I certainly can adjust outlooks. But, I don't need to.
You are missing my point. My point is that you were absolutely certain that AMD can go only up, dismissing any reason that AMD could go down. Now you seem to be absolutely certain that AMD will go down, dismissing any reason that AMD could go up. You are overly confident (which is why I included that last quote of yours) and thus you have to continuously flip/flop from one viewpoint to another.
If your outlook includes uncertainty (less confidence), then your outlook doesn't need to flip/flop. My outlook that includes good and bad about a stock gets tweaked slightly as data comes and goes. Your outlook appears like a fish out of water flopping around aimlessly.
This only makes sense to me if AMD is looking to spin off RTG in not too distant future.
Why?This only makes sense to me if AMD is looking to spin off RTG in not too distant future.
The most interesting thing about all this is that we may finally get a good comparison of competing nodes. It also seems to indicate that Intel's foundry capability is getting a bit more sophisticated.
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.
Isn't intel fabbing for Rockchip anyway?What makes you think Intel is fabbing the Radeon chip? They could just be buying them from AMD like any other OEM.
Plus given how unique the solution is, it won't be directly comparable for power anyway.
Isn't intel fabbing for Rockchip anyway?
You are correct. Per AnandtechWhat makes you think Intel is fabbing the Radeon chip? They could just be buying them from AMD like any other OEM.
Plus given how unique the solution is, it won't be directly comparable for power anyway.
The agreement between AMD and Intel is that Intel is buying chips from AMD, and AMD is providing a driver support package like they do with consoles. There is no cross-licensing of IP going on
it can basically be confirmed that EMIB is only being used between the GPU and the HBM2. The distance between the CPU and GPU is too far for EMIB, so is likely just PCIe through the package which is a mature implementation.
This isn't RR. Full fat Vega is 484 mm^2, like someone who posted Chinese rumors - the GPU would be ~200mm^2, add another 100mm^2 for the HBM and you get over 400mm^2 for CPU(4+2)+GPU+HBM2. No chance of fitting that in the LGA1151 package.Who says it will be that big? RR isn't that big.
You are correct. Per Anandtech
So they are selling them graphics chips with an open HBM2 interface. Also mentioned in Anandtech's updated article
So this probably a Vega 24, 1506 shader chip with HBM2 interface. Intel, instead of putting into an AIB like other partners, will instead throw it on an interposer with a PCIE link to a CPU.
Also telling is that this might be what we see released in the not so distant future to replace the RX 580. A Vega 24 with 4GB HBM2.
the real competition Intel is afraid of might be ARM, not Nvidia
there's always been rumors that Apple could go to a full custom ARM product stack. This could be Intel's desperate attempt to stave that off by addressing their main weakness, one that Apple has always been unhappy about
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.
This is a solid win for RTG. This is a solid win for AMD as a whole.
Yeah. The drivers better be good, because switchable graphics can be a pain.
I don't think you understand what's really going on. AMD might be indirectly killing off Intel's IGP development, making Intel dependent on integrating an AMD GPU into future products. This will payoff in a couple years massively.
What are the pros and cons of this compared to a traditional discrete graphic card in a laptop 45w form factor?
Pros:
Less power.
Less board space.
Con:
More Expensive.
I think the benefits of Kaby G with EMIB is z height. Volta will probably provide better performance at same power. But i think fitting a Volta chip with similar performance to Kaby G in an ultrathin <= 15mm is probably difficult. btw I am sure this chip was built for Apple. Its almost definitely going to be found in 2018 iMacs and Macbook Pros.Great to see an iGPU really being pushed of course, but I'm not remotely sure about the less power bit for iso performance.
From that leak, the power draw etc it is roughly comparable to Pascal. Great, except that the timing will put it vs Volta, and it'll be a chunk behind that. You'll have to really, really want the single chip solution.
(Or love AMD, as per Apple ).
24CUs would be 1536SPs, correct?
I think the benefits of Kaby G with EMIB is z height. Volta will probably provide better performance at same power. But i think fitting a Volta chip with similar performance to Kaby G in an ultrathin <= 15mm is probably difficult. btw I am sure this chip was built for Apple. Its almost definitely going to be found in 2018 iMacs and Macbook Pros.
At best Volta GV107 chip, which will compete with Vega 24 will have performance between GTX 1060 and GTX 980 Ti.I think the benefits of Kaby G with EMIB is z height. Volta will probably provide better performance at same power. But i think fitting a Volta chip with similar performance to Kaby G in an ultrathin <= 15mm is probably difficult. btw I am sure this chip was built for Apple. Its almost definitely going to be found in 2018 iMacs and Macbook Pros.