Deepcool CL500 chassis review
AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G Renoir APU review
CORSAIR iCUE LT100 Smart Lighting Towers Review
Gigabyte B550 Aorus Pro review
Asus ROG Strix XG27UQ review
be quiet! Pure Rock 2 review
Fractal Design Define 7 Compact review
Lian Li Galahad 360 liquid cooler review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - July 2020
Patriot Viper Steel DDR4 3600 MHz (64GB) review
AMD: Partner meeting on April 23 in preparation of Navi and Ryzen 3000 CPUs launch
On April 23, AMD will hold a meeting with the company's partners to discuss the next generation of Ryzen CPUs and the upcoming graphics architecture Navi. What exactly AMD will reveal on the presentation is unclear, but it is likely to address release dates and product details.
AMD will hold a partner meeting on April 23 to share information about the planned products in the 7nm process. Specifically, these are the upcoming Navi GPUs and the Ryzen 3000 processors with Zen 2 architecture ("Matisse"). Since this is a closed event, AMD has no specific information on the content discussed. It is also an event for North American partners. Meetings with partners from other regions will take place later. Wccftech suspects that the partners at the event will be given the planned release dates of this year's products.
AMD seems to be planning an announcement presentation of the products, or even a launch, at the Computex 2019, which will start May 28th and ends June 1st in Taipei. This is also supported by the fact that AMD opens this year's Computex with a keynote . Such an opening conference is quite a thing, it will be interesting to see what AMD will actually reveal, announce or introduce on the presentation.
"I am honored to host the opening keynote this year and to provide new details on AMD's Next Generation high performance platforms and products," said Su. In the press release, the Ryzen 3000 CPUs and Navi graphics cards are explicitly mentioned.
tunejunky
Senior Member
Posts: 971
Joined: 2017-08-18
Senior Member
Posts: 971
Joined: 2017-08-18
#5658061 Posted on: 04/08/2019 03:55 PM
this is the more-than-$64,000 question.
but AMD has agility going for it and the most nimble move was actually the one i criticized the most - selling the fabs.
now that Intel has discovered the joys of contract work (an increasing part of it's product offerings) it has suffered from supply chain issues as well as node issues. Apple is even questioning the use and availability of Intel 5g modems. and it was the (4g) modems which caused a delay in the current Intel lineup.
Intel is and will continue to be the market leader, but by steadily decreasing margins for the next 3-4 years. after that, if AMD doesn't have its ducks in a row, there'll be trouble.
I kind of wonder what AMDs long term plan against Intel is. The core count increase was a nice "surprise" but it's really only going to last so long. With Intel's recent restructuring of it's design team and massive capex increase - how is AMD going to sustain it's momentum against a company that has 10x the revenue and significantly more clout in the industry?
this is the more-than-$64,000 question.
but AMD has agility going for it and the most nimble move was actually the one i criticized the most - selling the fabs.
now that Intel has discovered the joys of contract work (an increasing part of it's product offerings) it has suffered from supply chain issues as well as node issues. Apple is even questioning the use and availability of Intel 5g modems. and it was the (4g) modems which caused a delay in the current Intel lineup.
Intel is and will continue to be the market leader, but by steadily decreasing margins for the next 3-4 years. after that, if AMD doesn't have its ducks in a row, there'll be trouble.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 5155
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 5155
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5658065 Posted on: 04/08/2019 04:04 PM
Haha Apple is questioning their continued use with Intel, period. There's rumors that they're going to transition entirely to ARM.
Though, if Apple ceased to exist tomorrow, I don't think that would really impact Intel all that much. Apple and Intel, to my understanding, never really got along that well because Apple is very demanding and Intel doesn't have enough of an incentive to cater to their demands.
Apple is even questioning the use and availability of Intel 5g modems. and it was the (4g) modems which caused a delay in the current Intel lineup.
Haha Apple is questioning their continued use with Intel, period. There's rumors that they're going to transition entirely to ARM.
Though, if Apple ceased to exist tomorrow, I don't think that would really impact Intel all that much. Apple and Intel, to my understanding, never really got along that well because Apple is very demanding and Intel doesn't have enough of an incentive to cater to their demands.
waltc3
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: 2014-07-22
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: 2014-07-22
#5658127 Posted on: 04/08/2019 07:23 PM
By simply keeping the R&D pedal to the metal at all times. Having 10x the revenue (Intel is highly diversified outside of the PC arena, remember) has never been a defense against being bested by AMD technically. But this time at AMD, unlike the two-year period years back when AMD was besting Intel with it's A64 line, while Intel was trying to push Itanium and keep everyone else on a 32-bit desktop (I will never forget Intel's infamous, "You don't need 64-bits on the desktop!" ad campaign targeting the A-64), AMD is being run by the right people! Su has one foot in engineering, the other in the retail markets--she's a huge boon for AMD. After the A64, after Intel licensed x86-64 from AMD and proceeded to beat AMD at its own game, AMD went through a succession of CEO's without a clue, literally. Reminded me of C= a lot during those years. All of that is history, now, thankfully--or I don't think there would be an AMD around to talk about! One last comment: Intel reminds me a lot of Apple corporate--Intel really is not accustomed to having to compete with anyone except AMD, and the last time that happened was many years ago. Intel is huge and extremely cumbersome--will let go 15,000 employees in a year and not feel it, etc. AMD is primed, otoh, leaner and more nimble competitively and far less weighted down by other-than-PC concerns. As far as "clout" goes, Intel doesn't have as much as you might imagine. When AMD introduced the original Athlon, Intel pulled out all of the stops and dirty tricks it could manage to keep OEM motherboard makers away from using AMD cpus, and to keep companies like Dell from selling any AMD products by paying them not to do so. All total, it was never enough to knock AMD out of the box. Intel's going to have its work cut out for it from now on, imo.
I kind of wonder what AMDs long term plan against Intel is. The core count increase was a nice "surprise" but it's really only going to last so long. With Intel's recent restructuring of it's design team and massive capex increase - how is AMD going to sustain it's momentum against a company that has 10x the revenue and significantly more clout in the industry?
By simply keeping the R&D pedal to the metal at all times. Having 10x the revenue (Intel is highly diversified outside of the PC arena, remember) has never been a defense against being bested by AMD technically. But this time at AMD, unlike the two-year period years back when AMD was besting Intel with it's A64 line, while Intel was trying to push Itanium and keep everyone else on a 32-bit desktop (I will never forget Intel's infamous, "You don't need 64-bits on the desktop!" ad campaign targeting the A-64), AMD is being run by the right people! Su has one foot in engineering, the other in the retail markets--she's a huge boon for AMD. After the A64, after Intel licensed x86-64 from AMD and proceeded to beat AMD at its own game, AMD went through a succession of CEO's without a clue, literally. Reminded me of C= a lot during those years. All of that is history, now, thankfully--or I don't think there would be an AMD around to talk about! One last comment: Intel reminds me a lot of Apple corporate--Intel really is not accustomed to having to compete with anyone except AMD, and the last time that happened was many years ago. Intel is huge and extremely cumbersome--will let go 15,000 employees in a year and not feel it, etc. AMD is primed, otoh, leaner and more nimble competitively and far less weighted down by other-than-PC concerns. As far as "clout" goes, Intel doesn't have as much as you might imagine. When AMD introduced the original Athlon, Intel pulled out all of the stops and dirty tricks it could manage to keep OEM motherboard makers away from using AMD cpus, and to keep companies like Dell from selling any AMD products by paying them not to do so. All total, it was never enough to knock AMD out of the box. Intel's going to have its work cut out for it from now on, imo.
waltc3
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: 2014-07-22
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: 2014-07-22
#5658133 Posted on: 04/08/2019 07:31 PM
this is the more-than-$64,000 question.
but AMD has agility going for it and the most nimble move was actually the one i criticized the most - selling the fabs.
now that Intel has discovered the joys of contract work (an increasing part of it's product offerings) it has suffered from supply chain issues as well as node issues. Apple is even questioning the use and availability of Intel 5g modems. and it was the (4g) modems which caused a delay in the current Intel lineup.
Intel is and will continue to be the market leader, but by steadily decreasing margins for the next 3-4 years. after that, if AMD doesn't have its ducks in a row, there'll be trouble.
I won't even look more than a year ahead, really. Things change so fast! But I didn't think AMD should have sold its FABs, either--I also complained about that. But in retrospect I was wrong. Was likely the best thing at the time. AMD's problem up to now--post Jerry Sanders--was top management, imo. Until Su, none of the people they hired to run the company had a clue. With the right management there's no stopping AMD, whereas Intel is sitting on enough $ not to have to worry about bad management all that much. Intel failed with Rdram, with Itanium, and many other things that literally cost them billions in investments. But they had enough $ to stay afloat nonetheless. The one thing I think AMD cannot afford is mistakes on the order of those that Intel has made through the years.
this is the more-than-$64,000 question.
but AMD has agility going for it and the most nimble move was actually the one i criticized the most - selling the fabs.
now that Intel has discovered the joys of contract work (an increasing part of it's product offerings) it has suffered from supply chain issues as well as node issues. Apple is even questioning the use and availability of Intel 5g modems. and it was the (4g) modems which caused a delay in the current Intel lineup.
Intel is and will continue to be the market leader, but by steadily decreasing margins for the next 3-4 years. after that, if AMD doesn't have its ducks in a row, there'll be trouble.
I won't even look more than a year ahead, really. Things change so fast! But I didn't think AMD should have sold its FABs, either--I also complained about that. But in retrospect I was wrong. Was likely the best thing at the time. AMD's problem up to now--post Jerry Sanders--was top management, imo. Until Su, none of the people they hired to run the company had a clue. With the right management there's no stopping AMD, whereas Intel is sitting on enough $ not to have to worry about bad management all that much. Intel failed with Rdram, with Itanium, and many other things that literally cost them billions in investments. But they had enough $ to stay afloat nonetheless. The one thing I think AMD cannot afford is mistakes on the order of those that Intel has made through the years.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 109
Joined: 2016-11-08
That can't be true, they make Mercedes....