Bill wrote:
wrote:
On Thursday, June 22, 2017 at 10:19:16 AM UTC+8, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Well, since your original posting, Intel has upped the ante to 18 cores
and 36 threads, just to pip AMD's 16 cores/32 thread monster.

The 10-cylinder i9 7900x is out, but is burning a lot of gasoline on
the dyno.
So will be interested to see how hot 18 runs.

Is anyone else watching the rise of AMD stock price and the fall of INTC
stock price along with AMD's new releases. If I understand correctly,
this is the sort of hardware that supports "the cloud" (I can't help but
look up when I think about it). My long-held impression was that AMD
was mostly a "copycat". Side by side, how do you think they stack up
now (and looking forward)?


Then you don't know much about AMD then.

When I was 18, I cut my teeth on a copy of Mick and Brick
and the 2900 series bitslice. At the time, I couldn't afford
parts, but I did a paper design of a bitslice with a 100ns microcycle.

So even back then, they were doing interesting stuff. This was
RISC stuff rather than CISC, and some of it very nice. Later,
single chip products started appearing inside printers, but this
is not something a user would notice. This was RISC with three-address
instructions. You could write decent code with it. It wasn't
as Micky Mouse as some other RISC.

AMD is currently a much smaller company than Intel. And if you
were to look at the underlying technology (silicon interposer,
HBM memory added to APU design, new internal monitoring system
that keeps track of all sorts of internal environmental conditions),
I think you should be impressed.

For comparison, Intels innovation was the FIVR voltage
regulator (co-habits Haswell die), which has since been removed.
And Intel did some MCM chips. But that's nothing, compared
to using a silicon interposer. Or making chips with ~4000
contacts. Intel did learn how to design a GPU, but I
guess "that's just copying" :-)

Apparently, the interposer technology comes from AMCor, a third
party company. The gutsy part, is bringing that stuff mainstream,
undercutting Intel on price, paying for the Interposer... and
still remaining in business.

And what really amazes me about the current fab industry, is
the ability for non-processor or non-memory companies, to
roll out cutting edge fab facilities. If you look at Glo-Flo
for example, it's *much* more innovative since it was cut
loose from AMD. And makes a good partner for them, as it's not
stuck using ten year old strained SOS stuff.

And I think this is why both Intel and AMD have a lot to fear
from the ARM camp. The availability of cutting edge fabs,
to people with money, means the "edge provided by owning your
own fab", is really no longer necessary. Intel needs to work
on that. And you'll notice Intel isn't "breezing through this
part of its exam". Fabs are hard, and mis-steps common. This
is what's so weird about the current state of fabs. Why are
there so many successes out there ? It's like space aliens
are running these operations or something.

In this picture from Glo-Flo, there's even a *human* walking
down the aisle. Some competitors, you'll see robotic tray transport
and no humans in the picture. So this is where (some) AMD
products might be fabbed.

http://images.anandtech.com/doci/115...78_678x452.jpg

What AMD lacks is "scale". And now that they're fabless, what
would "scale" even mean ? Would an extra 200 engineers make them
twice as dangerous ? I don't know. I don't know how a fabless
company, can beat Intel. But, they'll try.

Intel's biggest enemy is complacency and incrementalism.
Only once in a while, does their executive team have to
"stop playing golf, and go check on things". Intel has
an incentive to keep AMD around, so if you were wondering,
"why doesn't Intel crush AMD", they don't have to. AMD is
kept as a pet. It's for strategic reasons (to make the
industry look "competitive"). When it really isn't. Only
ARM can make it competitive again, by wiping out Intel
(as desktops disappear).

Intel is worried about its future. They can't keep their
fab full. It's not running at full capacity. IBM had to
dump its fabs, because there wasn't enough production
to justify keeping all of them. IBM will still have
research fabs. And Intel may at some point, decide whether
it's really worth it, to be the last domestic company with
fab capability on-shore. In times of conflict, it's nice to
have something on your own continent.

*******

Stock price doesn't mean a damn thing, to what counts.
The AMD rollout would have to be "absolutely flawless"
for the current numbers to stay put. And technically,
I don't think that's possible. There are bound to be
some rough edges on rollout. Putting 4000 contacts
on Epyc is just asking for trouble. Even some Intel
launches have had problems in the past, for much smaller
LGA sockets. The Foxconn versus Lotes thing. All of
AMDs partners have to be "firing on all cylinders",
for this latest push to work.

Paul