Ajay
Lifer
- Jan 8, 2001
- 15,448
- 7,858
- 136
His net worth is something like $100B. I'd of gotten up there and done that act for less.lol Balmer did a line before he went up on stage no doubt.
His net worth is something like $100B. I'd of gotten up there and done that act for less.lol Balmer did a line before he went up on stage no doubt.
Well macs are 10% of the computer market so even if apple isn't a threat to x86 thats still a sizeable chunk of money not going into intel anymore.Intel isn't competing with Apple.
Well macs are 10% of the computer market so even if apple isn't a threat to x86 thats still a sizeable chunk of money not going into intel anymore.
Link broken. Kind of an odd site anyway.Please share what you think the probability is it launches in October. WCCF said it won't, I don't think there is any other source.
The rumors are for an announcement in late October and availability in Nov.Please share what you think the probability is it launches in October. WCCF said it won't, I don't think there is any other source.
People overhype Apple anyways. They don’t see to understand that the whole reason Apple chips appear to perform so well is that Apple uses a hybrid design similar to ADL-S (among other things). Apple has an efficiency advantage, but most of it comes from being on TSMC 5nm. My iPhone 13 Pro Max scores 1740/4809 in Geekbench, which is roughly where a Core i7-1185G7 would score, the Apple chip having 2 big and 4 small cores, and the Intel chip having 4 big cores.A15 is a dud, CPU-wise, and Intel and AMD aren't that far behind to begin with. Intel will have a solid peak ST performance lead with Golden Cove already. Perf/watt will still be an issue, I suppose.
Not even a dent in revenue. Apple has 10% of the marketshare currently, but most of those machines have Intel inside. At our company, for example, we are evaluating the M1, but thus far we have no incentive to use it. Future laptops may end up being Linux machines on x86. In our case, it is the desire to use the same platform for development as production. Apple doesn’t make server hardware, so…Well macs are 10% of the computer market so even if apple isn't a threat to x86 thats still a sizeable chunk of money not going into intel anymore.
Please share what you think the probability is it launches in October. WCCF said it won't, I don't think there is any other source.
On the plus side - it appears that the answer includes the phase "real soon now"; so, not much wait time left.The rumors are for an announcement in late October and availability in Nov.
Announce Oct 27, Available Nov 19 rumor: https://wccftech.com/intel-12th-gen...z690-motherboards-launching-on-19th-november/
Nov 4 rumor: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/msi-spills-possible-alder-lake-launch-date
Nope. AVX-512 is still physically there. It looks more like Intel didn't want the bad PR about suggesting if you want AVX-512 you need to disable the small cores.
No. That would be stupid. Future HEDT - maybe.
Any takers for the bet that AVX-512 might become a licensed feature in consumer CPUs?
Initially this Software Defined Silicon support appears to be focused on Xeon processors as opposed to license/upgrade features for Intel Core desktop/mobile processors. Yes, a decade ago Intel tried a similar approach in the consumer space with the Intel Upgrade Service that was short-lived and never saw Linux support.
No. That would be stupid. Future HEDT - maybe.
AVX-512 isn't something that everyone needs. For those who do, something like $50 might be worth it.No. That would be stupid. Future HEDT - maybe.
1) As a person who's computer fried in a power outage this year, in the middle of a graphics card shortage, having integrated graphics in a new CPU was wonderful. I didn't have to wait months or pay hundreds of dollars more than I wanted. I would never have purchased a rocket lake chip otherwise, but with no GPUs available, rocket lake it was. A computer with an Intel 11700 was $300 cheaper than the cheapest AMD computer that I could get immediately.Something that has bothered me for the past decade or so with Intel is their insistence on putting IGP in ALL of their non HEDT SKUs, whether it's enabled or not.
I think you are confusing AMD's use of TSMC's better process with benefits of no integrated graphics. I don't think many people would agree that AMD is doing well because of their lack of integrated graphics on most of their chips. AMD is doing well since TSMC's current process is far better than Intel's and AMD chips were well designed for that fact.I didn't say necessarily have NO CPUs with integrated graphics. Just that I think AMD's approach is better overall, and being able to choose by Mobo would be better still.
And designing multiple CPU lines isn't asking too much. AMD does it. Intel does it. This would just be a different approach. And no, having more cores doesn't immediately mean latency, unless you want to argue 11900k has worse latency than 11600k for example. Even per core makes no sense as a complaint because of the very granular per core clock controllability.
IGP as a die space hog is not without its own drawbacks. And on apples to apples comparison, you can see what those are (eg; Zen 5600X vs 5600G).
Even if you do absolutely nothing with the added die space other than add cache, that's low hanging fruit and pays major dividends. AMD had to cripple the cache in their Zen3 APUs to get it to fit the IGP.
Like everything else in life, nothing is really free, and there are tradeoffs in everything. I think Intel's overly stack wide decision to saddle everything with IGP, particularly at the cost of other potential progress from 2nd to 11th gen consumer SKUs is regrettable.
AMD did it better, and I think that's been fairly well shown by their product stacks. The criticism for AMD has been how poorly some of their products have been made available on that front by shortages and delays/slow to market. The Zen3 APUs were OEM only for far too long, and they also have really ceded value segments to Intel almost in their entirety, which is a risky proposition in terms of abandoning market segments.
Is AMD not going full APU lineup with Zen 4 like Intel?AMD didn't saddle mainline Zens with a huge amount of die space and transistors for graphics a lot of their customers didn't need. No, they did it right with a few APU products on that side of things, and didn't cripple their entire lineup like Intel did.
Is AMD not going full APU lineup with Zen 4 like Intel?
I've always thought that AMD should have included a basic video block on their chipset. Maybe 3 CU's, and an equivalent to quicksynch. It would have made their initial offerings more palatable to OEM's.I hope not, that woupd artificially cap their potential. I do beliece more IGP options are good to have. More options period.
I've always thought that AMD should have included a basic video block on their chipset. Maybe 3 CU's, and an equivalent to quicksynch. It would have made their initial offerings more palatable to OEM's.
If Zen4 is going the APU route as some leaks suggest, the GPU is going to be situated in the IOD. CPU chiplet area won't be affected. I hope the same will happen for Intel starting with Meteor Lake, in the sense that they'll decouple the GPU block from the CPU. (obviously keeping the iGPU for most consumers).Is AMD not going full APU lineup with Zen 4 like Intel?
Intel is on the path of decoupling them. They did it in the past in limited ways (for example, the Kaby Lake G chips). But it is also in Intel's long term plans for most chips. I just don't know if Meteor Lake is the start of it. They've been talking about it since ~2017 (https://newsroom.intel.com/newsroom...3/Murthy-Renduchintala-2017-Manufacturing.pdf), so it isn't something Intel is just jumping right into.I hope the same will happen for Intel starting with Meteor Lake, in the sense that they'll decouple the GPU block from the CPU. (obviously keeping the iGPU for most consumers).