Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

servethehome.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 209 posts

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#181

Post by solotronics »

NicoJuicy wrote: post #166
kmlx wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Long AMD" are you expecting a higher stock price? because their 90 PE TTM doesn't look like it's in line with the rest of the industry. don't get me wrong, i was also long AMD, and still partly am, but i don't think the stock can go higher than 36-37, or even maintain that level long term, without some some mega quarters. which according to their own estimates will not be the case.

Yes, i'm expecting stock price according how much they capture from Intel. And they are capturing it fast. As said before: Servers, laptops, ... are coming and that's the profit-market for CPU's and they aren't abandoning their nich ( semi-custom) also. it was 40 in 2000, the current buy prediction is 40. They are doing way better now and they have another full year to win market share. I compare against Intel, not a…

Exactly market cap of AMD is 35 and Intel is 250. Even if AMD can only manage to steal half of that they will do phenomenally well.

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#182

Post by tagrun »

kllrnohj wrote: post #100
gpm wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many? Anything running a browser needs it because of js. Anything running connected to the internet at all would be well advised to have them because you can take advantage of the exploits via the network stack. Anything running on a vm has to have them since microcode is set by the hypervisor. So, we're talking about desktops not used to browse the internet, and bare metal servers whose network stacks aren't exposed…

> So, we're talking about desktops not used to browse the internet, and bare metal servers whose network stacks aren't exposed to hostile actors? To be fair the context here is HPC. Nobody is installing Chrome on something like IBM's Summit supercomputer. Nor is it running "untrusted" code. It's configured to go as fast as possible, nothing more. Anyone in cloud hosting or desktop would be insane to not install spect…

Except HPC clusters do need all the Spectre/Meltdown fixes and more. Those are shared environments (with the exception of a handful of people who got research grants for their own internal clusters). In fact, hyper-threading has also been disabled completely is some clusters.

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#183

Post by snvzz »

Unklejoe wrote: post #154
loeg wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10G stuff still carries a substantial price premium, unfortunately. And if you've got existing Cat 5/5e cable (esp. in the wall), now you've got to replace the cable, even for short runs. I don't find 1Gbps hugely limiting myself at this time, or at least, not enough to push me to the extra spend on 2.5-5 or 10Gbit hardware. (Also, we've got 5e in the walls, no conduit, and that stuff is never getting replaced.)

> Cat 5/5e cable (esp. in the wall), now you've got to replace the cable, even for short runs. Not always. I have a working 10GBASE-T link over about 50 feet of Cat 5e, going through two couplers too. No frame loss. Probably depends a lot on the quality of the cabling and the noise environment.

And then there's NBASE-T, which takes care of situations where the cabling isn't up to scratch, scaling bandwidth accordingly.

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#184

Post by bob1029 »

bjornjaja wrote: post #172
NicoJuicy wrote: post #39

They wouldn't have an answer to AMD untill 2021: https://newsroom.intel.com/news/2019-intel-investor-meeting/... Ps. Long AMD, perfect execution the last two years. It's crazy, even their late firmware fixes improve performance as it had bad press for a moment for false benchmarks advertisement ( it was not false so it seems, the firmware was just not ok yet. Not everything is fully ok now, it's the only minor nitpic…

AMD bringing the competition forces Intel to up their game and bolster R&D—they may come with some beast chips as a result. Such is the way things work, scales tip one way then the next. What about NVIDIA?? Also isn’t Amazon working on their own chips?

x86 licensing makes this an AMD vs Intel game, with occasional celebrity appearances by VIA, et. al.

So, effectively AMD gets this private 1v1 game with Intel, and has a strong part in the GPU side of the market as well.

GPU is certainly a more open playing field compared to x86 (Intel is trying to get into it), but AMD is very competitive here as well. I think we will start seeing a lot more unification of their concepts between CPU and GPU. Multiple GPU dies interconnected using things like I/F, etc.

Dr. Su said AMD was more about architecture than process technology, so perhaps they can prove what most of us suspected all along - Intellectual property is the most valuable strategic asset we have. Even if Intel reverse-engineered AMD's reticles, by the time they could implement the same architecture, AMD would be pushing products to market that are 2-3 generations ahead.

My question right now is, how long will it take Intel to reach parity on this architecture front (especially if it's the key to success as AMD's CEO claims)? The other question is, even if Intel figures out the architecture and comes up with something even better, will they be able to catch up on process technology? Is it only going to be TSMC and Samsung left standing at 3nm and beyond? What sort of damage would offloading the foundry business cause Intel if they had to go pure-play to become competitive on x86?

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#185

Post by riku_iki »

kmlx wrote: post #122
NicoJuicy wrote: post #39

They wouldn't have an answer to AMD untill 2021: https://newsroom.intel.com/news/2019-intel-investor-meeting/... Ps. Long AMD, perfect execution the last two years. It's crazy, even their late firmware fixes improve performance as it had bad press for a moment for false benchmarks advertisement ( it was not false so it seems, the firmware was just not ok yet. Not everything is fully ok now, it's the only minor nitpic…

"Long AMD" are you expecting a higher stock price? because their 90 PE TTM doesn't look like it's in line with the rest of the industry. don't get me wrong, i was also long AMD, and still partly am, but i don't think the stock can go higher than 36-37, or even maintain that level long term, without some some mega quarters. which according to their own estimates will not be the case.

> 90 PE

High P/E can mean that company reinvests profit to the business, instead of stockpiling it. Amazon has 80 P/E for example.

I would be more concerned about very moderate revenue growth, looks like consumers don't rush switching to AMD.

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#186

Post by loeg »

mcdevilkiller wrote: post #179
loeg wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rome is nominally 225W/socket on the very high end of the price range; a 4P config puts you at 900W for the CPUs. Depending on other peripherals you might be at 1200-1500W total but I don't think you necessarily go much past that unless you're loading it up with power hungry graphics cards or something. You'd definitely want an efficient power supply! You're right to express some concern -- practical residential limi…

Wait, in the US you use 15A at 120v? Here in Europe (Spain at least) the typical is 16A at 240v. 1500W isn't that much of a problem. Oven breakers are even 20 or 32A.

> Wait, in the US you use 15A at 120v? Here in Europe (Spain at least) the typical is 16A at 240v.

Yep! The typical US residential circuit is only 120v, 15A breaker (so 12A at 80% load). (And that may be only 110-120v.) 20A circuits are also fairly common, but it's not the most common; the majority of wall outlets in a US house will be 15A.

In this chart, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEMA_connector#/media/File:NEM... , the commonly used US residential sockets are NEMA 5-15 (labelled "Typical Outlet," for 15A breaker circuits), NEMA 5-20 (for, duh, 20A breaker circuits), and NEMA 1-15 ("Old Outlet," in older buildings).

> 1500W isn't that much of a problem. Oven breakers are even 20 or 32A.

We do have higher amperage circuits for appliances like ovens and clothes driers, but they're usually dedicated circuits and have different socket shapes. You can see the labels "Clothes Dryer" and "Electric Oven" in the chart linked above :-).

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#187

Post by undersuit »

axaxs wrote: post #131
rhizome wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get a VESA mount Mini-ITX[1] case with a current-chipset (X570, etc.) motherboard, as well as all the other Mini-ITX options like monitor-mount base cases[2]. 1. https://www.amazon.com/Antec-ISK110-VESA-U3-Mini-ITX-Compati... 2. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcQQB9...

Thanks for the links. This is significantly larger than a NUC, but still manageable. That said, part of what I appreciate about the NUC is that it's all built together...no weird hardware/compat issues, etc.

>That said, part of what I appreciate about the NUC is that it's all built together...no weird hardware/compat issues, etc.

? Has something changed in the laptop world because you're describing issues frequently heard with Laptops and their screenless cousins, NUCs.

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#188

Post by NicoJuicy »

riku_iki wrote: post #185
kmlx wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Long AMD" are you expecting a higher stock price? because their 90 PE TTM doesn't look like it's in line with the rest of the industry. don't get me wrong, i was also long AMD, and still partly am, but i don't think the stock can go higher than 36-37, or even maintain that level long term, without some some mega quarters. which according to their own estimates will not be the case.

> 90 PE High P/E can mean that company reinvests profit to the business, instead of stockpiling it. Amazon has 80 P/E for example. I would be more concerned about very moderate revenue growth, looks like consumers don't rush switching to AMD.

DIY builders already changed ( https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Computers-Accessories-Co... ) and OEM's will probably join.

I think one reason their PE is so high is because their price is very competitive and they are very slow on raising average sale price.

It's only very recently that the flagship of Microsoft changed to AMD. I'm waiting for some OEM's to follow after this. This happened on the end of previous quarter. As explained before.

I think the cloud custumors can change faster than the consumer market though. As they will analyze price with performance and AMD has another year of "playing around", until 2021 or even 2022

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#189

Post by undersuit »

mcdevilkiller wrote: post #179
loeg wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rome is nominally 225W/socket on the very high end of the price range; a 4P config puts you at 900W for the CPUs. Depending on other peripherals you might be at 1200-1500W total but I don't think you necessarily go much past that unless you're loading it up with power hungry graphics cards or something. You'd definitely want an efficient power supply! You're right to express some concern -- practical residential limi…

Wait, in the US you use 15A at 120v? Here in Europe (Spain at least) the typical is 16A at 240v. 1500W isn't that much of a problem. Oven breakers are even 20 or 32A.

Computer PSUs are generally more efficient at european electical standards. I read many a thread two years ago about cryptominers in America wiring our heavy appliance 220v lines into their racks to approach the efficiency that PSUs can reach at higher volts.

And of course some datacenters just wire DC to the whole schebang instead of having an individual, well two redundant, PSUs per server.

Re: Intel publishes misleading benchmarks against AMD

#190

Post by NicoJuicy »

axaxs wrote: post #131
rhizome wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get a VESA mount Mini-ITX[1] case with a current-chipset (X570, etc.) motherboard, as well as all the other Mini-ITX options like monitor-mount base cases[2]. 1. https://www.amazon.com/Antec-ISK110-VESA-U3-Mini-ITX-Compati... 2. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcQQB9...

Thanks for the links. This is significantly larger than a NUC, but still manageable. That said, part of what I appreciate about the NUC is that it's all built together...no weird hardware/compat issues, etc.

Frequently bought together section on Amazon is probably exactly what you wanted ^^
Post reply on HN