Denial:

I doubt it - most people in the industry don't care. I studied at Rochester Institute of Technology, lots of my classmates went to Nvidia/AMD/Intel/Xilinx/etc - it's different when it's your job, you don't get attached like people here on forums. Most of them have bounced several times during internships between companies and even after they graduated the general sentiment was that if you weren't bouncing between companies every 3-4 years in order to increase your salary cap, you're doing it wrong. Maybe it would be weird for some older guys that have been with AMD since day one - I know AMD's current CPU architect Michael Clark has been with them for decades - so if Intel poached him yeah, but for the most part these guys hop companies often and are used to it.

Sorry for OT but now I finally know where you get your insights from, you're educated in the field. Cudos.

waltc3:

That's funny...as I think nVidia is the one behind...;) Ah, marketing perceptions, eh?

I won't bother dwelling into pointless polemics. Be a fanboy of whoever you want, but a fact is a fact. Last time I checked AMD hasn't outperformed Nvidia. Please remind me if it was otherwise as of late.

I think Raja had pretty much "shot his load" at AMD and had little more to contribute--it was sorely obvious he wanted to step back out of the limelight and he did. He was very uncomfortable being in the spotlight. But Intel hiring these people says much more about Intel than it does about AMD or nVidia--Intel is admitting it's not in touch with the markets so it's looking outside as opposed to inside for hires. Remember that all of these people are likely working at Intel under five-year NDA's from nVidia and AMD, which is pretty much industry-standard. So whatever Intel is doing it will have to lie far outside of what AMD and nVidia are presently doing--if not, the lawsuits will fly with gusto...;) These hires may well help to put Intel on the right path (as AMD has always steered them since x86-64), but won't do very much at all for Intel-specific GPU designs for the foreseeable future. I think the tech press makes rather more of these hires than is warranted.

Jesus Christ! INTEL will succeed but only by stealing AMD GPU employee's. Once INTEL dominates the GPU market they will just lay those people off. POS betrayed LIsa Suu. I wonder what INTEL is paying those new workers. I bet Raja and the workers on purposely slowed AMD GPU department in order to work with INTEL and quickly play catch up against their old team. I hope for the worse for the ones that jumped ship from AMD to INTEL. Fuc***** POS!

cryohellinc:

I won't bother dwelling into pointless polemics. Be a fanboy of whoever you want, but a fact is a fact. Last time I checked AMD hasn't outperformed Nvidia. Please remind me if it was otherwise as of late.

Let's take the ~$300 market--where many more GPUs are sold than in the $600-$1300 price range--far more, for both companies. What does nVIdia have at that price point that does SLI? What does nVidia have at that price point that has 8GB's of VRAM? 0, on both counts. AMD offers both at that price point. That's what I mean about "ahead"--like I said, there are marketing perceptions and then there are facts. Factually, I find nVidia stuff way overmarketed, long on hype, and priced too high. Now you can call that "fan boy" if you like--but I rather think not...;) We'll agree to disagree...;)

Dimitrios1983:

Jesus Christ! INTEL will succeed but only by stealing AMD GPU employee's. Once INTEL dominates the GPU market they will just lay those people off. POS betrayed LIsa Suu. I wonder what INTEL is paying those new workers. I bet Raja and the workers on purposely slowed AMD GPU department in order to work with INTEL and quickly play catch up against their old team. I hope for the worse for the ones that jumped ship from AMD to INTEL. Fuc***** POS!

You mean all *three* of these new nVidia and AMD workers out of the tens of thousands Intel employs? Quite the conspiracy theory...;) Intel sucks at graphics--in comparison with AMD, for instance. Always has--the only discrete 3d GPUs Intel ever made got trounced and Intel promptly quit the discrete GPU business. Intel has a long, long way to travel just to catch up. We shall see if the company even tries.

waltc3:

I think Raja had pretty much "shot his load" at AMD and had little more to contribute--it was sorely obvious he wanted to step back out of the limelight and he did. He was very uncomfortable being in the spotlight.

I think Raja wanted to build an amazing gpu but was hamstrung by AMD's lack of funds, so he went to Intel who have opened the coffers and he is getting his chance. He's using his connections to build a good team. As for limelight - how does heading up the team to build a brand new gpu for one of the biggest most recognisable companies in the world count as hiding from the limelight? You might not like him but his neck is on the line now - and he no longer has the "I have no money/corporate support excuse" if he fails.

waltc3:

I think Raja had pretty much "shot his load" at AMD and had little more to contribute--it was sorely obvious he wanted to step back out of the limelight and he did. He was very uncomfortable being in the spotlight. But Intel hiring these people says much more about Intel than it does about AMD or nVidia--Intel is admitting it's not in touch with the markets so it's looking outside as opposed to inside for hires. Remember that all of these people are likely working at Intel under five-year NDA's from nVidia and AMD, which is pretty much industry-standard. So whatever Intel is doing it will have to lie far outside of what AMD and nVidia are presently doing--if not, the lawsuits will fly with gusto...;) These hires may well help to put Intel on the right path (as AMD has always steered them since x86-64), but won't do very much at all for Intel-specific GPU designs for the foreseeable future. I think the tech press makes rather more of these hires than is warranted.

INTEL doesn't care about lawsuits, they will glady pay those crumbs again in court. People have stated before INTEL made out better with doing those Monopoly stunts and getting fined in court than playing fair instead. AMD won won like 2Billion or whatever but it was proven it hurt AMD long term wise what shady INTEL did.

waltc3:

Let's take the ~$300 market--where many more GPUs are sold than in the $600-$1300 price range--far more, for both companies. What does nVIdia have at that price point that does SLI? What does nVidia have at that price point that has 8GB's of VRAM? 0, on both counts. AMD offers both at that price point. That's what I mean about "ahead"--like I said, there are marketing perceptions and then there are facts. Factually, I find nVidia stuff way overmarketed, long on hype, and priced too high. Now you can call that "fan boy" if you like--but I rather think not...;) We'll agree to disagree...;)

No, I agree that AMD has a better offer, but you are wrong when you say that AMD is ahead of Nvidia. It's not. Give credit where credit is due. And in this case, Nvidia outperforms anything that AMD has to offer right now. I also don't like the direction Nvidia is heading especially price wise, insane and too expensive for where I live.

waltc3:

Let's take the ~$300 market--where many more GPUs are sold than in the $600-$1300 price range--far more, for both companies. What does nVIdia have at that price point that does SLI? What does nVidia have at that price point that has 8GB's of VRAM? 0, on both counts. AMD offers both at that price point. That's what I mean about "ahead"--like I said, there are marketing perceptions and then there are facts. Factually, I find nVidia stuff way overmarketed, long on hype, and priced too high. Now you can call that "fan boy" if you like--but I rather think not...;) We'll agree to disagree...;)

Hmmm good points, but... does it mean to beat somebody if you've got more VRAM you don't need or SLI / CFX which nobody uses? Does it mean much if you got the higher numbers on the white papers but perform the same in real world usage? Is it a marketing perception that things like 8GB VRAM are needed on a card in the 300$ range, or that people need a multi GPU capable graphics card? I personally say that AMD's "underdog" branding comes from lower sales, cards in the 300$ range are seldomly used with more than 1080p, where 8GB VRAM do hardly make a difference in terms of fps, and where nobody uses two cards even though they're capable of it. Call me a Nvidia fanboy 😉 Nvidia's products are absolutely overpriced. The marketing is grossly blunt ("It just works"), and it makes me feel more stupid than necessary. The hype's created by the same effects that made Apple a brand, position yourself properly (marketing...), and market the... marketing. And if I would be more orientated to buying price / performance wise, I wouldn't nearly as much buy Nvidia than I do now. And AMD is definately trying to push things way more than Nvidia in terms creating new and open standards, and establish value features (remember Mantle?) where Nvidia tries to keep the status quo just as it is now, incremental performance increases with little new stuff (or little new stuff that's worth using or actually available) like Intel does? Call me an AMD fanboy 😉 It's a point of view, and marketing's really hard on both sides, don't fall for it my friend

Denial:

They took one Nvidia engineer, one AMD engineer and two AMD marketing people.

Come on, finish the joke - Irish man, Scottish man and an English man ........ 🙂:p:D I'll finish it for you - Intel coming on will only leave 1 question , 'Will there cards be dearer than Nvidia? '

So AMD's next gpu will be good with all the dredge removed from RTG.

What I am interested in is what will Intel bring to the table to make Nvidia and Amd loyalists, fanboy is a racist remark to me, jump ship and buy their gpu? Will they simply pry in double the performance power at the same price as their competion? Will they just bring in the same performance and under price the competition to gain customers at a loss in the beginning? Will they bring in a new hook like Nvidia did with ray tracing? Or will they make their gpu smoke the competition's performance when you use it in conjunction with Intel cpu's and optane memory? Everyone knows Intel has the money to make a gpu. But what are they going to produce to muscle in on Nvidia's 80% share of the discrete gpu market? And the lack of information on which way they are heading isn't building market interest like Nvidia and Amd does when they tease their product. Quite the opposite I feel. Right now I find the whole Intel joining in on the discrete gpu market a yawner. And remember how Optane was going to change your lives?

NewTRUMP Order:

What I am interested in is what will Intel bring to the table to make Nvidia and Amd loyalists, fanboy is a racist remark to me, jump ship and buy their gpu? Will they simply pry in double the performance power at the same price as their competion? Will they just bring in the same performance and under price the competition to gain customers at a loss in the beginning? Will they bring in a new hook like Nvidia did with ray tracing? Or will they make their gpu smoke the competition's performance when you use it in conjunction with Intel cpu's and optane memory? Everyone knows Intel has the money to make a gpu. But what are they going to produce to muscle in on Nvidia's 80% share of the discrete gpu market? And the lack of information on which way they are heading isn't building market interest like Nvidia and Amd does when they tease their product. Quite the opposite I feel. Right now I find the whole Intel joining in on the discrete gpu market a yawner. And remember how Optane was going to change your lives?

They don't really have to bring anything new - they completely dominate the OEM channels. All they need to do is produce a competitive GPU and push it to their vendors and they'll gain a ton of marketshare then just build off that. With prices as high as they are with GPUs it won't be hard to be competitive either.

It's intel. Whatever they release is going to be overpriced for how it performs.

BLEH!:

It's intel. Whatever they release is going to be overpriced for how it performs.

That's not always true. Intel actually has plenty of products that are adequately priced. They're never the cheapest option and they're very rarely the best value, but basically anything that isn't industry-leading in some regard is often a decent buy. For example, their NICs, their non-Optane drives, their low-end CPUs, etc. I'm sure these first-gen GPUs will be very competitively priced [with Nvidia]. Intel is well aware of their poor reputation for GPUs, so being a first-generation product, even if it's all-around better than the competition (which I predict it won't be until drivers mature), they need to convince people to opt for them, and price is likely the easiest way to go about that.

BLEH!:

It's intel. Whatever they release is going to be overpriced for how it performs.

It was actually Intel that broke the trend of high priced CPUs that AMD had going back in its Athlon 64 & FX days (Socket 939, 2004-5). A dual core FX53 was about $800 back then. Intel came along with Core 2 Duo and beat it at around $250-330.

Intel is such a scammer that amazes me how many people love them... I can't wait for Zen 2 to see Intel going down. We all know the history behind Intel and their clients...

Intel has literally thousands of employees, and this makes, what, 5-6 people hired from AMD & nVidia?...;) Oh, yeah, like those 5-6 are going to make all the difference--I don't think so. As far as this gal goes--"digital marketing" is *Internet sales*, if you didn't already know that...;) She is not a tech or engineer. The hype here is starting to remind me of Larrabee! Of course, it's not quite that bad yet--and we should all hope to the Good Lord that it never gets that bad, ever! But really, all of this speculation is going to lead to major disappointment, just like Larrabee. In the case of Larrabee, my belief was that the pundits had falsely ascribed so much incredible power and ability to Larrabee--far, far outside of anything Intel ever officially stated about Larrabee (for instance, Intel stated often that Larrabee was not "real-time ray tracing" but the Internet tech pundits soldiered on, oblivious!), that it was the Internet pundits and their ridiculous Larrabee hype that persuaded Intel just to can the whole thing--which they did. No way could Larrabee ever met the hyped expectations. Is it going to happen again? Who knows? I hope not. Best advice is to listen only to what Intel says about its upcoming GPU/IGPs, and ignore the pundits this time, imo.

Intel may have to change their logo soon with the way they are pouching all the AMD employees. https://i.imgflip.com/2y9o7s.jpg