Jim Keller leaves AMD

[coercitiv]

He's used to working for companies that don't turn a profit, it would appear.

Yeah, Apple was a major slip from his true habits.

 

[cbn]

Looks like AMD soured this dude on chips altogether

A postponement of K12 could have caused that. One wants to do something new and would still have to wait longer than anticipated with finishing the current project..

Not sure what AMD's plans are on K12, but to me having it in the form of APU made the most sense. (Although Server is very interesting as well)

But one problem AMD faces is getting their linux graphics drivers up to par with Nvidia (otherwise what is the point of even launching an ARM APU). Unfortunately I don't believe AMD is helping encourage the open source development by essentially abandoning low end desktop dGPU. (re: the more Radeons are out there ...whether APUs, mobile dGPU or desktop GPU the the more folks are likely to contribute and develop for it. This in turn helps the K12 APU which uses the same Linux driver)

With that mentioned, one way AMD could help is to get 4C + 512sp and 4C 384sp Bristol Ridge out of socket AM4 and focus exclusively on mobile with those good dies.. Then with this done bring back the competition to the low end desktop dGPU market. This will boost one part of Radeon market share and therefore begin the process of making Radeon graphics a more inviting target for Linux development.

P.S. It's not like everyone uses a new desktop anyway, plenty of good Sandy Bridge i5-2400 and i5 2500 SFF boxes out there that could use a boost. Why not compete with Nvidia again for this need?

 

[dark zero]

I would be worried of AMD unless nVIDIA is attacking Xeon Phi... That is good news since AMD is not targeting that side for now.

 

[imported_bman]

Maybe he can convince Tesla it is time to upgrade the Tegra 3 in the Model S/X.

 

[JDG1980]

With that mentioned, one way AMD could help is to get 4C + 512sp and 4C 384sp Bristol Ridge out of socket AM4 and focus exclusively on mobile with those good dies.. Then with this done bring back the competition to the low end desktop dGPU market. This will boost one part of Radeon market share and therefore begin the process of making Radeon graphics a more inviting target for Linux development.

This makes absolutely no sense. Why would AMD want to handicap one of the few decent selling points of the Carrizo APU? Remember, these are 28nm parts, so yield is not going to be a serious issue. Most likely the top bins will continue to be used for mobile, but all that means is that desktop parts will have slightly inferior perf/watt, which many people won't care about. The profit margins on Bristol Ridge will almost certainly be higher than on outdated trash dGPUs like Oland.

If they want to support Linux development then they should just support Linux development.

 

[cbn]

This makes absolutely no sense. Why would AMD want to handicap one of the few decent selling points of the Carrizo APU? Remember, these are 28nm parts, so yield is not going to be a serious issue. Most likely the top bins will continue to be used for mobile, but all that means is that desktop parts will have slightly inferior perf/watt, which many people won't care about. The profit margins on Bristol Ridge will almost certainly be higher than on outdated trash dGPUs like Oland.

Remember FinFet is coming for dGPUs so the low end dGPU will be in a whole new category.

Honestly in 2016, do we really need 4C 384sp and 4C 512sp iGPU big machine desktop parts? It is just plain obsolete.

Better to go Athlon x 4 + dGPU for big machine desktop while boosting the dual core APU with a better iGPU for the most low end big machine desktop buyers (eg, 2C + 384sp, 448sp or 512sp).

For small desktops, AMD can just use BGA Bristol Ridge 4C + 512sp or 4C + 383sp. (No dual cores for mobile please).

 

[cbn]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37937094&postcount=343

Here are the AMD APU vs Core i3 desktop prices from January 2014:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35947650&postcount=746

Using Newegg prices are a comparison for pre-built desktops:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...el Core i3 (Core i3 starts @ $399)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...8-Series APU (A8-6500 APU starts @ $479)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...0-Series APU (A10-6700 APU starts @ $499)

Using the Current Fry's sale for Pre-builts here is what I am coming up with:

http://www.frys-electronics-ads.com/...4130-Processor (Core i3 for $348)

http://www.frys-electronics-ads.com/...6500-Processor (A8-6500 for $448)

Now granted the Core i3 systems come with 4GB RAM vs. 8GB for the AMD systems, but that still a pretty big disparity in pricing IMO.

^^^^ Notice how Core i3 desktops (despite a rather high processor list price) are still cheaper than both the A8 and A10 desktops.

Now here are the current price trends (2 years later):

Here are the listings for new (not refurbished) A8 desktops (some of these are A8-6410 cat core processors):

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...14&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30

(Kaveri starts @ $399.99)

Here are the listings for new (not refurbished) A10 desktops

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...14&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30

(Kaveri starts @ $419.99)

Here are the listings for new (not refurbished) Core i3 desktops

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100019096 4814 600014733&IsNodeId=1

(Core i3 4170 starts @ $329.99)

Notice how the Core i3 desktops are still significantly cheaper than the A10 and A8 desktops.

With that info noted, what do you think should be done?

1.) Should AMD keep on fighting on Desktop with A10 and A8 Bristol Ridge APUs?

2.) Or do you think AMD would be better off focusing all 4C/512sp and 4C/384sp Bristol Ridge into Mobile (particularly the 35W category)?

3.) Or perhaps a middle of the road approach where all 512sp dies are allocated to mobile, but 4C/384sp is allowed on desktop?

Personally, I am thinking #2 is the best option. Then maybe at some later time (perhaps when Zen APU launches) there could be some left over 4C/384sp and 4C/512sp Bristol Ridge made available on AM4?

^^^^ Based on that analysis, I don't see how AMD can justify 4C + 384sp and 4C + 512sp for Bristol Ridge (AM4) desktop. They have no presence with OEMs, and I suspect part of this reason relates to a relatively low amount of chips available.

And for 2016 (with FinFet dGPUs coming) the performance to dollar problem stands to only get worse. ( Even today an old tech $55 Kepler low profile card (with Athlon x 4 860K) beats a A10-7870K with DDR3 2133 --> http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37941558&postcount=413)

AMD needs to change.

 

[cbn]

IMHO, what AMD should do is delay AM4 till Zen 8C/16T launches.

Then focus purely on mobile with the 4C + 512sp and 4C + 384sp Bristol Ridge dies (saving the harvested Athlon x4 and 2C dies later on for AM4).

Regarding Bristol Ridge for laptop, I made a thread discussing that here --> http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2459807&highlight=

 

[DrMrLordX]

^^^^ Based on that analysis, I don't see how AMD can justify 4C + 384sp and 4C + 512sp for Bristol Ridge (AM4) desktop.

Uh, good job quoting yourself? AMD planned Bristol Ridge some time ago, and all the foreheads that needed to be slapped have had their slapping. It's done, get over it man.

 

[cbn]

AMD planned Bristol Ridge some time ago, and all the foreheads that needed to be slapped have had their slapping. It's done, get over it man.

I'm not against Bristol Ridge for mobile or against Bristol Ridge Athlon x4 or 2C 384sp/448sp/512sp dies for AM4..

But to put what little amount of 4C 512sp and 4C 384sp Bristol Ridge dies AMD has on AM4 (which is a big machine platform) makes no sense to me.

Those chips have no reason to be used in that way.

If you can think of one....let me know.

 

[DrMrLordX]

If you can think of one....let me know.

Bristol Ridge has never looked like a good idea. At least Bristol Ridge in March-June 2016 looks less-bad than what was originally on leaked roadmaps (Bristol Ridge in Q3/Q4 2016). Otherwise, it doesn't matter if I can think of a good reason, it's happening, end of story. Enjoy the carnage.

 

[cbn]

At least Bristol Ridge in March-June 2016 looks less-bad than what was originally on leaked roadmaps (Bristol Ridge in Q3/Q4 2016).

I think Bristol Ridge for mobile being released early would be a good thing.

But AM4 might as well come in very late 2016 or early 2017....whenever Zen 8C/16T launches. (An exception might be if AMD had a ton of harvested Athlon x4 or maybe 2C (which is not optimal for mobile) chips available. Although with that mentioned, apparently the Athlon x 4 dies are useable on FM2+ when the DDR3 controller is enabled....so I am not even sure what I am mentioned would truly be an exception.)

 

[NTMBK]

I'm not against Bristol Ridge for mobile or against Bristol Ridge Athlon x4 or 2C 384sp/448sp/512sp dies for AM4..

But to put what little amount of 4C 512sp and 4C 384sp Bristol Ridge dies AMD has on AM4 (which is a big machine platform) makes no sense to me.

Those chips have no reason to be used in that way.

If you can think of one....let me know.

Well at least the increased bandwidth from DDR4 should actually let the 8 CU GPU run at its full potential; Kaveri didn't see any real gains from 6 to 8 CU due to memory bottlenecks.

Depending on how high they can clock Bristol Ridge (and what memory speeds it supports), a 65W SKU could be nice for low-cost "Steam Machine" style gaming HTPCs.

EDIT: Plus Bristol Ridge's GPU has memory compression tech and a larger L2 cache than Kaveri, which will also help with the memory bottleneck.

 

[JDG1980]

But to put what little amount of 4C 512sp and 4C 384sp Bristol Ridge dies AMD has on AM4 (which is a big machine platform) makes no sense to me.

Well, there's the error in your analysis. These are 28nm parts on a fully mature process. They are not supply constrained. (In fact, AMD's WSA gives them an incentive to produce and sell parts even at low margins - better than paying the penalties and getting nothing at all in return.) They are not yield constrained. They are constrained only by how many AMD can sell into all markets.

AMD will pitch desktop Bristol Ridge as the platform of choice for e-sports enthusiasts, who often play games at low resolution and detail but demand high FPS. And I wouldn't be surprised if they also released a FirePro version - Bristol Ridge would be just fine for a lot of low-end CAD work, and it would come in a lot cheaper than a CPU plus discrete FirePro/Quadro card.

 

[cbn]

But to put what little amount of 4C 512sp and 4C 384sp Bristol Ridge dies AMD has on AM4 (which is a big machine platform) makes no sense to me.

These are 28nm parts on a fully mature process. They are not supply constrained. (In fact, AMD's WSA gives them an incentive to produce and sell parts even at low margins - better than paying the penalties and getting nothing at all in return.) They are not yield constrained. They are constrained only by how many AMD can sell into all markets.

It does make sense to me yields would be good.

But @ 245mm2 per chip, how many chips can AMD really supply an OEM if they divide their supply up between desktop and mobile?

As you can see from this post here , both FM2 and FM2+ A8 and A10 APU desktops have a very serious price problem. Which I believe is related to supplying lower volumes compared to Intel.

In fact, comparing the January 2014 price survey to January 2016 price survey I see very little change in the Core i3 pre-built desktop vs. A8/A10 pre-built desktop price delta suggesting that a mature process is not helping the situation.

AMD will pitch desktop Bristol Ridge as the platform of choice for e-sports enthusiasts, who often play games at low resolution and detail but demand high FPS.

If a person wants high FPS at low resolution then they would be best off with an Athlon x4 860K and coupled to even a very low end dGPU it would still be faster:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37893106&postcount=73

(The reason is that the APU's CPU throttles under iGPU load, whereas the Athlon x4 860K + low end dGPU would not)

 

[Dresdenboy]

And for 2016 (with FinFet dGPUs coming) the performance to dollar problem stands to only get worse. ( Even today an old tech $55 Kepler low profile card (with Athlon x 4 860K) beats a A10-7870K with DDR3 2133 --> http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37941558&postcount=413)

AMD needs to change.

It's the same old problem about comparing apples to oranges: with adding a separate graphics card, you add system builder costs, hardware costs, TDP, memory bandwidth, GPU silicon. Obviously that adds performance and costs. Adding costs and power usually gives more performance.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Yes, but everything is a compromise. For the slight additional cost, a dgpu with a low end cpu like the 860k in a desktop is usually a much better solution than an APU. Something like 50% better performance for around 10% (or less if one shops carefully) additional cost just seems like a no-brainer, especially at the low end like this were every last drop of performance is needed.

And it is kind of ironic to hear AMD fans talk about power consumption, especially in a desktop.

It most definitely is not an apples to oranges comparison though, unless one is determined to reject any reasonable alternative and insist an APU is the best gaming solution.

 

[AtenRa]

Yes, but everything is a compromise. For the slight additional cost, a dgpu with a low end cpu like the 860k in a desktop is usually a much better solution than an APU. Something like 50% better performance for around 10% (or less if one shops carefully) additional cost just seems like a no-brainer, especially at the low end like this were every last drop of performance is needed.

And it is kind of ironic to hear AMD fans talk about power consumption, especially in a desktop.

It most definitely is not an apples to oranges comparison though, unless one is determined to reject any reasonable alternative and insist an APU is the best gaming solution.

A10-7850K = $130
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...STMATCH&Description=A10-7850K&N=-1&isNodeId=1

Athlon 860K = $75
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...3379&cm_re=Athlon_860K-_-19-113-379-_-Product

And cheapest GT730 1GB GDDR-5 starts at $63,00
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...97&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30

Total = $138

You spend $8 more just to have what ?? 5-10% faster graphics. But you also increase the power consumption, noise, you need larger case, increase hardware failure probability etc etc.

Edit: Nobody said current APUs are the best gaming solution. But for the current price of the A8-7600/7650K and A10-7850K its a very nice product for entry gaming (720/900p) with some games able to play at 1080p.

 

[Burpo]

$130 Intel Core i3-6100
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=2MN-0004-00002

 

[frozentundra123456]

A10-7850K = $130
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...STMATCH&Description=A10-7850K&N=-1&isNodeId=1

Athlon 860K = $75
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...3379&cm_re=Athlon_860K-_-19-113-379-_-Product

And cheapest GT730 1GB GDDR-5 starts at $63,00
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...97&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30

Total = $138

You spend $8 more just to have what ?? 5-10% faster graphics. But you also increase the power consumption, noise, you need larger case, increase hardware failure probability etc etc.

Edit: Nobody said current APUs are the best gaming solution. But for the current price of the A8-7600/7650K and A10-7850K its a very nice product for entry gaming (720/900p) with some games able to play at 1080p.

Or for 105.00 you could get a 750Ti. So like I said, 50.00 more (approximately 10% of even a low end gaming rig cost) for at least 50% more performance, more likely 75% or even close to double. Plus no need for expensive ram to extract the best performance.

 

[Dresdenboy]

Or for 105.00 you could get a 750Ti. So like I said, 50.00 more (approximately 10% of even a low end gaming rig cost) for at least 50% more performance, more likely 75% or even close to double. Plus no need for expensive ram to extract the best performance.

Are we discussing the right use cases?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...STMATCH&Description=A10-7850K&N=-1&isNodeId=1 lists related PCs as HTPC at ~$300-$400.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Or for 105.00 you could get a 750Ti. So like I said, 50.00 more (approximately 10% of even a low end gaming rig cost) for at least 50% more performance, more likely 75% or even close to double. Plus no need for expensive ram to extract the best performance.

And you avoid APU throttle

 

[cbn]

It's the same old problem about comparing apples to oranges: with adding a separate graphics card, you add system builder costs, hardware costs, TDP, memory bandwidth, GPU silicon. Obviously that adds performance and costs. Adding costs and power usually gives more performance.

A10-7870K is more expensive than Athlon x 4 860K + GT 730 GDDR5 even before factoring in DDR3 2133 memory costs.

And even worse for AMD is that a person can add that 38W TDP GT 730 GDDR5 card to Intel Core i3 pre-built and for a total power consumption of 89W have something faster and cheaper than a 95W A10-7870K.

P.S. That PNY GT 730 GDDR5 usually always has a $10 rebate on it. For some reason it is gone today. But even without rebate it is still cheaper than using the Godavari APU.

 

[cbn]

A10-7850K = $130
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...STMATCH&Description=A10-7850K&N=-1&isNodeId=1

Athlon 860K = $75
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...3379&cm_re=Athlon_860K-_-19-113-379-_-Product

And cheapest GT730 1GB GDDR-5 starts at $63,00
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...97&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30

Total = $138

You spend $8 more just to have what ?? 5-10% faster graphics. But you also increase the power consumption, noise, you need larger case, increase hardware failure probability etc etc.

Edit: Nobody said current APUs are the best gaming solution. But for the current price of the A8-7600/7650K and A10-7850K its a very nice product for entry gaming (720/900p) with some games able to play at 1080p.

Factor in DDR3 2400 RAM for the A10-7850K and now its $2 more expensive (going by Newegg prices) than Athlon x 4 860K (using DDR3 1600) + GT 730 GDDR5.

And remember this is for Kaveri which is clocked at only 720 Mhz compared to Godavari A10-7870K which is 866 Mhz.

 

[Dribble]

If you are actually going to home build a desktop you'd always go for a budget intel + budget discrete graphics as that gives you the best upgrade path. Even if it costs slightly more you'd be better off saving for another month then throwing money into a dead end build.

The amd apu is really only sensible in some budget pre-built box. Then it's fine but you know they won't put in fast memory so it'll have bandwidth problems. Even then you've got to compare prices - if you actually care about gaming then often a few $ extra can add a lot of performance, even more so if you are vaguely technical and are able to put in a low end discrete gpu into some budget non-apu box.