4 ms·

Only took 5 years https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-slide-criticizes-amd-for-using-glued-together-dies-in-epyc-processors/ https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-slide-criti

Only took 5 years https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-slide-criticizes-amd-for-using-glued-together-dies-in-epyc-processors/ https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-slide-criticizes-amd-for-using...

washadjeffmad 4y ago
Has Intel ever released a benchmark or marketing comparison that wasn't the filtering equivalent of spelling and grammar mistakes in spam emails? If you notice it for what it is, you're not their target demographic. Their whole sour grapes culture is just bizarre to me.
paulmd 4y ago
Eh, they were criticized for "glued-together" processors in the Pentium D/Core2 era, so a little turnabout is fair play. https://www.anandtech.com/show/1656/2 https://www.anandtech.com/show/1656/2 https://pcper.com/2006/11/intel-core-2-extreme-qx6700-processor-brings-quad-core-computing/ https://pcper.com/2006/11/intel-core-2-extreme-qx6700-proces... Also, let's be honest. First-gen Epyc was glued-together nonsense. It was very much NUMA, it performed weird, the cause was the weird chiplet design (no IO die at that time). It was fair to criticize it on that basis. It had far less cache and much higher latency than the designs that followed, and it felt far more NUMA as a result. Hyperscalers agreed and turned their noses up at it after some test installations, and decided to wait for Rome - which was much much better in those areas. But Naples was bad and that shouldn’t be sugarcoated. I don’t really get why people are always so miffed by Intel saying that, it was a criticism that had been leveled against them, and they were right in applying that criticism to AMD, it was a quirky server design glued together out of consumer dies, it suffered all the same downsides as Intel’s own “glued-together” designs. Didn’t they really just… call a spade a spade?
- selimthegrim 4y ago
  I believe Orange County Choppers even poked a little fun at them.

Only took 5 years https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-slide-criticizes-amd-for-using-glued-together-dies-in-epyc-processors/ https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-slide-criticizes-amd-for-using...

washadjeffmad 4y ago

Has Intel ever released a benchmark or marketing comparison that wasn't the filtering equivalent of spelling and grammar mistakes in spam emails? If you notice it for what it is, you're not their target demographic. Their whole sour grapes culture is just bizarre to me.

paulmd 4y ago

Eh, they were criticized for "glued-together" processors in the Pentium D/Core2 era, so a little turnabout is fair play. https://www.anandtech.com/show/1656/2 https://www.anandtech.com/show/1656/2 https://pcper.com/2006/11/intel-core-2-extreme-qx6700-processor-brings-quad-core-computing/ https://pcper.com/2006/11/intel-core-2-extreme-qx6700-proces... Also, let's be honest. First-gen Epyc was glued-together nonsense. It was very much NUMA, it performed weird, the cause was the weird chiplet design (no IO die at that time). It was fair to criticize it on that basis. It had far less cache and much higher latency than the designs that followed, and it felt far more NUMA as a result. Hyperscalers agreed and turned their noses up at it after some test installations, and decided to wait for Rome - which was much much better in those areas. But Naples was bad and that shouldn’t be sugarcoated. I don’t really get why people are always so miffed by Intel saying that, it was a criticism that had been leveled against them, and they were right in applying that criticism to AMD, it was a quirky server design glued together out of consumer dies, it suffered all the same downsides as Intel’s own “glued-together” designs. Didn’t they really just… call a spade a spade?

selimthegrim 4y ago
I believe Orange County Choppers even poked a little fun at them.