[HN Gopher] Alienware Doesn't Want You to Buy an AMD Ryzen PC
___________________________________________________________________
Alienware Doesn't Want You to Buy an AMD Ryzen PC
Author : basilgohar
Score : 165 points
Date : 2021-04-17 17:17 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.extremetech.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.extremetech.com)
| Farfignoggen wrote:
| Intel Gets Sneaky
|
| "Despite losing considerable market share to AMD, Intel held on
| to a commanding lead by exerting its influence on computer
| manufacturers. Most famous was the "Intel Inside" co-branding
| program, in which Intel gave "market-development funds" to
| computer manufacturers if they highlighted the Intel brand on
| their products. But "Intel Inside" was not nearly as
| controversial as Intel's practice of paying "loyalty rebates" to
| computer manufacturers for not using AMD chips. On the surface,
| Intel's loyalty rebate programs appeared to be innocent volume or
| bundled discounts. Courts had struggled to apply section 2 of the
| Sherman Antitrust Act to the issue of bundled discounts, as it
| was hard to distinguish harmless discounts from loyalty rebates
| provided for the sole purpose of acquiring or maintaining
| monopoly power. But by taking into consideration the market
| conditions at the time and the nature of Intel's relationship
| with the computer manufacturers, the monopolistic intent
| underlying Intel's actions is noticeable. The commoditization of
| the PC market had severely impacted the profit margins of
| computer manufacturers, leaving their hopes of meeting quarterly
| earnings targets at the mercy of Intel's loyalty rebates. In
| internal emails at major computer manufacturers, company
| executives were clearly distressed by the risk of losing such
| rebates, and most importantly, profitability, if they adopted AMD
| chips--or, as one Dell executive poignantly put it, Intel was
| "prepared for 'jihad' if Dell joins the AMD exodus." Indeed,
| AMD's biggest barrier in breaking 25% in overall x86 market share
| was its failure to court Dell, the biggest U.S. computer
| manufacturer. Dell was for a long time an exclusive Intel
| customer, but actually had been quite eager to use AMD's chips.
| In an e-mail to Intel's CEO in 2005, Michael Dell wrote, "None of
| the current benchmarks and reviews say that Intel based systems
| are better than AMD. We are losing the hearts, minds and wallets
| of our best customers." Intel was quick to address Dell's
| concerns. Intel's CEO, Paul Otellini, replied, "[W]e are
| transferring over $1B per year to Dell for meet comp efforts.
| This [should be] more than sufficient to compensate for the
| competitive issues." Soon after, Dell's CEO Kevin Rollins
| announced that Dell had "made no plans to begin using" AMD chips,
| which Otellini described as "the best friend money can buy." "(1)
|
| (1) [See Subheading: Intel Gets Sneaky]
|
| "Intel and the x86 Architecture: A Legal Perspective Written by
| Greg Tang January 04, 2011"
|
| http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/intel-and-the-x86-archite...
| k__ wrote:
| What's the best Ryzen laptop on the market right now?
| dvko wrote:
| I have a Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 with a Ryzen 4800U and love it.
| Running Linux on it, everything pretty much worked right out of
| the box.
| basilgohar wrote:
| It's a good idea to wait because Ryzen 5000 mobile devices are
| starting to come out. The Asus Zephyrus has been getting
| accolades for it's design and performance, but if you're
| looking for thin-and-light or ultrabooks, the Zenbook (also
| Asus) is well regarded too.
|
| There are a slew of models out there. Lenovo usually has some
| good ones too but they lag a bit behind other OEMs in their
| offerings.
| Rapzid wrote:
| I've been wanting a 5950x at MSRP since last December. This is
| the one time in recent history I'm not sure any of this really
| matters to AMD. They physically can't produce enough chips to
| meet demand. I'm even skeptical of any future damages this could
| cause by harming their brand image at this particular point in
| time; everybody wants AMD right now and this is further enhanced
| because "you can't have it".
| Farfignoggen wrote:
| Here's an interesting Litmus test:
|
| Go into any Staples regular brick and mortar Retail location and
| look at the Laptops on the showroom Floor and see if they have
| any AMD laptops on display there! And If they do not then ask the
| sales associate why. And I've asked and been told that they have
| AMD options but the AMD laptop has to be ordered online! So do
| that at Staples and other Office Stores that have brick and
| mortar retail locations!
| CraftThatBlock wrote:
| This is likely due to low stock of AMD laptops in general (they
| sell like hot cakes). Once stock availability is improved, I
| would expect to see more in-store stock.
| lumost wrote:
| Given the supply issues and the challenges with most OEMs placing
| AMD products in inferior packages with subpar support. Wouldn't
| it make some amount of sense for AMD to focus on a preferred OEM
| who put their products in a premium package with dedicated focus?
|
| Right now it seems that most OEMs are hesitant to commit to the
| product line given supply issues.
| mordae wrote:
| After many years of running AMD desktops I now own my very
| first AMD ThinkPad as well. I think they are slowly getting
| there.
| rahimnathwani wrote:
| In October, I ordered an AMD Thinkpad from Lenovo's online
| store. It arrived in January.
| brutus1213 wrote:
| I bought the R10 late last year (before the new Ryzen chips were
| in stock) so ended up getting the AMD Ryzen 3700x. I was quite
| confused why Dell was even offering the single channel RAM
| option.
|
| The actual hardware Dell uses is a bit annoying. It seems even
| the GPU I got was a Dell specific version. The motherboard is
| also their custom chipset. I am fine with what I have but it is
| perplexing that Dell positions Alienware to be upgradable and
| makes it pretty difficult to do so (e.g. I made the mistake of
| not getting the system watercooled .. the steps required seem out
| of my hardware skill level). I'd also be keen to swap the Ryzen
| 3700 for the newer series chip .. but have no clue whether that
| is possible on that motherboard. Also, can I say AMDs numbering
| makes no sense to me personally.
| 66fm472tjy7 wrote:
| > The motherboard is also their custom chipset
|
| It's a custom motherboard but not a custom chipset. The chipset
| comes from AMD.
|
| > I'd also be keen to swap the Ryzen 3700 for the newer series
| chip .. but have no clue whether that is possible on that
| motherboard
|
| If the chipset is A520, B550 or X570, you have Ryzen 5000 / Zen
| 3 support, though it probably requires a BIOS update. You might
| also have Zen 3 support on B450, B550A, X470 [0]. Check the
| BIOS release notes for your machine.
|
| > I made the mistake of not getting the system watercooled
|
| Most water cooled systems only water cool the CPU, which in
| your case (a 65W TDP CPU) is absurd. Good air coolers match the
| performance of twice as expensive AIOs [1] and have far less
| potential for breakage.
|
| > Also, can I say AMDs numbering makes no sense to me
| personally.
|
| The first digit is the generation. 1000 series -> Zen 1
| architecture, 2000 series -> Zen+, 3000 series -> Zen 2, 5000
| series -> zen 3. The higher the number after that, the better
| the CPU is within the generation (more cores/cache, higher
| frequency).
|
| [0] https://www.anandtech.com/show/15807/amd-to-support-
| zen-3-an...
|
| [1] https://youtu.be/23vjWtUpItk?t=482
| ncmncm wrote:
| Some of the 5000 series are Zen 2. Be careful, and look it
| up.
| Jiejeing wrote:
| > The first digit is the generation. 1000 series -> Zen 1
| architecture, 2000 series -> Zen+, 3000 series -> Zen 2, 5000
| series -> zen 3. The higher the number after that, the better
| the CPU is within the generation (more cores/cache, higher
| frequency).
|
| Except in APU territory, where nothing makes sense and cpus
| with the same first digit will be of different zen
| generations.
| RealStickman_ wrote:
| Didn't they skip 4000 to fix exactly this?
| ziml77 wrote:
| 4000 exists, but there are only mobile chips in that
| line.
| henriquez wrote:
| The conspiracy theorist in me suspects that Intel must be
| applying heavy-handed pressure to OEMs to keep them in line long
| enough for Intel to release a better architecture in a couple of
| years.
|
| The realist in me says that AMD has had major supply issues
| delivering the 7nm Zen3 chips in any appreciable quantity while
| Intel literally prints 14nm chips like it's going out of style.
|
| Given that you can spec a comparable Ryzen vs. Intel system on
| Dell's site I'm thinking Dell is just prioritizing their
| marketing focus on the systems where they can move the most
| volume. Else they'd be shooting themselves in the foot with "SOLD
| OUT" notices and backlogs.
| basilgohar wrote:
| If there's no supply, then simply don't offer the product.
| However, Alienware, a Dell property, doing as described in this
| article, is not surprising at all. Dell got in big trouble for
| their behind-the-scenes favoritism of Intel [0].
|
| The offerings of Ryzen laptops tells a similar story, even
| before the supply shortages of late. They are only now escaping
| their shells, but large OEMs still give the best specs to
| Intel-powered laptops. Better offerings come from the smaller
| vendors.
|
| [0] https://fortune.com/2007/02/15/suit-intel-paid-dell-up-
| to-1-...
| LegitShady wrote:
| My bet is they're giving dell a much better price and dell
| makes more money off those systems making it an incentive
| instead of pressure.
|
| Intel fabbing their own chips gives them a lot more room for
| profit than amd in the end price - basically you could give the
| equivalent of half tsmc's cut to an OEM and still make more
| money than amd per chip.
| ginko wrote:
| > The conspiracy theorist in me suspects that Intel must be
| applying heavy-handed pressure to OEMs to keep them in line
| long enough for Intel to release a better architecture in a
| couple of years.
|
| But what kind of pressure can Intel even apply? Intel CPUs are
| more expensive and have sub-par performance? Why would any OEM
| favor them?
| virtue3 wrote:
| Intel had(has?) a practice of giving OEMs a discount if they
| only sell Intel chips.
| basilgohar wrote:
| See my sibling comment. Intel has applied incentives to OEMs
| before to give them preferential treatment. Dell got caught,
| but it's likely it's happened with others based on the same
| pattern existing elsewhere.
| dnautics wrote:
| "we will not sell you _any_ of these chips unless you agree
| to exclusivity with our chips for dual channel DDR "
| ginko wrote:
| They have an inferior product. Dell could just call their
| bluff and go AMD exclusive.
| tedunangst wrote:
| And sell how many systems before running out of
| inventory?
| RamRodification wrote:
| "Hi Dell, this is Intel calling. You know how you are one of
| the biggest computer hardware vendors out there and we give
| you 30% off on our stuff because you sell insane volumes of
| it? Yeah we're gonna have to stop doing that if you continue
| this worrying trend of selling more and more of those AMD
| chips. We did the math and this will actually hurt you more
| than you could bring in on the AMD stuff. Ok thanks bye now"
|
| Or maybe the other way around
|
| "We'll give you 40% off instead of 30 if you stop moving so
| many AMD chips."
|
| It is probably worth while for Intel to do things like this
| for now and stop the bleeding while AMD is ahead for once.
| photoGrant wrote:
| Intel have heavily ramped up their consumer facing marketing
| push. There's credence to the crumbs
| ClumsyPilot wrote:
| People keep calling such suspicion "conspiracy theory" as if
| it's rare of unlikely. Intel in particular has been fined
| multiple times for this exact practice. Maybe they are back at
| it- if I were the regulator, I would at least take a look at
| the issue.
|
| https://www.extremetech.com/computing/184323-intel-stuck-wit...
| smolder wrote:
| Conspiracy theories just need to be theories of conspiracy.
| It carries an implication of implausibility only because of
| popular perception. e.g. TV and movies like to show a
| "conspiracy theorist" as a person struggling with paranoia
| who has outlandish theories and no credibility.
|
| Real, mundane conspiracies are numerous, and there are
| probably some outlandish ones, too. Every _proven_ conspiracy
| must have started with someone 's theory, if not an
| unprompted admission, so it's not always wrong to theorize.
| It's just silly to dedicate more than a little brain
| space*time to theories you've got no evidence for or hope of
| proving, conspiracy or otherwise.
| ncmncm wrote:
| "It's not a conspiracy if it is not illegal." By
| definition.
|
| Garden-variety corruption doesn't need a conspiracy. The US
| is today the world leader in high-level, fully legal
| corruption. It took many decades to get there, but it will
| take even longer to choke it off, if we ever do.
|
| We even elected an out-and-out con man to the presidency.
| Russia wishes it could be so corrupt, but just doesn't have
| the money for it. China does, but its corruption is mostly
| still _technically_ illegal.
| cmeacham98 wrote:
| You are correct about the dictionary definition of the
| word, but in popular parlance the phrase "conspiracy
| theory" has a massive negative connotation. I have
| literally never in my life seen someone use the phrase
| without intending to imply "crazy/unprovable/etc".
| radicalbyte wrote:
| I don't think that this is the reason this time.
|
| I have a Ryzen 5950x system and like many other owners I
| suffer from poor stability. My machine crashes several times
| a week with CPU errors.
|
| This seems to be the result of poor BIOSes from AMD and their
| partners, more so than fab faults - reddit is full of people
| who still have issues after their 3rd RMA.
|
| I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole if I was Dell.
| Covzire wrote:
| I have a 5950X as well and it's only mostly stable. I've
| been running at stock with just PBO enabled and it's mostly
| fine. It's not so unstable I regret building it since it
| almost always only reboots and logs a WHEA error when I'm
| not using it for some reason.
| Nursie wrote:
| Funny, never had an issue with mine. Bad stick of ram
| caused a few issues, but when it was replaced all's been
| well.
| jamesponddotco wrote:
| Counter anecdote, but I run the Ryzen 9 5950X on dedicated
| servers with Ubuntu 20.04, and they are as stable as they
| should be.
| mattgreenrocks wrote:
| Wow. Hope it gets fixed soon. I'd be livid about this even
| if I only used the machine in the off hours.
| emodendroket wrote:
| I have a 5800X and I hadn't even heard of it. But the
| supply chain thing seems plausible -- it's still hard to
| get your hands on Zen 3.
| lunfard00 wrote:
| lucky me never had issues with my 5950x (windows, x570
| taichi). That being said, TDP 105w is bs.
| Lev1a wrote:
| Oh nooooo, your new top-of-the-line processor has a lower
| TDP than average-good processors from a few years ago!
| How absolutely horrible.
|
| /s, in case that wasn't blatantly obvious.
| lunfard00 wrote:
| That is not the issue, the issue is that AMD advertise
| 2700x and 5950x with the same TDP, so at the very least
| that should means that they both work fine when using the
| same cooling solution, which is not the case. Using my
| previous cooler 5950x was throttling at 100 Celsius.
| api wrote:
| I really dislike the use of "conspiracy theory" as a thought
| stopper. Conspiracies and other underhanded behavior
| absolutely does exist. The FBI has an entire conspiracy
| division dedicated to organized crime.
|
| The conspiracy theories that people usually mean by that term
| are the silly ridiculous ones like Qanon, outlandish "secret
| space program" stuff, we didn't land on the moon, etc.
| dnautics wrote:
| It's not a conspiracy theory to suggest something that
| companies do all the time, and that intel regularly has and
| will probably continue to do.
|
| #2 does not explain the single channel DDR thing.
| faeriechangling wrote:
| Using the phrase "conspiracy theory" to simply describe
| theories about conspiracies is pretty common nowadays, the
| phrase doesn't have an inherently perojative connotation.
| Just because it's true does not mean it is not a conspiracy
| theory.
|
| Study showing the phrase "conspiracy theory" doesn't alter
| people's judgements of a situation:
| https://psmag.com/news/has-conspiracy-theory-lost-its-
| negati...
| dnautics wrote:
| if you wanted the non-perjorative form you would say simply
| "conspiracy" without the word "theory".
| lupire wrote:
| That study is interesting, but us an extremely synthetic
| testing environment, where _everything_ in the experiment
| group was called a "consipiracy theory" in a synthetic
| research prompt, not measuring how peopld respond to actual
| usage of the term. "Being in a study" may have as large an
| effect on the result as "attitude toward the term
| "conspiracy theory".
| Spooky23 wrote:
| Intel provides backend rebates to channels or even large
| commercial end users (usually if you use Intel ssd) for
| exclusivity. AMD does the same -- I'm sure HP has favored
| pricing.
|
| As someone who bought large numbers of devices in the last
| year, I would say that the AMD devices had more supply chain
| issues than any other devices, from thin clients to desktops to
| laptops.
|
| That may not mean it's an AMD thing, those issues may well be
| due to the OEM as many devices/components are constrained.
| Asmod4n wrote:
| In the past, Intel simply paid your marketing campaign when you
| advertised its products. Remember how every manufactor had
| fullpage advertisements of Intel PCs in every magazine you
| could buy?
| BoysenberryPi wrote:
| I believe the real answer is between column A and column B. It
| would not surprise me to learn that Intel has exclusive product
| agreements with certain manufacturers top shelf products like
| the Thinkpad X1, Surface Pro, and the Dell XPS. Long before the
| shortage, people have been wondering why they can't buy any of
| these products with a Ryzen CPU. A Ryzen Thinkpad X1 would be
| an instant purchase for me personally.
|
| However, there is no denying that AMD is having supply issues
| and is arguably mismanaging the supply they do have with their
| constant paper launches.
| reader_mode wrote:
| Are there any USB 4 Ryzen laptops ? If there are it must be a
| very recent thing. AMD has only been viable in laptops for a
| short while and with limited availability - I suspect they
| are going to start to show up in premium laptops once they
| start becoming more common place - just look at the delays
| between desktop and laptop releases - it's obvious laptops
| are not a priority for AMD
| basilgohar wrote:
| This is not the impression of many review sites - a lot of
| the premium Ryzen laptop offerings from certain OEMs (not
| the big ones) like Asus and others out of Asia are amongst
| the top performers and have excellent features.
|
| The issue at hand is that other, bigger OEMs are not
| putting AMD hardware into their best designs and thus
| yielding less than stellar performance or features. There
| are still cases of high-end Ryzen mobile CPUs being put
| into single-channel configurations!
| basilgohar wrote:
| I believe the column A, column B description is apt. For sure
| AMD is struggling with supply-chain issues, but despite that,
| they are still managing to lead and stay afloat in terms of
| tech and mindshare.
|
| These unfair practices by OEMs and Intel serve to exacerbate
| that problem and will make it harder for AMD to gather
| greater marketshare as well as mindshare which they could
| have otherwise reaped when supplies are greater. It's a
| double-whammy misfortune for AMD in that case, which they
| don't need as their tech really is advancing past Intel in
| many ways.
| bostonsre wrote:
| Yea, would love a ThinkPad with amd and 32gb of memory (looks
| like they now can go to 32gb, but think they were all
| soldered 16gb last time I checked). Not quite as pretty as a
| Mac, but probably they best laptop keyboard I've used.
| mangix wrote:
| I just saw an HP prebuilt with Ryzen and dual channel memory.
| Quite impressive for a prebuilt.
|
| Time to throw Alienware in the dumpster.
| [deleted]
| edem wrote:
| I don't buy Alienware then. Easy.
| dnautics wrote:
| But also tell your friends to not buy alienware
| bellyfullofbac wrote:
| Linus (Tech Tips) had an employee buy computers on the phone,
| and the Dell sales put on several extra warranty packages
| despite the "mystery shoppper" saying she didn't want them:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Go5tLO6ipxw
| bitL wrote:
| AMD notebooks/systems usually come with less memory, storage and
| inferior GPUs, despite being faster than Intel. The thing that
| makes me most upset are inferior displays; often the top AMD
| model has some TN panel at 1920x1080, whereas top Intel model has
| an OLED 4k. This is criminal.
|
| I had to buy an Intel-based Razer with 4k@120 and 3080 because
| there is no similar AMD model provided by anyone. Like nobody in
| the whole world has a comparable AMD system.
| varispeed wrote:
| Isn't the problem that companies have plenty of products with
| Intel chips that nobody wants and they just don't want to go
| bankrupt so they use different tactics to manipulate consumer
| into buying such product?
|
| I am looking for a laptop with the new Ryzen and it is very
| difficult. It seems like companies do their best to make it hard
| to find any of their product with AMD inside and Intel is all
| over the place.
|
| I am not sure if they realise how this damages their image? Why a
| consumer would buy a machine with reheated vintage Intel CPU that
| is already obsolete when it leaves the store new?
| firebaze wrote:
| I'm curious if Intel will be able to turn tides in time before
| mainstream opinion follows reality. AMD is quite far ahead, ARM
| (not just with Apple M1) is a generation ahead, and Microsoft
| dominance (i.e. x86 dominance) is fading.
|
| Either Intel has a fully new architecture ready and is just
| waiting for the best time to unveil the beast in the making, or
| they're starting to be part of history.
|
| Reminds me a bit of Boeing in the face of SpaceX and Airbus.
| Maybe a bit unfair, since Intel is innovating, just apparently
| without much luck until today.
| tester756 wrote:
| >and Microsoft dominance (i.e. x86 dominance) is fading.
|
| What?
| chrisseaton wrote:
| It used to be almost all non-technical businesses used
| Windows and other Microsoft products for almost everything. I
| don't know if you're younger but you may not be able to
| appreciate how much their dominance has faded in the last
| twenty years, due several shifts after each other, but most
| recently to the comprehensive switch to software-as-a-
| service.
| spideymans wrote:
| Windows is down to 75% desktop usage share worldwide and
| 60% usage share in the United States. Still a majority, but
| a far cry from the days where it held 90%+ usage share.
| It's usage share has gradually and _very_ quietly eroded.
|
| Nevermind that the desktop/laptop OS market itself is no
| longer as important as it was in the 2000s.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| And I guess almost all of those Windows servers in the
| back offices of small businesses running Active Directory
| and Exchange are now also gone.
| varispeed wrote:
| Everyone I know is buying new M1 macs. There is simply no
| competition currently for the price and performance. I hate
| Apple, but I am considering getting one too. I am tired of my
| Intel laptop constantly spinning loud fans.
| morsch wrote:
| The dominance of x86 PCs, which are Microsoft's bread and
| butter (the "Wintel" platform), is fading, as more people are
| using ARM devices as their main or only computing device.
| Arguably. I think that's what they meant, anyway.
| firebaze wrote:
| What I meant is: a few years ago, Windows was set - either
| you used Windows (usual) or MacOS (you got spare money), or
| you probably used Linux or something else (geek).
|
| In Server-Space, you mostly used either Linux or Windows ASP.
| Nowadays, not so much anymore. Linux prevails (and doesn't
| care if x86 or ARM) and Windows is losing grounds week by
| week (even MS itself seems to favor Linux for server-side
| stuff, or technology-agnostic NPM etc.).
|
| Even on laptop and desktop machines Linux is gaining momentum
| (but is still far behind Microsoft), but that market is
| getting smaller and smaller.
|
| So, my personal opinion is that the x86 dominanace is fading.
| Not Azure, not Microsoft as a whole, but the presence of its
| desktop operating system, as it seems to me, definitely is
| losing importance fast.
|
| I'd not be surprised if MS offers a linux window manager
| which emulates windows, so to speak.
| Delk wrote:
| I'm not really sure what to make of that. On one hand, yes,
| more and more things are being done in browsers, and
| possibly on phones, which in theory de-emphasizes the
| importance of x86 and Windows.
|
| On the other hand, especially when it comes to laptop
| market share diminishing, I don't even know how many times
| and over how many years I've heard people say that laptops
| will become obsolete because of phones.
|
| Hasn't happened, at least for people who use their devices
| for almost any kind of work. For finding a repair shop for
| whatever you need repaired? Sure, most people will probably
| use their phone for that, and people who only need an
| internet device for things like that might not bother with
| more than a phone. Writing a report or a plan? Not so much.
|
| I honestly don't think the market for laptops is going to
| diminish that much when jobs become more and more white-
| collar.
|
| With Apple's non-negligible market share and their using a
| different CPU architecture, combined with the emphasis on
| web and browsers, x86 will probably become less of a de
| facto standard. But it would take a lot to topple the
| inertia of Windows in the consumer on non-tech work market.
| firebaze wrote:
| I didn't want to argue laptops are becoming obsolete. In
| fact I think they'll become more important - the share of
| desktops + laptops is shrinking, but laptops are gaining
| disproportionally over desktops.
|
| Nevertheless, the importance of the OS shrinks in my
| opinion. Either you use windows, then you're (still)
| bound to x86 (yes, Windows technically supports other
| platforms, but this is mostly history), or you're using a
| Mac (BSD-based OS, doesn't really care which
| architecture) or something else (i.e. Linux, which also
| doesn't care).
|
| Microsoft isn't stupid by far. As soon as the market
| doesn't favor Intel/x86 anymore they'll pivot to
| providing a linux window manager (earning money with
| telemetry and their office platform).
|
| I'm convinced Intel has to play a big card soon (and I'm
| quite sure they will), or they're history, comparable to
| IBM in 2000-2010.
| bartvk wrote:
| Indeed. The big boys all made their own CPUs, and the
| growth market has been mobile. And x86 isn't there. The
| architecture is still big, but under pressure from both
| sides.
| thekyle wrote:
| I agree, it seems many consumers no longer use Windows. For
| many people today their primary computer is a smartphone or
| tablet running Android or iOS.
| basilgohar wrote:
| Intel is not called Chipzilla for no reason. AMD's been working
| like crazy to keep up, but Intel still has a lot of cash
| reserves and innovation. And though I prefer AMD as a company,
| I cannot deny that advances that have come from Intel and also
| from the AMD/Intel rivalry. It's better for both of them, and
| even more players, to succeed.
|
| What is not right is for one or more players to use their
| market dominance to stifle innovation from competitors. I would
| be upset if AMD did the same thing (though they'd have to do it
| a lot, i.e., to the same level, before I would feel the same as
| I do about Intel).
|
| Edit: Fixed typo.
| mhh__ wrote:
| ARM really isn't a generation ahead. Put a good x86 core on
| 5nm, and it might be _slower_ but that 's not a generation.
| Especially if you take generation to be like, pentium to
| pentium pro kind of leap.
|
| Intel _should_ have an escape plan off x86, but people are way
| way too stuck on the idea that x86 is a dead end when a good
| microarchitectural leap could offset it.
| dathinab wrote:
| > a good x86 core on 5nm
|
| But that is actually Intel's problem, you can not "just" put
| a good x86 core on 5nm (technically) and you _need_ 5nm
| production capacities to.
| mhh__ wrote:
| But what is 5nm, ARM is just an ISA, was my point.
| eptcyka wrote:
| At the end of the day, modern x86 cores are essentially high
| performing RISC cores with a vdry intelligent CISC decoder.
| An ARM core just has to be a high performing RISC core.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-04-17 23:01 UTC)