• jagged_circle@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Intel’s flagship 128-core Xeon 6980P ‘Granite Rapids’ processor costs $17,800, making it the company’s most expensive standard CPU ever. By contrast, AMD’s most expensive 96-core EPYC 6979P processor costs $11,805.

    Jesus Christ when did we break 20 cores?

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Their P/E is 125

      One fucking hundred and twenty five.

      That’s more than twice Nvidia. It’s completely disconnected from reality.

    • Shadywack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 hours ago

      What the fuck??? Insert Jumanji meme “What year is it?”

      Numbers check out too. Wintel, slayed, and we didn’t even notice.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    I predicted in 2017 stock price over $100 when that happened.
    Took about 3-4 years longer than expected, but still congratulations to AMD, on their successful fight back from the brink of bankruptcy.

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      Not to diminish the hard work AMD has put in, but it’s at least partially related to Intel’s ongoing issues with quality assurance (or the lack thereof, rather), and thus it’s arguable that they hold a stronger position at least partially due to Intel’s weakness in the last 10 years.

      • Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        63
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Having a usable product while your opponents continually shoot themselves in the foot is a viable market strategy.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        Absolutely, if Intel hadn’t been sleeping on their laurels for 5 years on desktop performance, and had made 6 and 8 core CPUs themselves before Ryzen arrived. Ryzen would not have been nearly as successful. This was followed by the catastrophic Intel 10nm fab failures, allowing AMD to stay ahead even longer.

        So absolutely, AMD has been helped a lot by Intel failing to react in time, and then failing in execution when they did react.
        Still I think congratulation is in order, because Ryzen was such a huge improvement on the desktop and server, that they absolutely deserve their success. Threadripper was icing on the cake, and completely trashed Intel in the workstation segment.

        And AMD exposed Intel’s weakness in face of real competition. Arm and Nvidia had already done that in their respective areas, but AMD did it on Intel’s core business.

        • aard@kyu.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          12 hours ago

          For people who weren’t looking for a developer workstation back then: Threadripper suddenly brought the performance of a xeon workstation costing more than 20k for just a bit over 2k.

          That suddenly wasn’t a “should I really invest that much money” situation, but a “I’d be stupid not to, productivity increase will pay for that over the next month or so”

          • boonhet@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            11 hours ago

            productivity increase will pay for that over the next month or so

            Found the fellow Rust developer

            Cargo build universe

        • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          For sure, and as someone who has been stuck running Linux on an Intel box after being spoiled by all-AMD for about 6 years, I gotta say, the fact that a lot of AMD stuff “just works” in Linux when you have to jump through hoops for the same from Intel is probably a big reason they’re picking up in datacenters, too. Datacenters don’t usually run on fucking Windows Server, they usually run Linux, and AMD just plays better with Linux at the moment. (In my personal experience, anyway)

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Yes this too is really a turnaround compared to “old times”. Intel used to be the safe choice, that’s definitely not the case anymore.

  • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Granite Rapids is probably going win some of that back: a lot of the largest purchasers of x86 chips in the datacenter were buying Epycs because you could stuff more cores into a given amount of rack space than you could with Intel, but the Granite Rapids stuff has flipped that back the other way.

    I’m sure AMD will respond with EVEN MORE CORES, and we’ll just flop around with however many cores you can stuff into $15,000 CPUs and thus who is outselling whom.