OF COURSE, we don't know if any of this is actually true, we have ONE source.
Which source would that be? Remember, the news site reporting it cannot be the source, this is no different from burden of proof... The claim cannot be the proof.
Did you read anything I wrote? If you think that's a valid reason to delay a highly anticipated launch you are naive at best. AMD who has less than 10% of the CPU market share is not going to delay a launch because it might cannibalize their existing products period. Besides how long have we been anticipating Zen for? They have had plenty of time to get their supply chain affairs in order, they still do in fact, there is still 4-5 months left.Are you just trolling at this point? The answer to your question has been explained countless times in the thread.
Additionally, the (reported) supply chain issues keep getting overlooked. You've got Nvidia launching Pascal currently, AMD launching Polaris at the end of the month, AMD also planning for new/updated consoles from all the major players, and Apple presumably ramping up A10 production for a Q4 iPhone 7 launch. It shouldn't be shocking that production capacity is strained across the board. And again, this is not a situation in which you can separate Intel and AMD. We're talking about, potentially, increased demand at the freaking mines where they're producing raw materials.
DigiTimes has seems to have legitimate sources, generally in the Taiwan-based supply chain.
DigiTimes has gotten a lot of things right, but some people rush to claim that they have a spotty track record when they say things that the reader doesn't like.
Funny thought: Perhaps the PC builders need a chance to get rid of current HEDT CPUs which might be prone to price drops later. And this already became more difficult due to the Zen hype osbourning the current sales. Just a fun speculation.
That makes no sense. DigiTimes has seems to have legitimate sources, generally in the Taiwan-based supply chain. Intel, AMD, and so on all inform PC OEMs/ODMs of their chip plans and it would seem that sources within those OEMs/ODMs leak things.
DigiTimes has gotten a lot of things right, but some people rush to claim that they have a spotty track record when they say things that the reader doesn't like.
Exactly, they have no source. It's made up. Their reasoning for the delay is not even plausible.You don't seem to understand, the news outlet that releases the news is NOT the source, they either got the news from somewhere else or made it up...
I want to know the SOURCE... Please look up Burden of Proof.
Upstream:
or upstream the supply chain, the direction in a supply chain opposite to the flow of materials, e.g. a supplier will always be upstream from its customers.
Downstream:
or downstream the supply chain. The direction in which materials flow, e.g. a customer will always be downstream from its suppliers. (Illustrated in fig. gif.)
Let me get this straight, you're saying because OEMs presumably don't want Zen in Nov-Dec, but will magically change their mind in January 2017 and will want it then, that's a good reason for AMD to delay it? Despite the fact that there is a whole enthusiast market (us) who Lisa Su specifically [and accurately] described at Computex who very much want this product ASAP.Did you read anything I wrote? No one is saying that AMD is delaying because they're worried about cannibalizing sales. NO ONE. They are delaying because they don't expect there will be demand from OEMs. Do you understand this now?
I do actually, but here is why in the "right" context the article makes even less sense. They wrote:No, you've got the definition of upstream and downstream confused.
upstream supply chain still has serious inventory issues, and market demand has been slow
I think you're reaching, besides if wafer material supply was dire we would have heard about it in other news.. Polaris would have been affected for instance since it's being made in the same fab on the same process. And CPUs tend to have a bigger profit margin so at the very least they would prioritize the CPU.For the same reason that gas prices can plummet but you don't see a corresponding drop in airfares: what happens at one end of a supply chain doesn't immediately affect the other end. There's a lot in between. If you pour a glass of water in the ocean, do you notice the water rise?
Which other component is there, in CPU production? There is some resin and copper for the packaging, but we sure as hell haven't heard about any shortage of those. So if there is a supply chain shortage, then it's surely something related to wafers. Silicon, arsenic..Where does the article state that wafer material supply is dire?
Wait you accused me of trolling, when I am trying to be pragmatic here and understand your point, but there is nothing to understand. You for some reason are taking the side of this poorly written article with zero facts to back up your claims.It just says "upstream." And if Polaris is being made on the same fab with the same process, ding ding ding, there's one possible reason why supply could be constrained.
I've explained this in 18 other posts you've ignored because you won't drop this childish rant: look at how many other products on the market are being launched this year through the next.
And you're reaching if you think you know how fabs prioritize their customers.
Good because you've only brought confusion to the discussion. Please spare me from your further "patient explanations".Honestly, I am done with this conversation. Myself and others have very patiently explained this article to you many times. If you don't understand it now, you're misunderstanding it on purpose.
1.) Supply isn't low today. We know that for a fact. Polaris isn't being delayed. TSMC fabbed Pascal isn't delayed. Other fabs aren't having issues (I follow other semiconductor companies too, like STM and NXP), the digitime article is the only place we hear of it.lol nevermind, I can't help myself
AS I HAVE EXPLAINED BEFORE, many times (honestly, are you reading anything?), I am not taking the side of this article. I am simply explaining it to you because you refuse to understand it.
1. Supply is low.
2. Demand is low.
3. Product is delayed.
Do you grasp this elementary concept now? I'm not even saying they're right. Forget the question of them being right or wrong. Just tell me know, "Yes, I understand that if supply and demand are both low a company will choose to release a product later, when those constraints have been lifted."
I have no idea, not one, where Seronx gets these things...but it's an interesting speculation. Is he reading the history from a dead timeline or something, one where IBM and AMD merged?
Certainly an AMD64/Power9 hybrid is an interesting idea. I'm not sure if it would be worth IBM's while to pull it off though, and am trying to figure out just what the application would be. HPC? Surprise anti-Intel blitz on the mid and high-end of the server market? Insane enthusiast desktop? Secret deal with Apple for new Mac Pro?
The mind boggles.
Do you really think that an octo-core Zen @ 95 W is going to deliver the same performance as an octo-core HW-E/BDW-E @ 140 W?
Unlikely considering that Broadwell-E just launched.