Does AMD have any hope against Intel?

[Thala]

Well RT was designed back in their not listening to anyone phase Given the recent outbreaks of seeming sanity, it could be interesting to see what they'd do if they did a RT2, but no real signs of that?

Talking about Windows RT or about Surface RT? If you mean latter, there is the Surface 2, running Windows RT 8.1.

There is nothing inherently wrong with Windows RT, as it provides the full functionality of Windows.
What I was talking about was the signature enforcement for desktop programs, which is purely artificial. This prevents any desktop program from starting, with the exception of Microsoft signed executables as for instance Office, Outlook, PowerShell, Paint, Wordpad etc.
With Windows RT 8.0 there was a hack to circumvent this restriction, but Microsoft closed the hole with the 8.1 update.

Why does it hurt them, if someone is developing desktop programs for RT? Managed .Net 4.0/4.5 would even directly run without recompilation. And there is a C# compiler directly on the device. Isn't it funny, I can develop and compile C# .Net programs on the Surface, but can only execute them on my x86 PC?

 

[ShintaiDK]

http://www.winrtsource.com/2014/10/02/windows-10-rt-confirmed-preview-coming-2015/

Its quite optimistic to conclude an RT OS from that

Windows RT is dead for all OEMs and even for MS it flopped.

I doubt we see more than ARM support via Windows Phone 10.

 

[Abwx]

No, see, the problem with that is that Intel has gone all-in at the low end. Bay Trail-M/D was just the first shot, and as I'm sure people here will agree with, Bay Trail wasn't exactly the world's best chip in graphics (AMD's Kabini and Beema were demonstrably superior in terms of raw performance). Even still, it managed to do some very serious damage to AMD's APU sales, and Intel did so with extremely robust margins on those parts.

You call robust margins a net loss of 75$ per chip.??.

Intel supplied 20% of the mobile W8.1 market with free chips and subsides, that s a 1bn/year market that was locked thank to anti competitive practices, how much would had AMD got from this market considering, as you point it , that they have the best product in this segment, my most cautious estimation was 30% but considering the perf difference they may as well had got 45%.

If we look at their mobile APUs shippement last quarter they decreased by 16%, at the very same time that Intel did give 15 millions chips + 750m subsides, do the maths and you ll know from where their current problem is coming.

 

[Arachnotronic]

You call robust margins a net loss of 75$ per chip.??.

Intel supplied 20% of the mobile W8.1 market with free chips and subsides, that s a 1bn/year market that was locked thank to anti competitive practices, how much would had AMD got from this market considering, as you point it , that they have the best product in this segment, my most cautious estimation was 30% but considering the perf difference they may as well had got 45%.

If we look at their mobile APUs shippement last quarter they decreased by 16%, at the very same time that Intel did give 15 millions chips + 750m subsides, do the maths and you ll know from where their current problem is coming.

Intel isn't "contra-revenu'ing" Bay Trail-M or Bay Trail-D. How many times do I need to explain this?

The losses are on chips sold into tablets because Intel's platforms did not have a competitive platform-level bill of materials. In other words, a $20 Intel chip came with it additional costs that a $20 ARM chip did not, therefore Intel is providing a "subsidy" in order to neutralize that disadvantage.

The disadvantage does not exist in the PC market, ergo no subsidy.

 

[papapapapapapapababy]

To be honest, I want AMD gone. The sooner the better.

I have a huge vendetta against AMD. You see... I had AMD CPUs all my life, my first PC had an Athlon K7... then came the x64 stuff I had that too... Then I upgraded to a Phenom triple-core then to a Phenom II quad, never used an Intel CPU before as I was a huge AMD fan boy.

Then... My life was about to change, I decided to give in and try an Intel CPU for the first time... That CPU would be my i5-760. When I first used it, I was just shocked, utterly shocked, like as if someone took the blindfold away from my eyes and I finally saw the light. Everything was just so much faster and more responsive, games ran better, applications opened faster, everything, literally everything was better.

When the AMD eight-cores came out, literally the week it was released, I decided to buy a new system to support one, the FX-8150, thinking it would wreck the i5-760 with its "eight-awesome-AMD-cores". So when I was so excited to test my new system, I realized how bad it was compared to my older i5-760... Everything was slower, games ran worse, applications loaded slower... I literally wasted almost a thousand dollars on an entirely new system.

To this day, I'm pretty upset and have vowed NEVER to buy an AMD CPU ever again. Second thing I learned was to do extensive research on any product before purchasing, especially if I'm spending a lot of money.

So yes... I hate AMD and I hope it dies in hellfire!

/endrantandlifestory

facepalm... AMD also burned me with "no nore drivers Bs for yr gpu sorry, so i can simpatize" but no reason to be upset, in the past it was a good idea to use amd, maybe in the future they will offer something that dsnt suck ... never say never. i hope they do, intel is not pushing things past movile crap eficient

 

[Abwx]

Intel isn't "contra-revenu'ing" Bay Trail-M or Bay Trail-D. How many times do I need to explain this?

The losses are on chips sold into tablets because Intel's platforms did not have a competitive platform-level bill of materials. In other words, a $20 Intel chip came with it additional costs that a $20 ARM chip did not, therefore Intel is providing a "subsidy" in order to neutralize that disadvantage.

The disadvantage does not exist in the PC market, ergo no subsidy.

I m talking of BTs used in mobile devices not on DTs, 15 millions mobile chips in a quarter amount to 30% of the W8.1 mobile market of this quarter, only a handfull millions are used in Android based devices, this leave 25% of the W8.1 mobile market being flooded by free chips + subsides, and dont tell me that i m off in the number, do a google search about the number of BT using Androisd and the ones using W8.1, you ll find that the former does not even reach 30%.

Looking at Q3 numbers we can se that neither Qualcomm nor Apple or anybody else was impacted by the contra revenue scheme, actualy only AMD saw their mobile offering decreasing so the writing is in the wall whatever what eventual spinners will say, thoses numbers as said point to AMD being the primary target of the contra revenue practices and if you ask me why then it means that you dont pay attention to your own writings and inherent conclusions, actualy without this despicable plan they would be in very safe situation in the short term, mid term being subsequently not wonderfull but sustainable and long term being of course uknown untill they release their next gen products.

 

[Justinbaileyman]

How about this..I will blow every ones minds.. I like both companies and hate both companies equally. "LOL" I have both Intel and Amd systems and it is what it is, they are both just over priced toys. No need to get homicidal on that poor cpu. If you dont like it sell it and move on.The only time I get bent out of shape is, over price gouging as I just cant understand why and how its possible to charge $500-$1000 plus for a Cpu when it only costs a couple bucks to make them Guess you can call me a tight ass. you know what my favorite cpu's are?? the cheapest ones you can overclock the snot out of.Or ones where you can build a whole system for like $100 bucks like say the L5639,G3258,860K,5350. Lately I have been getting into Mini Pc builds like Raspberry Pi and hope to see AMD get into this market cause I think Mini Pc's are going to be the way of the future.Sorry To babble On...

 

[Abwx]

In other words, a $20 Intel chip came with it additional costs that a $20 ARM chip did not, therefore Intel is providing a "subsidy" in order to neutralize that disadvantage.

That s a myth and a really a bad, really bad pretense from Intel s marketing, or rather viral, department.

That s pure BS from Intel, you could do the same devices at same prices using the same hardware, the only difference will be the SoC price.

What are those additional costs that need to be subsided considering that we re talking of SOCs..?.

 

[Arachnotronic]

That s a myth and a really a bad, really bad pretense from Intel s marketing, or rather viral, department.

That s pure BS from Intel, you could do the same devices at same prices using the same hardware, the only difference will be the SoC price.

What are those additional costs that need to be subsided considering that we re talking of SOCs..?.

No, it's not a "myth" -- it's quite literally what Intel has publicly told its investor base.

If Intel is lying then Intel's management team would be committing securities fraud.

Do you think that Intel's executives would commit such fraud and risk jail time over this?

 

[Arachnotronic]

That s a myth and a really a bad, really bad pretense from Intel s marketing, or rather viral, department.

That s pure BS from Intel, you could do the same devices at same prices using the same hardware, the only difference will be the SoC price.

What are those additional costs that need to be subsided considering that we re talking of SOCs..?.

User AtenRa had a very helpful slide to help visualize what this contra-revenue is needed for:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36875551&postcount=853

 

[cytg111]

Here we go again with the brand-fanboism rhetorics, why even

 

[Spawne32]

Here we go again with the brand-fanboism rhetorics, why even

It's even funnier watching the fanbois justify $300+ dollars for a i7 chip claiming that intel would take a loss otherwise.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Well to show how great Intel has been lately, I went from an AMD Athlon x2 3800+ to an Intel i7-860 back in 2009. I am still using that i7-860 playing the latest games with no issue.

 

[Abwx]

User AtenRa had a very helpful slide to help visualize what this contra-revenue is needed for:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36875551&postcount=853

I was to tell you that 500 components that cost individualy a few cts wont make the difference but this slide do it for me, it tell explicitly that the BOM disadvantage is currently 20$, giving the chip for free would already largely negate the ARM advantage, so why the need to add about 70-75$ with each chip.?

Isnt that aknowledgment that the BOM compensation point is moot and that the purpose is to keep one competitor from acquiring massive brand recognition?
Intel knew on November 2013, when they announced contra revenues, that AMD was going to beat them on the mobile offering six months later, Mark Papermaster has been very clear about this during APU 13 in October 2013.

AMD banked a lot on thoses chips, they just didnt imagine that Intel would rely to such a machiavelic plan, out of the 1.2bn $ market locked their share would had been in the 300-600m $ range, enough to get acceptable Q3 numbers and keep on their RD going averagely, the thing is that Intel prefer to lose 3-3.5bn than to se AMD gaining a substancial part of what is the next big W8 market, think about it, and while you are at it you can do an article about the results of thoses contra revenues and their impact on the alleged official targets during Q2-Q3, i guess that you ll be hard pressed to prove that they were impacted the slightest way...

 

[monstercameron]

Intel17 do you really believe this strategy doesn't adversely affect amd in any measurable way?

 

[Abwx]

Intel17 do you really believe this strategy doesn't adversely affect amd in any measurable way?

I checked the corporates results for Q3, none of the supposed targeted firms did suffer the slightest way, Apple did at most lose 1-3 millions tablet sales for H1 2014, Qualcomm got strong growth and profits, their problem is rather LTE licencees that are cheating, and Samsung used Snapdragon 805 anyway, so all Intel pretenses are just bad covers as the only firm that had to suffer dire consequence is AMD, the proof is in the pudding.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

Some exaggeration for dramatic effect but true story. If you only used AMD CPUs all your life, then changed to Intel, you'd understand what I mean by "finally seeing the light".

I'm currently running an OC i5 3570k (after a long run of AMD CPUs from as far back as TBird), with my previous PC being an OC Phenom II X6, and I really don't see much difference in performance. The biggest difference is a few extra FPS in games, but that's about it. I don't share your enthusiasm.

 

[Ryanrenesis]

I'm currently running an OC i5 3570k (after a long run of AMD CPUs from as far back as TBird), with my previous PC being an OC Phenom II X6, and I really don't see much difference in performance. The biggest difference is a few extra FPS in games, but that's about it. I don't share your enthusiasm.

A few extra FPS? The difference in FPS should be as high as 30FPS gain on the i5-3570K over the Phenom II X6, both OC'd.

Here we see 7 max FPS gain and 4 minimum FPS gain from the best OC'd X6 1100T BE compared to the i5-760.

Here we see 20 max FPS gains and 9 minimum FPS gains from the best OC'd 1100T BE to the i5-760.

Mind you those benchmarks are comparing 1st Gen i5 with the Phenom II X6, with FPS being as much as 20 FPS from the BEST X6 overclocked to the i5-760 overclocked. With your 3rd Gen i5, I imagine the FPS gain being much greater than "a few FPS gain". LOL

 

[Abwx]

A few extra FPS? The difference in FPS should be as high as 30FPS gain on the i5-3570K over the Phenom II X6, both OC'd.

Here we see 7 max FPS gain and 4 minimum FPS gain from the best OC'd X6 1100T BE compared to the i5-760.

Here we see 20 max FPS gains and 9 minimum FPS gains from the best OC'd 1100T BE to the i5-760.

Mind you those benchmarks are comparing 1st Gen i5 with the Phenom II X6, with FPS being as much as 20 FPS from the BEST X6 overclocked to the i5-760 overclocked. With your 3rd Gen i5, I imagine the FPS gain being much greater than "a few FPS gain". LOL

.......................

 

[Burpo]

Cherry picking 2 1/2 yr old benchmarks of 1 game?..lololol :biggrin:

 

[Ryanrenesis]

Cherry picking 2 1/2 yr old benchmarks of 1 game?..lololol :biggrin:

Re-reading all my posts it sounds like I've converted from an AMD fanboy to an Intel fanboy.

I honestly didn't mean it to sound like that, but my experience was truly traumatic going from AMD to Intel then back to AMD. So don't blame me

P.S. All Hail Intel ! *hitler salute*

just kidding xD





Kidding or not, Hitler salute isn't every going to fly here.

You need to tone down all of this anti-AMD rhetoric.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[AnandThenMan]

Re-reading all my posts it sounds like I've converted from an AMD fanboy to an Intel fanboy.

I honestly didn't mean it to sound like that, but my experience was truly traumatic going from AMD to Intel then back to AMD. So don't blame me

P.S. All Hail Intel ! *hitler salute*

just kidding xD

I don't even....

 

[erunion]

Its quite optimistic to conclude an RT OS from that

Windows RT is dead for all OEMs and even for MS it flopped.

I doubt we see more than ARM support via Windows Phone 10.

With windows 10 Microsoft will combine windows phone and windows RT, according to long standing rumors.A More recent rumor is that Microsoft will rebrand windows phone to windows mobile.

But you're obviously correct that the Windows on ARM war has already been fought to completion and WinRT isn't coming back.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Intel17 do you really believe this strategy doesn't adversely affect amd in any measurable way?

To the extent that Windows 8.1 tablets took share from Windows 8.1 PCs with AMD processors, AMD may have been affected.

However, most of these Intel powered tablets were Android, not Windows (Intel claims 80/20 mix). And then, of those Windows tablets, how many were 10.1" and above (i.e. netbook/notebook replacement)?

AMD might have been collateral damage as Intel sped up the cannibalization of Windows PCs by Windows tablets, but I don't think it's all that material.

 

[Abwx]

To the extent that Windows 8.1 tablets took share from Windows 8.1 PCs with AMD processors, AMD may have been affected.

Not possible, AMD s DT APUs/CPUs increased last quarter while Intel was flat, hence DT market wasnt cannibalised at all.

However, most of these Intel powered tablets were Android, not Windows (Intel claims 80/20 mix). And then, of those Windows tablets, how many were 10.1" and above (i.e. netbook/notebook replacement)?

Claim is blatant lie, there s much more W8.1 devices than Android dedicated, just check the BT thread if you dont want to google...

AMD might have been collateral damage as Intel sped up the cannibalization of Windows PCs by Windows tablets, but I don't think it's all that material.

Numbers are stubborned, Intel increased mobile shippement substancialy, with said 15 millions free BT, while AMD saw their mobile shippement decreasing by 16%, so they had fewer parts shipped in a market that did increase globally, particularly the cheapest devices, and as already pointed how would be AMD only collateral damage when it s clear that they are the only one that saw their shippement decreasing in the very segment where Intel is flooding the market with their free chips, actualy subsides are needed because just giving the chip would spare only 50-60$ at the end of the chain, that is retail, and this wouldnt be enough to offset the perf difference, a Mullins at 400$ would be much more desirable than a BT at 340-350.

As a clue there s 17" based BT here in France from HP, price without VAT is 290€, this means that it enter the country at less than 200€/250$, such a price wouldnt be possible here without subsides, Intel can spin the things the way they want the numbers says that all their statements and claims are screens for the gullible reader.