What are the odds that Intel...

...comes back at AMD and DESTROYS them like core 2 duo?????

EDIT: I was there for the launch of the E6300. I was the one who had just bought the 3800+ X2... I fear that this happens again. Maybe it is the whiskey and clearer heads would prevail, after all Intel has no chiplet strategy. Maybe this time Intel has no crushing response.... makes me wonder though. (Kavari coffee flavored whickey is gooooooooood πŸ™‚ )

last edited by Mightyunit

I have no doubt they will come back with a better CPU. That is what good competition does...drives performance and/or price to the consumers benefit. However, the only thing intel has to compete with in the short term is price drops. Last I heard desktop CPUs on the 10nm nodes are aren’t going to be ready until 2020.

last edited by Bond007

There's also will Intel finally wake up with their pricing and stupid business model? I'm looking at you i9 line...

The problem is... the last time around Intel had an oddball small project that worked and became the C2D (and foundation for all future Intel CPUs). Do they have another one in the works even after all the 'belt tightening' and project dumping they have been doing for the past few years? Right now Intel monolithic core design is maxing out on efficiency and its only smaller node size that is making them faster. Adding more cores.... is a loosing proposition against AMD's 'lego' building block design. It is going to take a massive low level redesign for them 'come back' like they did in the C2D days.
Can Intel do it? YES, they have a metric f-ton of RnD money to throw around. Will they? Maybe. Will they in time to save their market share? No idea. Interesting times indeed.

last edited by GaK_45

@GaK_45 Whoa. I did not know that back story on C2D!! "Intel had an oddball small project that worked and became the C2D", I had NO idea, very interesting.

Yeah Intel was looking for a 'good' MOBILE cpu line, so they gave a small team in Israel the go ahead to basically update their ancient P6 (aka Pentium Pro aka pre-NetBurst CPU desing). After a ton of work (and probably a LOT of drugs) they created the Pentium M (for mobile). Then AMD kicked the shit out of Intel's 'we want to hit 10GHz on one core' netburst designs (which when they tried to tack two on one die made for a great space heater but mediocre CPU)... and they panicked. They looked around and realized the Pen M design could easily scale UP in both TDP and core count... and the rest is history. Last real break through / paradigm shift for Intel beyond the usual tweaking and reworking and making the monolithic design BIGGER and more powerful. The really sad, sad part is Intel litterally spent Billions and years on the dead end NetBurst idea... when all they had to do was continue with what they already had!

Its why I say that Intel is sooo huge that they can easily outspend AMD, it just depends on IF they have another little oddball project tucked away sucking up merely a fraction of a percentage of their RnD budget or not. If they don't... will be a couple gens before they get back on top. Either way its great for consumers as AMD has once again blazed a trail (of necessity) that Intel will probably have to follow... or at least be forced to blaze a(nother) NEW trail. Time will tell how big the impact will be on the next decade or two of CPU design but it is the end of 'this gen is a minor improvement on the last THREE gens' days. πŸ˜‰

last edited by GaK_45

@GaK_45 no joke, that was fascinating to read! Thanks Gak for taking the time to post that info!!! πŸ™‚

Thanks. Glad I could fill in some background info for you. πŸ™‚

@GaK_45 ya it makes me more confident to jump in and build one or more likely two systems based off of Ryzen 3000 cpus. πŸ™‚

I was thinking more about this topic and I would like to bounce some ideas around in here.

Have you heard people say that Intel has (I am paraphrasing here) a treasure trove of new technology and tricks up their sleeves that they can whip out and slap AMD down with? I recall hearing this a number of times over the recent past ( 1- 2 years). Do you think there is anything to that? I know Intel has a ridiculous R&D budget so maybe this is partly true?? Sounds a little odd to me. If they develop new tech why wouldn't they use it immediately?

@Mightyunit I think this is very possible but it could go like Toyota and all car manufacturers, for years they just released the small mods to make you think you need a new one then companies like tesla came out and instead of all those years on top helping it really just caused them all to scramble and only now are some of them making somewhat comparable cars

Just my POV / 2 cents.
Intel spends literally billions of dollars every year on RnD. Their budget makes what NV and AMD spend look like chump change. Their engineers are basically given free reign to screw around. IF it works... great and they patent it. If not, they shelve it. Intel nukes a LOT of ideas every year... and they don't care. They can afford to play all the angles.
This wild RnD spending is what saved their bacon the last time AMD pulled ahead.
Intel loves to resell the same thing over and over again, just with tiny improvements while their teams work on next gen stuff in the background. This is because it is cheap to do so, and they had no competition to call them on it. Now they do.
Does this mean that Intel can pull something out their butt AGAIN to get back into first place? No idea. Either way it will be one gen at the very least before they can implement it.
So right now TR is the place to be for enthusiasts who want mega CPUs. While Ryzen is a pretty safe bet for the average joe.
Basically Intel may or may not recover quickly from years of being lazy. BUT it really does not matter right now. Unless you upgrade every year picking a socket type and mobo should NEVER be based on 'future proofing'. Instead buy what is best for your needs now.... and in the future when you want to upgrade THEN re-eval what is 'best'. Be it Team Blue or Team Red... and at that point your mobo will be outdated making it moot what socket the old system was using. This is why I am puzzled by peeps wanting more than one or two gens to a socket type. Chuck the board and CPU and move on (or turn it into something else like FreeNas based rig). πŸ˜‰

last edited by GaK_45

@GaK_45 said in What are the odds that Intel...:
...I am puzzled by peeps wanting more than one or two gens to a socket type.

Interesting. IMO it would have to do with the fact that there was no real reason Kaby Lake/Coffee Lake (four generations) were not inter compatible with z170-z390. I think that was too much for a lot of people. I had a 6700k on a Z170-a and wanted to buy an 8700k. After a bios tweak that 8700k ran on my Z170-a AND oc'd well. No need for a new mobo IMO!! Back in the day SB and IB were and I really appreciated that! I had a 3770k on a P67 board and would have considered more Intel cpus if it did not mean a new mobo almost every time.

IMO AMD was wise to make AM4 last this long. A stark contrast to their competitor πŸ™‚

last edited by Mightyunit

Sure you CAN use Z170s... but NVMe and other advanced tech is hit or miss on working or not. Basically when talking about more than 2 gens out of date... its the motherboard that is going to be a bottleneck not the CPU. For example PCIe 3 is nearing end of life. Next gen GPUs will most likely be 4.0... Hell Intel is skipping PCIe 4 and going right to PCIe 5. Same with onboard controllers. Audio is getting better every gen. USB is getting faster. LAN NICs the same. It really does come a point where peeps should be going "will the latest 5 bill CPU really make that big a dif? OR should I also yank the board, spend an extra 2 bills and get a much better end result?" The answer is almost always... spend an extra 2 bills.
Just my 2 cents. Others may see things differently. Etc etc πŸ™‚

last edited by GaK_45

I agree, new boards that offer better and more features are great. However it is the option to upgrade a board that I the consumer would like to retain if possible. I would prefer that AMD or Intel not decide for me. It seems like a good plan to me but I could be mistaken. πŸ™‚

@Soullessone21
I guess too big to fail is not a thing? unless perhaps you are a financial institution... or Intel. Time will tell I guess

last edited by Mightyunit

@Mightyunit haha yah too big to fail is a saying that disgusts me to my core, all the banks in 2008 and so many ruined lives and no repercussions for the horrible billionaires.

On another note amd for me has been amazing for csm requirements as their newer boards often can be swapped into system with older CPUs (am3 to am3+) now 3 Gen's of am4 is good to me for business uses.

This is all very interesting and I guess only time will tell.