Then here's a similar 9900K score from 5.2.2:There are enough differences between version 5.0 and 5.2 such that comparing the two is not appropriate. I recall reading about it in the Geekbench release notes.
It does indeed. Because GB results are all over the place for the 10900K, this 5.0 GHz RKL sample achieves anywhere between 4 and 12% better ST result than the wide variety of 10900K results @ 5.1 GHz (multicore will obviously be worse than a 10900K, no question there). While this is nice, The compromises that had to be made for 14nm mean that Rocket Lake's IPC gains are nowhere near the hoped for 20%.14nm strikes again.
My dear dude, in Charlie's call with that company, he had information about the GPU part being mfg'd at 14nm, not the CPU cores.I know, everyone with some serious thinking expected 10nm from ADL, however Charlie and some other usual suspects tried to defend the 14nm hypothesis till the end: https://www.reddit.com/r/AMD_Stock/comments/hr38ko/_/fy2dji2
It's an awkward situation right now intel is suffering.Wow, this thread is over 3 years old, and we still don't have a 10nm desktop chip.
by that time? nah, yields were too awful for that. remember cannon lake. if ryzen didnt happen intel could have waited to 2018 and release another 4 cores 8 threads 14nm+ 8700k but with 5ghz single core turbo, and in 2019 another 4 cores 8 threads 14nm++ 9700k with 5,2GHz sc, and 5GHz all core turbo... and maybe a 4C/8T 10700K tiger lake-s in 2020...If there wasn't any Zen1 in 2017, intel might had released 10nm desktop chip SKL-based i7-8700k at then which is only has 4C8T@4Ghz to continue fooling comsumer.
Well, in light of this delay...
It's alright so long as he is a god in his own mind. Seriously though, if Intel starts to falter as an IDM and if their TSMC-made dGPUs are at least moderately successful, that kinda puts Raja in the driver's seat.Yeah but you're talking about the same Raja who let a Vega tease video through with 'POOR VOLTA' in it.
Honestly I don't know, Charlie-but-not-Charlie?I'm really curious, who claimed ADL would be on 14nm?
With the CTO becoming Gary Patton, finally getting the position he originally had at GlobalFoundries.I think Michael C. Mayberry will be the next Intel CEO because he looks just like Tim Cook and that would make investors feel better
Why Raja though? He appears to have steered DG1, DG2, and Ponte Vecchio to outside fabs successfully, which is probably the direction Intel needs to take anyway. You would think anyone pushing hard to keep manufacturing in-house would be losing power.It looks like Raja will be gone within a quarter or two... There is a power struggle at intel and Murthy is winning(according to both Jim and Charlie). 7nm is a worse disaster then 10nm and 10nm is seriously under performing. It all looks like AMD will be pummeling intel next 2 generations at least, which is sad for us consumers.
Well, while tit-for-tat between Intel and AMD would be exiting, currently Intel still make over 98% of the x86 profit (2019 net income: Intel $21,000 million, AMD $341 million).It looks like Raja will be gone within a quarter or two... There is a power struggle at intel and Murthy is winning(according to both Jim and Charlie). 7nm is a worse disaster then 10nm and 10nm is seriously under performing. It all looks like AMD will be pummeling intel next 2 generations at least, which is sad for us consumers.
Yes, in a rational world you would think so but then who says a power struggle is rational?You would think anyone pushing hard to keep manufacturing in-house would be losing power.
Bad assumption.After the Geekbench v5 result it is easy to say this. He should have posted this before it appeared. Pretty sure this is just based on the Geekbench v5 result which is risky to conclude based on only one benchmark. TDP is known as well and 5 Ghz lol, after the 5 Ghz Geekbench leak not so difficult to predict this.
You are a fool. Mercury research has had AMD at 14.5% of the x86 market in 2018 and 15.5% in 2019. They are making headway in OEMs. And Intel lost a large customer in losing Apple. Added together, you are wrong in the way you calculate market share AND in your estimate of what AMD needs to do.Well, while tit-for-tat between Intel and AMD would be exiting, currently Intel still make over 98% of the x86 profit (2019 net income: Intel $21,000 million, AMD $341 million).
So I wouldn't worry about them yet, plus I think for AMD to truly be able to deliver multi-year projects and more variants, AMD would have to grab at least 20% of the x86 profit for a few years. That would be good for consumer and PC enthusiasts, not so good for shareholders.
In the end it is money and how many (few) employees they have which determine that how many die variations the do - with more employees we might not get the near one year delay between Zen2 and the APUs, or get proper 4C dies for the low end, try-outs of chiplets design combining CPU and GPU parts, etc.)
Yes, in a rational world you would think so but then who says a power struggle is rational?
While I doubt that Intel is as colourful as Apple at one stage (I'm thinking of the infamous pink vs blue when deciding on the next OS in the later 80s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copland_(operating_system)#Pink_and_Blue), I'm sure with Intel's manufacturing being so huge there are lots of egos, perks, and positions at stake if they were to fab stuff elsewhere.
Thanks!You are a fool. Mercury research has had AMD at 14.5% of the x86 market in 2018 and 15.5% in 2019.
Also absurd. Intel cannot maintain their pricing structure moving forward, meaning there are hard realities coming to investors with their heads in the sand like you.Thanks!
But what does marketshare have to do with profit?
I said that taking in under 2% of the net income in the x86 market, was not enough to have a competitive AMD long-term.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|Discussion [SA] Intel should not launch Ice Lake-SP||CPUs and Overclocking||3|
|News [Intel] Murthy is out||CPUs and Overclocking||7|
|S||Question Taiwan Report: Intel has reached an agreement with TSMC||CPUs and Overclocking||120|
|J||Question Two Intel Desktop CPUs: 2014-era Core i7 vs 2020 (current) Core i3?!||CPUs and Overclocking||9|
|J||Question Intel Q2: 7 nm in bad shape||CPUs and Overclocking||252|