34 ms·
The question is, are they in a hurry to catch up? What is the market that AMD is actually taking over with its multi-chip packages, and at what cost? Just beca
by incrudible 6y ago
The question is, are they in a hurry to catch up? What is the market that AMD is actually taking over with its multi-chip packages, and at what cost?
Just because AMD may be winning in Cinebench doesn't mean it's winning in the business side.
Multi-chip packages have downsides that become obvious in certain enterprise workloads, so the question becomes: Is it worth giving up on the monolithic approach, or adding multi-chip products, in order to
completely dominate the market, even when that is not more profitable?
Clearly, the answer for Intel must be "no", otherwise they would being doing it.
- willis936 6y agoI think the reason Intel is not doing multi-die packages is because the R&D to make it work is large and they don't want to take on that risk. What are the downsides, exactly? Thread-to-thread latency is the key one that comes to mind. It is far cheaper to make a multi-die package because yields are so much higher for any given node. The business advantages are great. The bleak picture for Intel that is being painted is warranted.
- galaxyLogic 6y agoAMD got downgraded today because Intel has new CEO. I don't know why the new CEO would be better, but they say fish rots from the head. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/AMD?p=AMD&.tsrc=fin-srch https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/AMD?p=AMD&.tsrc=fin-srch