Intel Announces Record First-Quarter Revenue of $14.8 Billion

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Apr 28, 2017.

  1. Undying

    Undying Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    15,288
    Likes Received:
    4,349
    GPU:
    Aorus RX580 XTR 8GB
    You do realize those AMD CPU's are 8c/16t while Intel are 4c/8t and 4c/4t?

    Give us some Intel 8c/16t CPU prices.
     
  2. NAMEk

    NAMEk Master Guru

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    Gainward/GTX560/2GB
    I'm sorry, I'm about performance here and edited my post while you were writing your comment. BTW Hyperthreading is BS.
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2017
  3. JamesSneed

    JamesSneed Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,143
    Likes Received:
    486
    GPU:
    GTX 1070
    Soap boxes

    Did Amazon have a buy one get one free deal on soap boxes last night? Everyone seems to have one today. To sum up some thoughts in this thread, Intel is evil because it makes money and AMD is more expensive because its HEDT line costs more than Intel's non-HEDT lineup. :coffee:
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2017
  4. rm082e

    rm082e Master Guru

    Messages:
    674
    Likes Received:
    218
    GPU:
    2070 Super
    I honestly loled at this.

    *thumbs up*
     

  5. H83

    H83 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,409
    Likes Received:
    797
    GPU:
    MSI Duke GTX1080Ti
    I´m sorry but this makes no sense! The Ryzen R7 compete directly against the 6 and 8 cores cpus from Intel, that are much more expensive!!! Against the 7700K/7600K they have the R5 range that is also cheaper than Intel.
    Those who need MT performance can buy a Ryzen R7 that offers great performance at very good prices. Those who value ST performance more can go with Intel.
     
  6. nz3777

    nz3777 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,467
    Likes Received:
    210
    GPU:
    Gtx 980 Strix
    Its going to take alot more then ryzen to put these guys outta buissness but its step in the right direction to give them some type of challange or at very least adjust prices accordigly.
     
  7. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,793
    Likes Received:
    1,148
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    It was free one day prime shipping. Why do you ask? Did you miss out?
     
  8. sverek

    sverek Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,073
    Likes Received:
    2,953
    GPU:
    NOVIDIA -0.5GB
    Intel fanboys are still butthurt about gaming performance?
     
  9. Agent-A01

    Agent-A01 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,402
    Likes Received:
    920
    GPU:
    ASUS 3080 Strix H20
    Nope.

    Wouldn't even make a dent to either intel or nvidia.

    AMD on the other hand yes as their cash on hand is minuscule compared to NV/intel.
     
  10. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,835
    Likes Received:
    4,744
    GPU:
    pny gtx 1060 xlr8
    $14.8 Billion in one Quarter...Wow thats a lot of duck bones$$...
     

  11. Silva

    Silva Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,443
    Likes Received:
    605
    GPU:
    Asus RX560 4G
    And you bought the best CPU you could buy today.
    Was it the better investment? I can't be sure (seeing how 7700k chokes on battlefield1, I'd say: not).
    You're right on the skipping new platform with bugs though, I'd do the same.

    My thoughts exactly, Intel isn't dead plus they have the opportunity to respond with something until Zen2 comes.

    Remember that the first quarter has 3 months, Ryzen came out on the last month: not really enough to tell anything. Many are being sold probably but Intel has other businesses.

    Maybe its just a possibility that in games like Battlefield 1 their beloved 7700k chokes...so ya: maybe the future is going more cores but we'll have to wait this one out.

    I can't see anything wrong, The R7 1700 is very close to the 1800x in performance and costs less than the 7700k that chokes on some heavy threaded games.

    10 years? ahahahah, ya right! Keep hugging your E8600.

    Intel isn't going out of business, we just need healthy competition to drive progress forward (and prices down). It's a win win!
     
  12. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,158
    Likes Received:
    1,274
    GPU:
    -
    Why should we "keep in mind that multithreading is still and will be are stuff"

    One, how does that sentence make logical sense?

    If it was rare, then why do intel and CPU not make any single-threaded CPUs? If anything, single-thread is rare, and will continue to be, as they don't make them anymore (afaik)

    Now if you're saying that PROGRAMS that support over 4-threads is rare, sure, i'll give you that to a degree, but they are not as rare as you think they are, and will only, and quickly, become less rare in the next 2 years, not 10.

    So, in terms of your question:

    AMD Ryzen 7 1800x cost per core: 69.62€
    AMD Ryzen 7 1700x cost per core: 51€
    AMD Ryzen 7 1700 cost per core: 43.62€

    Intel Core i7-7700K cost per core: 94.34€
    Intel Core i7-7700 cost per core: 84.24€
    Intel Core i5-7600K cost per core: 65.54€

    Yes, i realize these don't include individual CPU core performance, i'm not doing the math on that, if you wish to, fine do it yourself, have fun.

    I will state though, your prices you listed there, don't reflect the retail prices, and only your individual areas prices, which is neither intel or AMDs fault, and you can not even remotely try to state one company is cheaper or more expensive on 3rd parties jacking up the price.

    If you're about "performance" then you have to take the WHOLE performance of a CPU into consideration, not just decide:

    "Oh, well i'm going to gimp one CPU so that it can't be used to its fullest, and say that this other CPU, that is being used to its fullest, is faster then the purposefully gimped CPU"

    As an example, and i'll only give one, pure performance?

    CPU-Z benchmark
    1800x - Around 20,000
    7700k - Around 9,500

    Oh hey, you're judging on performance? well there you go, the 1800x is about twice as fast as the 7700k

    In reality, based on multiple benchmarks, the 1800x is about 30%-100% faster then the 7700k when BOTH CPUs are NOT GIMPED.

    So if your only reasoning to claiming "i only care about performance" is in reality "i only care about when one CPU is gimped", then you have absolutely no point in your posts.

    Oh, and hyperthreading and etc. is not BS. To claim it is BS is to claim that WHEN there is performance improvements by it, that those performance improvements are fake? wtf does that even mean? the performance improvements are there, so what is it that is BS? Do you not like extra performance? I don't understand this, why would you not like extra performance? Again, it's not fake performance, it's actually there, it actually does something for you, so wtf?
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2017
  13. Ryu5uzaku

    Ryu5uzaku Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,029
    Likes Received:
    242
    GPU:
    6800 XT
    That list could include 1600 and 1600x that are roughly as fast as the 8 cores in games especially while being way cheaper.
     
  14. NAMEk

    NAMEk Master Guru

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    Gainward/GTX560/2GB
    Omg, you all seem to take so personally, it was a simple question...BTW I hate both Intel and AMD more or less equally so no fanboism here.
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2017
  15. NAMEk

    NAMEk Master Guru

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    Gainward/GTX560/2GB
    It's the system I work with. I'm hugging right now 2700k. And I'm software dev, so believe me I know how hard and frustrating multithreading is. And to make it efficient and time predicting is even more harder. So more threads = more hassle. Prove me wrong :) If you think software today is properly or even multithreaded enough, keep on dreaming :)
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2017

  16. NAMEk

    NAMEk Master Guru

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    Gainward/GTX560/2GB
    Ok, first thing first amount of cores makes sense for server application, not for simple consumer or me. Here it's just marketing. How Hyperthreading is not fake performance. Split two physical cores into two virtual cores 50/50. But I'm glad You've proven I'm wrong in raw performance of AMD cpus. For server apps it does matter.

    Yes these prices are local prices. I mean they are cheapest genuine processors I can buy in the country I currently live in. I don't count 5euros difference here. So all it matters to me as a consumer.
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2017
  17. NAMEk

    NAMEk Master Guru

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    Gainward/GTX560/2GB
    Thank You.
     
  18. PrMinisterGR

    PrMinisterGR Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,659
    Likes Received:
    582
    GPU:
    Inno3D RTX 3090
    LOL, really? You actually believe that any existing tech company has basically put itself out of competition? That's such a naïve thought. If Kaby, Skylake or Pascal were just a 10% slower, Intel and NVIDIA would lose billions of dollars. When this happens to AMD it's "normal", but when it happens to Intel or NVIDIA it's "impossible"? Tech has never been like this. That's such a naïve thought.
     
  19. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,793
    Likes Received:
    1,148
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    No he is saying one failed product would not sink Intel or Nvidia.
     
  20. PrMinisterGR

    PrMinisterGR Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,659
    Likes Received:
    582
    GPU:
    Inno3D RTX 3090
    Nobody is sinking anybody else. A failed product can get you into a downward spiral. Look at AMD and Bulldozer. IBM and pretty much everything after the PC, Apple past the Apple II, Xerox, Lotus, Blackberry etc. You just need the spiral to start.

    Intel and NVIDIA will most likely survive a product like that due to the sheer talent they employ, same as AMD survived it. But it's not a given, same as it wasn't for AMD.
     

Share This Page