News Intel GPUs - Falcon Shores cancelled

[igor_kavinski]

Good attempt trying to dissuade people from buying ARC

 

[511]

When you in Intel's financial position, margin is the most important factor.

Intel is bleeding money like crazy and for arc to be viable in the long run, they need to make money.

Without good finances, this product cannot generate the financials to keep the driver team going and support going.

People thinking Intel is making money on this thing are delusional.

Polaris was a lower margin product and was priced at 239 dollars. But it could make money because the costs were much lower at the time.

Battlemage die is larger than polaris and using 5nm technology. Polaris was manufactured with 14nm samsung technology which was probably 4000 dollars per wafer. TSMC was 5000 dollars per wafer for 16nm and samsung was worse and cheaper. 5nm TSMC is 16,000 dollars per wafer(I don't see any reports of 5nm decreasing in price really and mostly the opposite).

Add in inflation, cost to ship things have gotten more expensive and no way is Intel making a profit.

The reason Intel has to price this thing so low is because next gen parts are not too far off which will drive this into even lower prices. Intel needs to sell as many of these things as possible as the RTX 5060 and RX 8600 should be 20 to 30 percent faster than this chip for around 300 dollars.

Intel was left holding the bag with R and D and TSMC wafer obligations that they can't produce nothing. Gamers buying this should not complain when ARC pulls out and they are left with videocard paper weights in two years.

People Will care about their wallet not Intel margin
Like i have been saying move celestial to Intel fab(Intel 3) and margin improves

 

[poke01]

Hot take: it’s better to buy B580 than not if you’re in a market for a new entry level GPU, the margin is an Intel problem, not a consumer one. I would pick B580 over 7600 and 4060 any day. Why? It’s will last longer than these cards due to 12GB RAM

Edit: I’m half asleep, please pardon the broken English…

 

[marees]

Hot take: it’s better to buy B580 than not if you’re in a market for a new entry level GPU, the margin is an Intel problem, not a consumer one. I would pick B580 over 7600 and 4060 any day. Why? It’s will last longer than these cards due to 12GB RAM

Edit: I’m half asleep, please pardon the broken English…

Agree 100%

The spoilers are 6800 & 6750xt. Depending on if they are available & how much they cost in your region/markets

 

[511]

It's good for Linux as well we will have review in 4 days

 

[beginner99]

Agree 100%

The spoilers are 6800 & 6750xt. Depending on if they are available & how much they cost in your region/markets

True, I rather by these used at same price because I will know old games will work.

 

[DigDog]

the RTX 5060 and RX 8600 should be 20 to 30 percent faster than this chip for around 300 dollars.

to be polite, i think you are being optimistic.

 

[511]

The reason Intel has to price this thing so low is because next gen parts are not too far off which will drive this into even lower prices. Intel needs to sell as many of these things as possible as the RTX 5060 and RX 8600 should be 20 to 30 percent faster than this chip for around 300 dollars.

Performance Price increase by 20-30% by Nvidia is guaranteed I don't know about performance

 

[StinkyPinky]

Hot take: it’s better to buy B580 than not if you’re in a market for a new entry level GPU, the margin is an Intel problem, not a consumer one. I would pick B580 over 7600 and 4060 any day. Why? It’s will last longer than these cards due to 12GB RAM

Edit: I’m half asleep, please pardon the broken English…

IF Intel stay in the market and support those dedicated GPU's and don't drop them like a hot potato in a few years. That's a pretty big "if" since I get the impression Intel have already lost interest in dedicated GPU's and just want to revert back to integrated ones.

 

[Hans Gruber]

IF Intel stay in the market and support those dedicated GPU's and don't drop them like a hot potato in a few years. That's a pretty big "if" since I get the impression Intel have already lost interest in dedicated GPU's and just want to revert back to integrated ones.

I an just curious where you get that impression from? Is the earth flat or is that a false narrative?

 

[Saylick]

Performance Price increase by 20-30% by Nvidia is guaranteed I don't know about performance

I can tell you what's definitely not going up 20-30%: VRAM.

 

[Win2012R2]

I an just curious where you get that impression from?

I have same impression -

1) external foundry used (TSMC) on a fairly new process (better than 6-7nm)
2) chip size is considerably bigger than competitors (so more cost)
3) bottom of the barrel prices - this thing can't be profitable being sold for $250
4) Intel is hardly in good shape to lose money on GPUs or just have them in volume to reduce overall margins
5) MLID says so

 

[Hans Gruber]

I have same impression -

1) external foundry used (TSMC) on a fairly new process (better than 6-7nm)
2) chip size is considerably bigger than competitors (so more cost)
3) bottom of the barrel prices - this thing can't be profitable being sold for $250
4) Intel is hardly in good shape to lose money on GPUs or just have them in volume to reduce overall margins
5) MLID says so

Eventually they will be making GPU's on their own fab. They get free government tech money from the Biden chips act.

 

[beginner99]

Eventually they will be making GPU's on their own fab. They get free government tech money from the Biden chips act.

Exactly and then the dGPUs can act as fab filler on bleeding edge -1 process and serve the mainstream market like this B580 does. In this case die size would be less important.

 

[511]

intel without Fabs is no Intel

 

[DigDog]

i think all the people here that are going on about wafer prices and all the "ooh Intel needs to make money", think that this technology giant that is currently sitting on a gross profit (not revenue) of $21 BILLION somehow cannot strategize their way out of a paper bag.

They are not trying to sell you GPUs.

They are trying to buy. reputation.

Arc7-- delivered on the hardware and then when launch came Intel went "whoops we forgot about the drivers" and realized there's more to being a GPU manufacturer than just the hardware.

Likewise the idea that a 5060 will sell for anywhere near the price of an Arc is .. well, i HOPE it's like that, but i wouldn't count on it. Because NV and AMD know full well that their hardware can be sold at a premium because of the reputation they have, aka as the result of not only years in the business, but all the marketing they have done.

In fact, Arc marketing isn't even impressive, considering what hardware comes with it. I am fairly sure that Intel wants to quiety bring to market a product that every budget youtuber can recommend to their viewers as the sleeper hit, "hey dont buy BIGBRAND, buy HIDDEN GEM and save money hashtag Big GPU Lies !!".

And, ofc there's gonna be the intel fanboys and shills that will promote it to high heaven.

let's look at this product objectively, but also within the context of the market where it is being sold. This is a GPU that both AMD and NV would have packaged with 8Gb of ram, but instead gets 12Gb. They would have done this to properly segment the market and to push people to at least WANT higher-tier products. Seriously, outside of AT who the hell needs a 4090, much less a $1700 5090 ??

But, instead we get a GPU that was actually designed to stand alone and not instead as a artificial step in an artificial ladder, AND we are lucky enough that this one company wants to buy into a market that's been dominated by 2 exclusively ! companies, and they beat them in the only sector they can, which is price.

I promise to you that 10 years down the line, once Intel is well established as a manufacturer of GPUs, their products will cost the same and will follow the same pricing structure as AMD or NVidia.

 

[511]

That is true for everyone Including AMD/Nvidia look at AMD Ryzen prices now

 

[DAPUNISHER]

That is true for everyone Including AMD/Nvidia look at AMD Ryzen prices now

Attacking AMD CPU pricing is a bad talking point easily refuted. Fact check: Historically, the top desktop SKUs are substantially cheaper than they were 25yrs ago, even in unadjusted dollars. AMD charged $1000+ for the first 1GHz CPU. Referencing one of Anand's old articles from August 2000; by that time, you could get a 1GHz for a little under $500. That's $935 in today's money. The 5800X released at $449, in adjusted dollars that's already $586, making it more expensive than the 9800X3D is at $479.

The talking point about AMD pricing now that they are curb stomping Intel is serious weaksauce. How they managed to get so many intelligent and educated DIYers to ditto it is beyond me.

On Gandalf/Battle Mage: It should sell much better than the A750 or A770. It checks many boxes necessary to compete for shoppers money. Trust is the biggest obstacle, so day one reviews will be important. More important will be user experiences in the following months. ARC was a constant barrage of questions and issues from the users. 5 minutes reading search results and the prospective buyers noped right out. I had one of the best times with it I've had with a GPU. As I often write, it's a box of chocolates. Gandalf can't be that, it has to be rock solid and predictable.

 

[511]

Attacking AMD CPU pricing is a bad talking point easily refuted. Fact check: Historically, the top desktop SKUs are substantially cheaper than they were 25yrs ago, even in unadjusted dollars. AMD charged $1000+ for the first 1GHz CPU. Referencing one of Anand's old articles from August 2000; by that time, you could get a 1GHz for a little under $500. That's $935 in today's money. The 5800X released at $449, in adjusted dollars that's already $586, making it more expensive than the 9800X3D is at $479.

Really we are getting same Hexa Core chip for the same price how is different from Intel selling Quad for gens?

 

[Win2012R2]

In this case die size would be less important.

Die size is always important, especially so in low margin situations.

B-series ain't a small chip - reportedly it's almost 300 sq mm and that's on N4 level node - AMD makes with better yields 4 x Zen 5 chiplets on it, throw in old process IOD plus some not so advanced (cheap) packaging and AMD sells this silicon for 3-5k USD as an EPYC chip, or in the worst case scenario for 1200+ consumer Ryzens. There is no 10-12 GB DDR6 to bundle, no board, no big cooler etc.

And this observation probably answers why Intel is doing it in the first place - it's not about Intel losing some money on Battlemage, they are limiting AMD's server revenues which would eaten into Xeon sales and cause far more loss than here.

Smart evil plan made many years ago, but the wheels are coming off so how long can they sustain it? It might be tempting for Intel to license NVIDIA for iGPUs, 2-3 more years and low end discrete GPU market might be totally dead.

Really we are getting same Hexa Core chip for the same price how is different from Intel selling Quad for gens?

It's different because in days of quad cores scaling still worked in the right direction (cheaper), where as now they don't, and SRAM does not scale no more. CPUs are cheap anyway - but they are small, where as GPUs require huge amount of silicon, they have to be more expensive even if chiplets were used to get better yields.

Eventually they will be making GPU's on their own fab. They get free government tech money from the Biden chips act.

They'd prefer to make Xeon slices and sell them for a LOT more money: 300 sq mm N4-level process for 250 bucks isn't sustainable, even before one throws in 12 GB of RAM+other stuff.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Really we are getting same Hexa Core chip for the same price how is different from Intel selling Quad for gens?

More fake Intel marketing propaganda. The MSRP for the 9700X is $359. The 7700X was $399. The 5800X $449. Take inflation into account, which you must, and they have gotten considerably less expensive.

 

[coercitiv]

Really we are getting same Hexa Core chip for the same price how is different from Intel selling Quad for gens?

Here's a simple comparison I posted in the CPU forum about a month ago:

Both the 9700X and the 245K are 20% cheaper than the 12700K I bought 3 years ago, and they're faster too. Inflation not included. If GPU pricing were anything like CPU pricing, we'd be chilling.

We are getting faster CPUs for less money, or more cores for the same price. It's literally the opposite of what you're claiming.

 

[511]

More fake Intel marketing propaganda. The MSRP for the 9700X is $359. The 7700X was $399. The 5800X $449. Take inflation into account, which you must, and they have gotten considerably less expensive.

I was talking about Hexa Cores and I will take it back cause it dropped by $20 but my original statement will remain AMD will do what Intel did with us
7600X -> 299$
9600X -> 279$

 

[igor_kavinski]

Everyone, this is Intel we are talking about. They would've honestly ditched Battlemage if it weren't at least mildly profitable. I think people are forgetting that they can increase yields through built-in redundancies. Maybe that's also why the die is so large. And they are further controlling for any defects with the B570. I find all this speculation about Intel's dGPU profits pretty tiring. Alchemist should have failed with how many problems it had but clearly they found a market with users who play only a limited number of esports titles or the latest games at acceptable framerates of at least 30 fps with XeSS upscaling.

You think only WE have problems with Nvidia pricing? What about third world countries? Their only options are Radeon and ARC. Someone working in a mall or at a store in the US can afford Nvidia GPUs with their credit card. Someone doing the same in a third world country would be stupid to do that and end up working for years to pay off the price of one Nvidia GPU. Radeons and ARC GPUs are more prevalent and attractive in low income markets.

Wanna know how many Nvidia GPUs I owned when I wasn't working? Only Geforce 2 MX 400 and Geforce 3 Ti 200. First was brand new from some Hong Kong company and second was an ASUS model in good condition. My next GPU was the Radeon 9550 and it honestly gave me a LOT more happiness than both previous Nvidia GPUs due to the bang for the buck. Similarly, I bought both Geforce 1060 3GB and RX 580 for the SAME price. Guess which one impressed me with its performance? A lot of people care about every single cent of their money and aren't willing to just give it to a clear money-grubber like Jensen.

 

[igor_kavinski]

AMD will do what Intel did with us
7600X -> 299$
9600X -> 279$

They have no reason to drop the price and dilute their brand further. Plus, the 9600X is a clearly superior product and actually well priced for its capabilities.