I agree. He could have left it at "Alderlake is a great success and we're back in the game". Everything on top of that was just his usual brand of overhype with the chance of underdelivering (*cough* SPR delays *cough*). Contrast that with Lisa Su's style of sandbagging and letting the products speak for themselves.
And the fact that the only things they are clearly in the lead, are gaming and a few single threaded apps, does not make them on top, just "in the game". Not to mention the ecores problems, and the power problem (mostly on the 12900k).
We'll see how the sales numbers look at the end of this quarter because November's sales numbers from Mindfactory didn't look so hot. Budget LGA1700 motherboards aren't fully launched, so if I were Pat, I'd reserve on saying that Alderlake puts me the lead until I knew that it was selling closer to 1:1 with Ryzen.
With Intel's imminent release of CPU's up and down the range, plus finally cheap motherboards, Intel looks poised to take a lot of desktop share away from AMD, whilst AMD is focusing on the server market.
We shall see. I'm not convinced Intel will make enough of a dent in AMD's leads on the desktop side just yet. Zen 4 is right around the corner.
"around the corner" more like "in half a year or more". I bet everybody hopes availability of DDR5 is somewhat better until then. But yeah, interesting times.
Maybe on the budget side? That will hurt Intel more than anything. They aren't touching AMD on the performance/enthusiast side of things. AMD was smart by having 12-16 core SKUs.
Not completely confirmed. Zen 4 is rumored to support DDR4, but the platform is, as of right now, DDR5 only. None of this matters anyway, The DDR5 situation will hopefully look very different when Zen 4 launches, and knowing AMD, they'll work with partners to ensure DDR5 availability.
The only current AMD cpu that one could argue makes more sense than an Intel offering is the 5950x, if you are a serious productivity user.
You are completely ignoring power consumption. Also the 5900X beats the 12900K in many benchmarks, including gaming (Civ 6, for example).
Exactly, but this might change with zen4 and the 170W TDP rumor for top tier. Which is still a lot lower than 241W.
You're right, "around the corner" is more like "in half a year or more", but it's not like the scenario where Alderlake systems are flying off the shelves is "around the corner" either. Z690 and DDR5 are expensive, B660 just barely launched, and I'm guessing the GPU shortage really puts a damper on people buying new CPUs because you're not going to have a compete rig without the GPU. The point is, I am not sure there's enough runway between now and when Zen 4 launches for Intel to make a big enough splash in the market. It's kind of like the situation AMD are in with Nvidia for so many years: by the time AMD caught up with Nvidia, Nvidia were almost ready to roll out their following generation of graphics cards to maintain the lead.
Pretty much. You can set a 5900X to effectively unlimited PBO and it won't boost that high except under sub-zero cooling. N7 just won't go there.
Do you really think that desktop will go beyond 16 cores (not counting efficiency cores)?
Zen5 maybe. Or whatever chip is gonna hit that 170W limit on AM5 first. It's not likely to be a 16c CPU if they go that high.
Eventually, the new I/O die makes it easy to create boards with triple channel memory.
Have they said anything about the new IO die? Triple channel memory seems an unlikely design choice.
If they just sliced the Genoa IOD into 4 quadrants it is possible, each quadrant of the Genoa IOD has 3 UMCs.
I think what he's saying is that AMD could simply design a new IO die with an extra memory channel that handles 3 CCD SKUs if they wanted to make 24 core desktop products in the future. For now, we'll just get 2 CCD, dual channel parts. Who knows if they'll go with triple CCD products but it won't be leaps and bounds more difficult if they wanted to.
Facebook
Twitter