DrMrLordX
Lifer
- Apr 27, 2000
- 22,027
- 11,607
- 136
The only one with single channel is the Lenovo Ideapad 330, all the rest is dual channel...
https://geizhals.de/?cat=nb&xf=9690_Raven+Ridge
I haven't looked at any German sites recently, but I did look at Dell's desktop lineup, and they still haven't put AM4 Raven Ridge in any of their systems, for anything. All you can get is Stoney Ridge, an A10-9700 (yes, that's the only BR they sell), or Ryzen. And it's all 1x8GB by default. I didn't look seriously at their notebooks, mind.
To get back OT no sure that Intel s quasi unlawfull behaviour wont backfire at some point, server CPUs discount here are not made at the OEM level but at the retail one, as if Bestbuy would make a discount paid by Intel on a laptop to a consumer that would want to buy a Raven Ridge equipped laptop..
As others have articulated here, backroom deals seem to be de rigueur in the server world. The only thing that can/will stop Intel from shutting down EPYC sales may well be their inability to serve the market with product. People are not going to care what deals Intel can offer them if they are looking at months worth of delays to get access to hardware.
ARM is almost non-existent at the moment and has other issues such as the switch from x86 to ARM which might frighten some companies so I'm not sure Intel has to offer anything hereOTOH, as we all know, Intel heavily subsidized companies that took Intel chips for tablets.
I was thinking about the historical RISC players in the server market (MIPS, POWER, SPARC, etc.). But after all they might have collapsed just because they were too expansive and didn't (couldn't) properly react to Intel prices, even official prices.
Remember what happened to Qualcomm? They came out big with an impressive first-effort chip, only for Qualcomm to bag on the entire operation and shut it down due to cost concerns. It looked like they were ready to compete (alongside Cavium, albeit with chips that were sufficiently dissimilar that the two required different support within the Linux kernel to function properly). Then all of a sudden, splat, no more Qualcomm server chips. The funny thing is that the server chip was probably the first thing Hock Tan would have cut from the operational budget had Broadcom bought out Qualcomm. When the Feds killed that buyout, it looked like the server chip had a chance of making at run on the server market. Nope! Didn't happen. Now it's down to Cavium.
But between Cavium, MIPS, IBM POWER, and whatever is left of SPARC, I would give Cavium either the best or second best chance of taking share from x86 in the server market. And I would only say second best when taking OpenPOWER into account.
TBH, the biggest market for this kind of cpu is cloud providers, and they already have major discount, and intel also sold it directly to them.
Hard to tell. ODM sales are shrouded in mystery. A lot of the cloud providers get their hardware this way.
AFAIK, the 14nm >10nm transition was started and caused a few fabs to be in the process of being upgraded plus chipsets are starting to being fabbed on 14nm. Rumor (?) has it that Intel will be using TSMC for some product.
This 10nm fiasco is a lot more convoluted than just a lack of 10nm CPUs.
edit:
Also, the last 14nm process for Coffee Lake is rumored to be less dense than previous versions to sustain higher clocks. Result is less die/wafer. I suspect the latest 14nm process is even less dense for the i9 5GHz clocks.
I was aware of the density issue, but still, Intel should have had all their 32nm and 22nm capacity switched to 14nm by now. If Intel is relying on "low density" 14nm for their future Xeons (Cascade Lake, etc) then they are getting fewer dice per wafer. In fact, Intel seems to be relying on 14nm++/14nm+++ for everything now . . .
And I was not aware that they had actually cut down on the number of fabs they had tooled for 14nm as a part of their botched 10nm rollout. What a fiasco.
Virtually all of their products are on one node now, this is the first time in recent history this has been the case for Intel. Plus the die sizes of products are getting bigger; they sell quad cores when they used to sell duals for instance; Skylake Server is considerably bigger than Broadwell-EP..
See above, though I will repeat that Intel "should have" been just fine if all their 32nm and 22nm capacity had switched to 14nm by now. Seems like they were not prepared to lean on the 14nm node for this long.
