. Your basically non-sensical, insulting and completely uninformative reply says more about you than it does about me.

 

[lobz]

I'm sorry that you can't understand why AMD giving away its biggest competitive advantage to their biggest competitor could possibly be a bad thing. Your basically non-sensical, insulting and completely uninformative reply says more about you than it does about me.

Possibly? Yes. You've touted the word 'definitely'. I see no convincing argument supporting it would be a greater danger than an opportunity.

 

[FIVR]

Possibly? Yes. You've touted the word 'definitely'. I see no convincing argument supporting it would be a greater danger than an opportunity.

It's probable enough in my mind that it does hurt AMD for me to make my own decisions about my investments. I can't say for sure that it will damage AMD and I never said I thought their share price would tank (actually I stated I thought it still might hit $20) but the decision to give intel their gpus as a showcase for intel's EMIB instead of producing their own integrated solution with Ryzen tells me that, at the least, AMD doesn't think they can sell their own chips on the high end market even if they vastly outperform intel's solutions.


Would Intel be able to produce a CPU/GPU+HBM chip integrated with EMIB without AMD? Maybe, with nvidia's help they could... but clearly there is some issue with them working with nvidia on this at this point. What is to stop intel from dropping AMD and using nvidia GPUs next time?


Why didn't AMD integrate Raven Ridge or Pinnacle Ridge with HBM? That solution would perform nearly the same as intel but would use less power, and it would allow AMD to compete on the high end with vastly more powerful notebooks. The only answer I can think of is they don't believe they can sell their own products. That tells me that AMD is acting as a subordinate to intel instead of competitor.


This whole deal stinks of short-term gains being put above brand recognition and marketshare aspirations. When I invested in AMD, I thought they could improve their brand image to the point where they could compete with intel on an equal basis. I saw their share price going as high as $50 by 2019. This deal tells me that will never happen, because AMD would rather piddle around in budget markets and gain a bit a revenue here and there rather than compete head to head with the big boys. So I'm out.

I never told anybody else they should sell nor did I ever say this was guaranteed to lower the share price or destroy AMD. I do think it's definitely bad for AMD in the long run to hurt their mindshare in this manner, but I don't pretend to be infallible. I may be wrong.

 

[Phynaz]

I'm hearing talk that this deal is why RTG was created. Gives Intel the warm and fuzzies that AMD is willing to work with them.

 

[FIVR]

I'm hearing talk that this deal is why RTG was created. Gives Intel the warm and fuzzies that AMD is willing to work with them.

This deal must be great for AMD. We all know how great a supporter of the "red team" you are. Otherwise, why would you use that avatar?

 

[raghu78]

I'm hearing talk that this deal is why RTG was created. Gives Intel the warm and fuzzies that AMD is willing to work with them.

RTG was created to rebuild AMD's graphics business which was in shambles after Nvidia Maxwell generation destroyed AMD's graphics market share . The Intel - AMD semi custom deal is being driven by Apple. I doubt Kaby G will see widespread adoption form PC OEMs. Apple has refused to work with Nvidia and thus their only choice is AMD. Apple tried using Intel graphics GT3e but seems like it just was not good enough. Apple has told Intel to build a PC chip with AMD graphics for their iMacs and Macbook Pros and thats exactly what they have done.

 

[PeterScott]

Why didn't AMD integrate Raven Ridge or Pinnacle Ridge with HBM? That solution would perform nearly the same as intel but would use less power, and it would allow AMD to compete on the high end with vastly more powerful notebooks. The only answer I can think of is they don't believe they can sell their own products. That tells me that AMD is acting as a subordinate to intel instead of competitor.

Because HBM is a niche solution, not a mainstream one, integrating HBM MC into RR/PR would have just been a waste of die space. HBM really only makes sense for GPUs at this time.

 

[raghu78]

Because HBM is a niche solution, not a mainstream one, integrating HBM MC into RR/PR would have just been a waste of die space. HBM really only makes sense for GPUs at this time.

Well said. HBM is not yet ready for high volume mainstream. The memory and packaging technology are not mature and cost effective. I think AMD with its foundry and OSAT partners GF/Amkor/ASE will have a cost effective HBM by 2020 when their 7nm APUs launch.

 

[Phynaz]

RTG was created to rebuild AMD's graphics business which was in shambles after Nvidia Maxwell generation destroyed AMD's graphics market share . The Intel - AMD semi custom deal is being driven by Apple. I doubt Kaby G will see widespread adoption form PC OEMs. Apple has refused to work with Nvidia and thus their only choice is AMD. Apple tried using Intel graphics GT3e but seems like it just was not good enough. Apple has told Intel to build a PC chip with AMD graphics for their iMacs and Macbook Pros and thats exactly what they have done.

This above is all conjecture that you are posting as fact.

 

[PeterScott]

This above is all conjecture that you are posting as fact.

It makes more sense than RTG being created to sell some GPUs to Intel.