INTEL ist KAPUT

[starflakeprj]

I had an AMD K6-2 3DNow! once, remember it being the same year as Baldur's Gate came out, in 1998. It was a lot of CPU for the money, if I remember correctly, but AMD never really managed to catch up on Intel.

What AMD has done the last two years has been impressive though, now AMD processors actually compare, and in some cases are better/faster than the Intel equivalents. Especially at the same price range. Still I chose Intel (i9-10990K) when upgrading two weeks ago. I really couldn't justify an AMD enough, even though they support PCIe 4th Gen. Intel still feels like a safer choice, at least when it comes to music production and gaming, and when speaking of 3D rendering, Nvidia graphic cards (with their CUDA cores) does a better job than any CPU.

Maybe next time, in 3-5 years or so, I will join team red, because they are really impressing me right now.

Edit: It was actually an AMD K6-III I had, but I remember buying Baldur's Gate as my first game after building that one

[nIGhT-SoN]

Not Fanboyism. Intel is well know for really shitty business practices stifling AMD sales around the world. It's like they have an entire department devoted to MONSATOism. They also were charging THEIR "fanboys" DOUBLE the performance/watt compared to AMD... evidenced by their ability to drop their prices in half when they really started to feel the heat, into figures that were AMD price points.

Slowing down the advent of greater computer prowess hurts everyone - this is my biggest beef.

I also HATE being gouged - another major beef.

If AMD had given up on HPC and forgone Ryzen, you would all be hailing the "new 12 core monster chip" being touted by Intel in 2020. Instead the Threadripper suddenly exposed huge CPUs that Intel was going to announce years from now after they had milked everyone for everything they had, just like they did before - 50% price hike for 10% improvement in performance.

Not fanboy - price/performance concerned - and happy to see an ogre on his back.

Your perspective does not include too much knowledge. Intel production technology is much more expansive than AMD. Intel CPUs are based on one chiplet where everything is included - Cores, caches, PCI lines). This technology is around twice as expansive as multi chiplet AMD tech.
This is the reason that RAM addressing is still domain of Intel that still wins in DAW Bench VI test even with 14nm vs 7nm of AMD.
I think that standard x86 tech is close to over and new tech behind ARM introduced by Apple will be the way to go. Intel understood this and working on totally new generation of processor units. Even Intel is falling down a bit it is still a giant compared to AMD financial wise. I consider this "Ryzen" period similar to AthlonA64 vs Intel Pentium4. Intel strikes back soon

I sure hope so, the winner in all this would be the end consumer. I also hope AMD will be able to keep up with them so we don't have another 10 years without real progress.

Intel is definitely the evil empire

Let's face it, everyone who succeeds in a competetive market is considered "evil" by the stupid people these days. Absolutely everyone. Including AMD, if they actually would have done a good job in the last 20-25 years.

Stupid is stupid.

The thing is Intel really did some shitty things, especially during Athlon 64. AMD cpus were a lot better than Intel's and DELL and other companies were "forced" by Intel to use their cpus. There is a lot of shady stuff behind Intel. Even now, when AMD laptop chips are way better than Intel, you don't see lots of OEMs to use their chips. And check the picture below, isn't that a strange decision?

[lunardigs]

I'd be willing to bet that Intel, AMD and ARM are in league with each other. Meaning, that to some extent they collude, to fix the market, prices, trends, etc.--much like MS and Apl. have done.

ARM are in a different market from Intel and AMD; they dont manufacture CPUs, their entire business model is in licensing their design to other companies to build their own proprietary variants. That's not 'fixing the market,' its closer to the opposite.

And exactly what are MS and Apple supposed to be colluding over? Apple arent actually in the business or cloud computing markets, which is where MS makes 2/3 of its money. They're in the phone and app business.

Well, firstly, I use the the term "collusion", they never would. They instead use terms like "strategic partnership", "strategic alliance", etc.

With MS and Apl. it's pretty easy to see that they're a duopoly, by now. How conscious this actually is, is another question. Yet, they're certainly in league with one another and if a third party were to come along and threaten their hegemony, they'd align to defend it.

Aug. 6, 1997: Apple Rescued — by Microsoft
https://www.wired.com/2009/08/dayintech-0806/

2015 Tim Cook on Apple and Microsoft partnership: 'It's what customers want'
https://www.macworld.com/article/298706 ... -want.html

2018 New Apple Strategy: Partner with Microsoft For Future Battles
https://www.macobserver.com/columns-opi ... microsoft/

2019 Why Apple and Microsoft belong together like a burger and fries
https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-apple ... and-fries/

Whereas the Intel-AMD-ARM dynamic isn't as clear. Make no mistake though, their moves are synchronized, even if only by like-mindedness. They're also stakeholders in one another. This is classic as it means they're entitled to see each others financials, as shareholders.

2013 Advanced Micro Devices' Strategic Partnership With ARM Holdings: Negative Implications For Intel?
https://seekingalpha.com/article/151066 ... -for-intel

2018 Arm enters a strategic partnership with Intel
https://www.ciobulletin.com/IOT/arm-int ... orate-for-

2018 Intel and Arm to Collaborate on Internet of Things
https://www.eletimes.com/intel-and-arm- ... -of-things

2019 Intel, AMD, and ARM each see our computing future differently
https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/29/1864 ... ouncements

This is why when I hear of brand-battles and fanboyism, etc. I have to pause, because likely half the time it's by some design that we're aroused.
Whatever else can be said, I would certainly leave open the possibility that it could be an intentional move by Intel to 'bow into the background for a while.' After all, it could be a strategic play, in concert with their strategic partners--ARM and AMD.

[lunardigs]

- deleted -
accidentally quoted myself when trying to edit

[Debutante]

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-compone ... t-one-week

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-indus ... ot-recover

https://www.howtogeek.com/intel-could-b ... ext-nokia/

hehehe am i a prophet?! no, but outlook was somehow on point. Gotta hand it to Lisa..."We will compete" sounded like a pipe dream back then... and yet look at where we are today.

[XrxT]

Quick question, is the E-cores/P-cores design relevant for this topic? It was one of my decision criteria. The other being USB troubles and (not) moving to Windows 11. I'm stuck with an 11th gen Intel CPU.

[uOpt]

Quick question, is the E-cores/P-cores design relevant for this topic?

Very slow E-cores will always be relevant. Yes, the schedulers improved somewhat, but optimal scheduling for highly uneven cores requires that you can see into the future, which the schedulers still don't do.

[lfm]

Quick question, is the E-cores/P-cores design relevant for this topic? It was one of my decision criteria. The other being USB troubles and (not) moving to Windows 11. I'm stuck with an 11th gen Intel CPU.

You're not stuck. Appreciate what you have.

I got 12th generation and turned off E-cores(just 4).
- no need for half-speed threads mixed into processes
- 8 P-cores with HT at full speed 4.5 GHz is perfect

In my bios for Gigabyte MB it even says "Atom cores" at some place.
- this is how weak these cores are, Atom cpu I think are the weakest ones

Not sure if Steinberg fixed this, but they had a warning about E-core cpu's were not supported by Cubase.
- one or two years ago

[uOpt]

11th gen is still a great CPU for music, for the reasons mentioned, as well as power consumption.

Sad but there it is.