Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality

#1

Post by BlackMonday » Sun, Jun 10, 2018, 11:41 PM UTC

Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality
techspot.com

Re: Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality

#2

Post by solomatov » Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 1:54 AM UTC

AMD did a great job with Threadripper, making high end CPUs much more affordable. It's interesting that Intel doesn't lower their prices. What's the logic behind it?

Re: Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality

#3

Post by dingo_bat » Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 1:54 AM UTC

It's awesome that TR2 will be a drop in replacement on existing motherboards! Props to AMD for delivering real value to consumers.

Re: Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality

#4

Post by dboreham » Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 2:00 AM UTC

solomatov wrote: post #2

AMD did a great job with Threadripper, making high end CPUs much more affordable. It's interesting that Intel doesn't lower their prices. What's the logic behind it?

Retail sales must be a very small percentage of the market. Perhaps they don't expect to sell any units anyway so the price doesn't matter.

Re: Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality

#5

Post by jopython » Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 2:08 AM UTC

I believe Intel's designs are based on a single die compared to AMD threadripper which are multichip.

Re: Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality

#6

Post by bluedino » Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 2:13 AM UTC

jopython wrote: post #5

I believe Intel's designs are based on a single die compared to AMD threadripper which are multichip.

Could Intel stick more than one on a single chip?

Re: Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality

#7

Post by CarVac » Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 2:16 AM UTC

bluedino wrote: post #6

jopython wrote: post #5

I believe Intel's designs are based on a single die compared to AMD threadripper which are multichip.

Could Intel stick more than one on a single chip?

Their first dual-core processors were multiple chip modules.

Re: Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality

#8

Post by tadfisher » Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 2:25 AM UTC

bluedino wrote: post #6

jopython wrote: post #5

I believe Intel's designs are based on a single die compared to AMD threadripper which are multichip.

Could Intel stick more than one on a single chip?

Yes, but so far they have not, instead investing in on-die mesh interconnects for scaling up core count. Here's an opinion piece on the subject: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12814/a-thought-on-silicon-de...

Re: Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality

#9

Post by MBCook » Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 2:26 AM UTC

jopython wrote: post #5

I believe Intel's designs are based on a single die compared to AMD threadripper which are multichip.

You’re right, but obviously the advantage that used to give them isn’t working out anymore.

AMD’s interconnect seems fast enough, and they don’t have the yield/cost problems from massive single die chips.

Re: Intel 28-core fantasy vs. AMD 32-core reality

#10

Post by wmf » Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 2:36 AM UTC

solomatov wrote: post #2

AMD did a great job with Threadripper, making high end CPUs much more affordable. It's interesting that Intel doesn't lower their prices. What's the logic behind it?

Intel was selling 18-core chips for >$2,400 then when Threadripper came out Intel released the 18-core i9 for "only" $2,000, so that is something of a price drop.

Also, Intel's $350 8700K was cheaper at launch than AMD's $450 1800X even though the 8700K is faster in gaming.