[bjornjaja]

AMD bringing the competition forces Intel to up their game and bolster R&D—they may come with some beast chips as a result.

Such is the way things work, scales tip one way then the next.

What about NVIDIA??

Also isn’t Amazon working on their own chips?

[bob1029]

x86 licensing makes this an AMD vs Intel game, with occasional celebrity appearances by VIA, et. al.

So, effectively AMD gets this private 1v1 game with Intel, and has a strong part in the GPU side of the market as well.

GPU is certainly a more open playing field compared to x86 (Intel is trying to get into it), but AMD is very competitive here as well. I think we will start seeing a lot more unification of their concepts between CPU and GPU. Multiple GPU dies interconnected using things like I/F, etc.

Dr. Su said AMD was more about architecture than process technology, so perhaps they can prove what most of us suspected all along - Intellectual property is the most valuable strategic asset we have. Even if Intel reverse-engineered AMD's reticles, by the time they could implement the same architecture, AMD would be pushing products to market that are 2-3 generations ahead.

My question right now is, how long will it take Intel to reach parity on this architecture front (especially if it's the key to success as AMD's CEO claims)? The other question is, even if Intel figures out the architecture and comes up with something even better, will they be able to catch up on process technology? Is it only going to be TSMC and Samsung left standing at 3nm and beyond? What sort of damage would offloading the foundry business cause Intel if they had to go pure-play to become competitive on x86?

[ksec]

Hold on a min,

>Dr. Su said AMD was more about architecture than process technology, so perhaps they can prove what most of us suspected all along - Intellectual property is the most valuable strategic asset we have. Even if Intel reverse-engineered AMD's reticles, by the time they could implement the same architecture, AMD would be pushing products to market that are 2-3 generations ahead. My question right now is, how long will it take Intel to reach parity on this architecture front (especially if it's the key to success as AMD's CEO claims)?

This is not true. As much as I support AMD and loathe Intel, architecture wise I would say even Zen 2 and Intel SomethingLake is about the same, with many benchmarks backing the claim. And Icelake being slightly in front of Zen 2. Icelake did deliver a roughly 15% improvement as promised, so there is no sign Intel's architecture department has any problems ( yet ).

The problem is Icelake performance improvement doesn't matter if 10nm cant yield.

And when Dr Su said about IP, she was referring to the whole chipset strategy and how it blinds everything together.