6 ms·
Hopefully this will be the kick in the backside that Intel needs to start leading again.
by civilitty 3y ago
Hopefully this will be the kick in the backside that Intel needs to start leading again.
- boringuser2 3y agoIntel is producing amazing GPUs AND CPUs right now.
- Tuna-Fish 3y agoThey really are not making amazing GPUs. The ones on the market are only decent value because Intel is selling them far below what it cost to make them, because there's no way they could sell them at proper prices. Even still, they have ceased production, and the product is still on the shelves.
- LASR 3y agoHonestly being anywhere on the competitive spectrum is pretty impressive. GPUs aren’t just some commodity product. They’ve required decades of iteration to lead to the flagship products we have today. To achieve at least a fraction of that is an achievement of itself. But yeah I am going to hold on to my NVDA for now.
- bee_rider 3y agoHaha, yeah, in any reasonable comparison to like “complexity of things that humans have made over all time,” they are definitely pretty amazing. But they appear to be third best among their peers. I’d take an Intel dGPU though.
- rektide 3y agoI'd have it the other way around. Intel's doing OK with cpus but man their P-core is way too big & hot. They've been adding and adding to the same core design for a decade & it's a monster. Also their process is still flagging. They've managed well for such limitations but real change has to come, soon. Meanwhile Arc is kicking ass. It's launch was a dud, but the team has really kept pushing on making the chip run better and better & it's such a great value now. People need to reassess the preconceptions they formed at launch. https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/intel-arc-graphics-cards-silently-excellent/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/intel-arc-graphics-c...
- Tuna-Fish 3y agoAgain, it only looks good because it's sold at such a deep discount. A770 has a 400mm^2 die and a 256-bit bus to 16GB of GDDR6. It only competes favorably to cards that cost less than half of what it did to manufacture. You can say that it's a great deal for a consumer, but it is a terrible deal for Intel, and the only reason they are selling them for such a price is that they already have the stock and couldn't sell it for any higher price.
- rektide 3y agoThere could definitely be a lot of truth to this but we don't really know do we? Do we have any idea how much these chips actually cost various chipmakers?1 Amd's rx580 was a $280 gpu with 256bit bus too. It got down near $200 for a while. It was only 240mm^2 though. I simply don't know what chips actually can cost these days. I wouldn't be surprised to find out Intel's taking a bath here but I also would be super unshocked to hear other folks making gpus have colossal markups.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- boringuser2 3y agoTuna-Fish decides what qualifies as a "discount" simply by shooting out of his ass, unless you have insider knowledge you'd like to share.
- boringuser2 3y agoCompletely disagree. The new P's are insane. I have an i5-1240p and it's the best chip I've ever owned. 12 cores, 25w tdp.
- wtallis 3y agoThe -P SoCs are not the same thing as the P-cores contained within. The i5-1240P SoC has 4 P-cores and 8 E-cores. The -P at the end of the model number denotes it as being in the middle product segment of their mobile lineup, between the lower-power -U models and the higher-power -H models. All three product segments use the same P-cores and E-cores, but in varying quantities and clock speeds.
- singhrac 3y agoThey did it to take market share, and they have, slightly (6% market share against AMDs 9%). If you look closely their software story is miles ahead of AMDs, so I can see them coming to a comfortable second in the next few years… which is nothing small given the leader is apparently a trillion dollar company.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- silisili 3y agoTheir APUs are not competitive. Somehow the 13 gen has a worse igpu than previous generations. The CPU is plenty fast, though. Meanwhile, you can run Cyberpunk on the newest AMD APUs.
- TheRealPomax 3y agoWhat does "start leading" even mean? Every CPU launch, AMD is ahead and the Intel beats them or Intel is ahead and then AMD beats them. There is no leading here. There are only wins for people who want CPUs that keep getting faster, cooler, require fewer watts to run, and overall improve generation upon generation.
- SuperShibe 3y agoAnd meanwhile they're both getting cucked by Apple because the Intel/AMD brand monoliths are too heavy to make any groundbreaking/architectural changes now.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- evilduck 3y agoAMD's Zen 4 chips are competing with Apple's M2 on performance and at least closing the gap on efficiency. Intel's Alder Lake is losing on efficiency but is still trading blows for performance. I am generally a fan of Apple but the M2 was just a modest iteration of the M1, it's not a groundbreaking architectural change either. Even the Pro/Max/Ultra die multiplication strategy is unlikely to continue competing much longer, the latest M2 Ultra is losing to AMD and Intel in some aspects right out of the gate.
- Atotalnoob 3y agoIn most aspects. The m2 chip is more power efficient, but it can't compete against Intel and amd
- evilduck 3y agoI don't know about that either, based on Tom's Hardware review of the M2 Ultra it is still pretty competitive and well rounded. Intel beats Apple at most specs but the margin is too small to say Apple "can't compete", especially for a company that didn't even have a desktop CPU three years ago.
- hn8305823 3y agoIntel, just like Boeing and to a lesser extent many other F500 companies appear to be fully financialized at this point. Their executives probably wake up each day and think about how much stock to buy back and nothing else. Do they even remember what it is the company used to do for a living?
- wefarrell 3y agoMicrosoft was able to reverse it, hopefully Intel can as well.
- porknubbins 3y agoIntel rested on their laurels for many years but their processors are neck and neck with AMD in some segments (probably because they had margin to burn, which they now have to stay competitive). And they are still adding fabs in the US. When I think of financialized companies I think like IBM. I wouldn’t count Intel out yet.
- worrycue 3y agoI don’t know if they have been resting on their laurels. Alder Lake which was a huge departure from their previous architectures came out at a very good time - just as their previous design was running out of steam. It takes years to get a new design from drawing board to production. IMHO Intel’s R&D was humming along just fine but the company as a whole had problems pushing stuff into full production. The new CEO managed to get the company into shape enough to actually ship things again.
- lotsofpulp 3y agoIBM is a good example, all that is left is rearranging ships on the deck while it goes down. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/IBM/ibm/net-income https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/IBM/ibm/net-income
- reissbaker 3y agoIntel was this way, but IMO Pat Gelsinger has turned it around — as per this, their surprisingly competitive GPU perf, and hopefully Intel Foundry Services. IDK if it's enough to call it a Satya Nadella-like CEO transition, but I've been pretty impressed watching it happen.