upto 64 Cores/128 Threads and 128 PCI express lanes (that's on all of them irrespective of the core count) - 8 channel memory.
Given AMD's insanely aggressive pricing on the Zen 2 consumer line I'm expecting a proper knockdown drag out fight.
If Intel follows, then they have both just lost money. Might make sense if ruining the market drives the competitor out, but that’s not likely with Intel.
Now passmark isn’t 100% accurate but it’s usually pretty close.
https://m.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
I’d call that aggressive myself.
I don’t care which one wins I just want proper competition again.
[1] https://images.anandtech.com/doci/13561/amd_rome-678_678x452...
AMD should go as aggressive as possible with the pricing to steal market share from Intel because it has nothing to worry about in regards Intel responding with a price war - it just won't happen. Intel couldn't even bring itself to do that with it's mobile chips - twice. First with Strong-arm and then with Atom. It lost the mobile market twice because of its insatious margin greed.
AMD to their credit have played everything blindingly well with nary a misstep in the last two years.
It must be hard to be intel and have your seeming invincibility in the x86 market challenged by a company that nearly went bust not that long ago.
Ironically intel needs AMD to prove they don’t own the whole market, it’s just blown up this time because AMD nailed it on the architecture and fab side.
This rough math means if AMD takes half of the new CPU orders, they should have about 10% server CPU market share within a year, consistent with some analyst estimates [1]
Will be interesting to see if intel begin pulling the same kind of shenanigans they did back the last AMD was competitive (early Opteron/Athlon days).
I don’t think the market structure is the same and given they got slapped for it last time by the regulators I’m curious to see if they’ll try.
That really isn't relevant. Most consumers buy a new computer when their old one breaks or becomes unbearably slow. Most corporate buyers have a consistent 3-5 year procurement cycle. AMD don't need everyone to rush out and buy new computers, nor do they particularly want it - huge spikes in sales are detrimental to the supply chain, as we saw with the GPU mining fad.
AMD want and need to consistently beat Intel on value over a protracted period, so that whenever a customer does choose to upgrade their computer they choose an AMD processor. At the moment, they're looking good in terms of both architecture and fabrication; the main problem AMD is likely to face is with partner relationships, because of Intel's historical dominance and use of anti-competitive practices.
If all my tooling and supply chain is geared towards Intel on the server lines, it'll take a much better value proposal, volume guarantees, and the threat my competition will do it first to make me add a new line geared towards AMD.
OTOH, for cloud powerhouses that design their own hardware, even a marginal improvement in TCO/performance will tip the scales.
It's fun seeing something that can chew through kdenlive video editing of 2160p, 60fps video and encode a project into HEVC like a hot knife going through butter.