In the past month, AMD has let fly with two-thirds of its 7-nm product line. Desktop and server spaces have now been refreshed with 7nm processors. Intel's answer? meh
Let's start with the market share data. At the dawn of the second quarter, AMD has a series of pressures on the performance of its market. Positive factors include Intel's current processor shortage (expected to peak in the second quarter of 2019) and Ryzen's strong overall market response for desktops, laptops and servers. . Negative factors include ongoing trade disputes with China and the possibility of a 12/14nm slowdown in sales ahead of the 7nm launch.
AMD's market share data for desktops, servers and laptops was provided by Dean McCarron of Mercury Research via THG. We covered Mercury Research figures before – Staying with a single company allows us to make a comparison between apples on the evolution of AMD's market share over time. There is good news on many fronts for the smallest processor manufacturer:
AMD's desktop market share was stable in the second quarter, at 17.1% of the channel. This is not necessarily surprising. AMD has reduced the prices of its oldest parts of the 2000 series to boost its adoption, but there has been a resurgence of undeniable interest for Ryzen, a third generation company. after these chips launched. We do not know how strong the ramp-up will be, but the European retailer Mindfactory has released sales data for the month of July showing that AMD shipments exploded after July 7. It is generally estimated that the retail market of DIY processors accounts for between 10 and 20% of the space. If AMD continues to benefit from strong demand in retail, this will be reflected in the third quarter figures of 2019 for the overall market share of desktops. As always, when looking at data from only one company or source, keep in mind that this information reflects the information provided by that particular retailer, not the market in general.
The share of laptops is the biggest gainer, both year-over-year and quarter-on-quarter. AMD has gained two percentage points since the beginning of the year and increased its market share by 1.6 times compared to the second quarter of 2018. The challenge for the company will be to maintain this share while the shortage of processors Intel fades. Some analysts have predicted that AMD would lose its gains in this area, with Intel delivering more hearts. we will see what Q3 shows us in this regard.
The server market continues to grow, with AMD now claiming 3.4% of space, up from 1.4% the year before. AMD had not achieved its previous goal of taking 5% of the server market by the fourth quarter of 2018 (the company told us earlier this year that it expected to have at least 5% of the 2S server space / dual-socket). We are not concerned with the relatively slow server ramp: the Epyc processors that AMD has launched is the most impressive leap ever made by the company in this market.
Overall, AMD's market share figures show that a company is doing well and gaining ground. AMD predicted that its computing and graphics revenues would increase 1.2 times compared to 2018 when the impact of slower sales of semi-custom designs is taken into account (sales of Xbox One and the PS4 drop as the new console cycle grows).
As for Intel, the biggest processor provider sticks to its weapons. Intel's processor price list for the month of August shows current expected prices in 1K units for the full range of products. There is no change whatsoever. These official price guides do not necessarily reflect the price at which chips are sold in the retail network, and they certainly do not reflect the price that OEMs pay wholesale, but they represent the officially communicated prices.
The complete document is available for your reading, but it looks like the above throughout the line. Intel can adjust prices discreetly behind the scenes or make larger formal reductions later, but the company is sticking to its weapons at the moment. From Intel's point of view, that makes sense. AMD may have just launched an impressive range of products, but Intel probably wants to see how the market will respond before deciding what to do.
Since 2017, Intel has responded to AMD by avoiding direct price cuts and introducing different products at adjusted prices. This may not work on the server, since Cascade Lake has already been launched and it will not be possible to respond to AMD with a new family deployment in the short term. Intel could reduce its prices later this year or wait to modify its product lines until Cooper Lake or Ice Lake are ready to ship. For now, AMD continues to gain market share, with improvements expected in the second half of 2019 being related to the 7-nm Ryzen refresh.
The next generation of consoles will be in less than 18 months and Microsoft is starting to share a little more information about its priorities for the next generation of Xbox consoles. Readability, load times, and upward compatibility of controllers and software are Redmond's top priorities with the launch of Xbox Next.
"I think the area we really want to focus on next generation is the frame rate and game playability," Spencer said. said Gamespot:
Make sure the games load incredibly quickly and that the game runs at the fastest possible frame rate. We are also the Windows company, so we see the work that is done (for the PC) and that of the developers. People love games at 60 frames per second. It is therefore essential that the game design works at 4K 60 (fps).
What is interesting, is that this generation, we really focused on 4K visuals and on the way we bring the movies in 4K Blu-ray and video streaming. With Xbox One X, allowing games to work with 4K visuals will bring really important visual enhancements next generation But playability is probably the main focus of this generation. How fast are the games loaded? Do I feel that I can get into the game as fast as possible and while he is playing? How do you feel? Does this game look like any other game than the one I saw? This is our goal. "
That's more or less what ET predicted earlier this year. 60fps is a much more realistic target for Xbox Next than for the 240fps rumor circulating. Despite various vague claims that the Xbox Next will support 8K, Spencer does not make any sensual mention as a game resolution target. There is no chance that the 2020 console will have a sufficiently powerful GPU to support this resolution. We are happy to see the company focus on other aspects of the game.
According to Microsoft, backward compatibility is a key pillar of the progression of the Xbox. The Xbox One, Xbox 360 and OG Xbox games will all continue to be supported on Xbox Next, Spencer told Gamespot. The company promised that this backward compatibility commitment would also apply to controllers, stating: "So, really, the products you've bought from us, whether it's the games or the controllers you're using, we want to make sure they are compatible. future compatible with the most faithful version of our console, which at that time will obviously be the one we just launched. "
Historically, there has been a handful of games that specifically targeted 60 frames per second for console play, but it was an unusual frame frequency target. The Xbox One X and PS4 Pro have expanded the list of titles offering this pace by encouraging developers to release updates for new and existing games that would add new resolution options or allow to play at higher rates than the basic title supported. In fact, moving the video game industry (backwards) to a 60-fps target would be a feat.
There is reason to think that the two console manufacturers could get by. The Xbox Next and PlayStation 5 will both achieve higher levels of performance than the existing Xbox One and PS4 Pro. The use of Ryzen and a RDNA-derived graphics processor for both platforms ensures superior console performance, but the perceived level of visual quality improvement offered by console generation over the next decreased each cycle. Rather than simply looking for new levels of detail, Spencer wants developers to focus on consistency and load times, two other areas in which major generational gains can be generated, including adoption of SSDs. .
A major question is how the 1080p / 4K splitting will be handled. Spencer refers to a 4K / 60fps target, but 1080p still represents a high percentage of TVs sold and the installation base for the old standard is huge. The easiest way for Microsoft to handle a 1080p output limit is to render internally at 4K, and then output at 1080p. This makes it possible to effectively apply oversampled AA to the overall image and dramatically improve the image quality compared to the standard 1080p resolution. With the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, Microsoft and Sony have provided developers with many ways to leverage the added power of new consoles to enhance the basic experience. We expect a similar approach. One of the benefits of having a powerful GPU with a low-resolution display is that you can enable secondary features like AA without worrying about the performance impact. We hope Microsoft will bring some of this flexibility to its Xbox Next design.
The PC player in me can not help but notice that the already almost empty line between consoles and PCs will be even finer at the next cycle. The consoles previously offered backward compatibility, but often come with qualifiers related to the version of your hardware and limited to a previous platform. Microsoft will not only support Xbox One games on Xbox Next, it will continue to support Xbox 360 and OG Xbox systems, as well as Xbox One devices. This is exactly the type of backwards compatibility that we expected when upgrading from one PC version to another, and it's nice to see the consoles catching up after a few decades.
The flip side, of course, is that the debate console against PC becomes more difficult each generation. At this point you can also simply ask for "controller or keyboard?" (Keyboard, natch). Functionally, at the hardware level, we are the PC games.
There is a strange rumor that AMD has destroyed or intends to destroy its reference GPU RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT designs. Eleven AIB custom cards are on the market. It started with the French site Cowcatland, which was titled:
The translation of this title indicates that the AMD reference GPUs for the 5700 and 5700 XT systems reached EOL status just five weeks after launch. This is not true. According to AMD, the goal and purpose here are not to compete with AIB partners. "We expect the Radeon RX 5700 Series graphics card offering to remain strong in the market, and that many models are starting to arrive from our AIB partners," said AMD. "In line with usual practice, once the AMD reference card inventory has been sold, AMD will continue to support new partner designs with the Radeon RX 5700 Series Reference Design Kit."
AMD provides reference designs for AIBs that want to accelerate the marketing of cards without designing their own coolers or reference graphics cards. The first boards are usually based on these reference products. The delay between AIB shipments and the availability of the reference card can be relatively short or differ by a few weeks. Some fans are unhappy that it has been five weeks since AIB was designed, although this has already been the case with Nvidia launches. AMD does not destroy its reference cards and they will still be manufactured in the future.
The community of enthusiasts is not particularly satisfied with the delay of the ventilation cards or the fact that these cards are or the fact that the 5700 and 5700 XT are louder than the equivalent Nvidia GPUs. The hope is that dual or triaxial cooling fans offer better acoustics than AMD's default reference designs. This is usually a very good bet.
After testing the 5700, 5700 XT, Vega 64, Radeon VII components and an associated mix of Ti 2060, 2070, 2080 and 2080 parts (both manufactured by Nvidia and not), I would honestly say, the battle for a fan compared to an open-air cooler can be a bit inflated. Thermally, there is an obvious difference between the two solutions (the fans discharge hot air, while the free-air coolers simply move it inside the chassis). What a difference means because your system depends a lot on its preconditions. Open air coolers can offer better performance in spacious cases with good airflow, while fans provide more consistent results. The relative volume of the two solutions depends on their cooler design. A fan may be stronger than a cooler in the open air or vice versa. The 5700 XT (a fan) is much quieter than the Vega 64 (another fan). Vega 64 and Radeon VII (open pit design) have very similar noise profiles.
An interesting aspect of Navi exams, however, is the degree of divergence of noise measurements from different examination sites. Anandtech, for example, indicates that the 5700 XT is a 54 dB (A) solution, compared to 61 dB for the Radeon Vega 64.
This 54 / 61dB (A) solution seems to correspond more to my own subjective experience using the Radeon Vega 64, Radeon VII, 5700 XT and Nvidia associated graphics processors. The reason I say this is that, for me, the 5700 XT is much better than the Radeon 64 or Radeon VII, reminiscent of the bad old days of powerful GPUs like the R9 290X.
Other critics, however, make very different statements:
Guru3D claims that the Vega 64 and Radeon 5700 XT are identical in terms of database (A) and that Radeon VII is much stronger. Since the distance to the target obviously has an impact on the noise measurements, the fact that Anandtech and Guru3D measure different levels of sound does not worry me. What is even more interesting is that one of the articles shows that Vega 64 and 5700 XT are comparable, while the other does not.
TechPowerUp has a third distribution, with 5700 XT scores and 5700 identical and the Radeon VII lower than Vega 64. Three well-thought-out websites for technical journals, three separate results. From my own subjective experience, the one that "seems" the most correct is that of Anandtech – but a number of factors will affect noise measurements, especially the relative levels of background noise. , the file opening tests compared to those closed, distance from the target and the equipment used to perform the test. It is also possible that the individual GPU variation also works here.
In my opinion, the 5700 and 5700 XT are resolutely on the "Quietly Quiet" side of "Is this GPU quiet enough to be used or not?" It is not as quiet as the RTX 2060 or 2070 that we tested for the same exam. C & # 39; greatly quieter than the Radeon VII or the Vega 64. It is known that I wear earplugs when testing these two cards in case of opening to avoid hearing damage, although the fact that I already have lesions hearing in my left ear also made me paranoid to hurt him further. I used a Vega 64 in my own system and I did not like how loud it was for games without headphones. The Radeon 5700 XT does not cause the same problem.
Radeon AIB cards have often been quieter than reference models, so it is likely that this will continue to be the case. We will check if these cards offer reasonable value for money, but they will be when they arrive on the market in larger quantities. Reference card templates will continue to exist alongside these new cards.
Wednesday August 7th, AMD launched the 7nm update of his family of Epyc processors. These new hearts are not limited to Intel in one category, they bring huge improvements in each category. AMD has reduced its prices by heart, increased the IPC and promises to provide many more processor cores than an equivalent Intel socket.
It was only another time that AMD nearly defeated Intel so decisively: the introduction of the Opteron dual core and the Athlon 64 X2 in 2005. The launch of Epyc this week seems more important. In 2005, AMD's dual-core processors matched the number of Intel processors, outperformed Intel's core clock and core processors, and were quite expensive. This time, AMD is targeting the trifecta, with higher performance, more cores and lower per-core pricing. This is the most serious attack against the high-end Intel Xeon market, launched by the company.
Industry analysts have already predicted that AMD's server market share could double in the next 12 months, reaching 10% by the second quarter of 2020. A larger share of the data center market is essential objective of AMD. A larger share of the corporate and data center market will not simply increase AMD's revenue, it will help stabilize the company's financial performance. One of AMD's critical weaknesses over the last two decades has been its reliance on low-end PCs and retail channels. Both markets tend to be recession sensitive. The low-end computer market also offers the least revenue per socket and the lowest margins. Business cycles are less affected by slowdowns. AMD briefly achieved its goal of a substantial market share for businesses in 2005-2006, when its market share for servers had broken by 20%.
Fans like to focus on the performance of AMD desktops, but apart from games, overall PC sales are declining. Growth in narrow categories such as 2 in 1 was not enough to offset the overall decline in sales. Although no one expects the personal computer market to fail, it is clear that the 2011 economic downturn was not a shock. AMD still has an interest in fighting to expand its share of the desktop and mobile market, but it makes more So it makes sense to fight for a share of server space, where revenue and unit shipments have increased over the past 8 years. The year 2019 may be a difficult year for server sales, but the general trend of migrating workloads to the cloud shows no signs of slowing down.
In our discussions on Rome, we focused primarily on the Epyc 7742. This graph, derived from ServetheHome, illustrates Epyc's performance against Xeon on more SKUs. Viewing at the bottom of the pile:
A pair of AMD Epyc 7742 costs $ 13,900. A support of 7502 (32C / 64T, base of 2.5 GHz, amplification of 3.35 GHz, $ 2600) is equivalent to $ 5,200. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8260 processor is a $ 4,700 processor, but there are four in the system with the highest score, for a total cost of $ 18,800. AMD processors worth $ 13,900 earn you 1.19 times more performance than Intel processors worth $ 18,800. The comparison does not improve with the falling of the pile. Four E7-8890v4 would cost nearly $ 30,000 at list price. A pair of Platinum 8280 costs $ 20,000. The 8676L is a $ 16,600 processor at list price.
But it's not just the price, or even the price / performance ratio where AMD has an advantage. Intel heavily subdivides the features of its product and bills much more. Consider, for example, the price difference between the Xeon 8276, 8276M and Xeon Platinum 8276L models. These three processors are identical, with the exception of the maximum amount of RAM supported by each. The price, however, is anything but.
In this case, "Maximum Memory" includes Intel Optane. The 4.5 TB RAM memory assumes that 3 TB of Optane is installed next to 1.5 TB of RAM. For comparison, the Rome 7nm processors offer up to 4TB of RAM support. It is a standard feature built into all processors, simplifying product purchases and future planning. AMD not only offers chips at lower prices, it is also interested in Intel's market segmentation method. Good luck justifying a price increase of $ 8,000 for additional RAM support when AMD is ready to sell you a 4 TB addressable capacity at base price.
One of AMD's talking points with Epyc is how it delivers the benefits of a 2S system in a 1S configuration. This table of ServetheHome shows the differences:
The advantage of AMD here is that it can simultaneously hit several Intel weaknesses. Need a lot of PCIe lanes? AMD is better. You want PCIe 4.0? AMD is better. If your workloads evolve optimally with the hearts, no one sells more cores per socket than AMD. Intel can still claim some benefits – it offers L3 unified caches much larger than those of AMD (each AMD L3 cache actually is 16 MB, with a slice of 4 MB per core). But these benefits will be limited to the specific applications that respond to them. Intel wants suppliers to invest in creating support for its persistent Optane DC memory, but nothing is said. how much do it. The current low prices of NAND and DRAM have made Optane's competition on the market much more difficult.
The move to 7nm has given AMD an edge in terms of power consumption, especially when you plan to end the server's life. STH indicates a single-threaded power consumption on a Platinum Xeon 8180 at ~ 430W (wall power), compared to around 340W at the wall for the AMD Epyc 7742 system. They note however that the high number of cores on the latter AMD processors will allow them to remove between 6 and 8 Intel Xeons 2017 sockets (60 to 80 cores) to consolidate workloads into a single AMD Epyc system. The energy savings from removing 3-4 dual-socket servers are well above the difference of about 90 W between the two processors.
Features like DL Boost can give Intel a performance advantage in AI and machine learning, but the company will fight hard. Until now, the data we have seen suggests that these factors can help Intel. match AMD as opposed to beating him.
The catalog prices we quoted for this story are the official prices that Intel publishes for Xeon processors in 1K units. It is also notorious that they are inaccurate, at least as far as major OEMs are concerned. We do not know what Dell, HPE and other vendors actually pay for Xeon processors, but we know that it is often well below the list price, which is usually only paid for by the retail network.
The gap between Intel's list prices and actual prices may explain why Threadripper did not have a lot of market penetration. Despite the fact that Threadripper processors have offered a lot more cores per dollar and better performance per dollar for two years, OEMs sharing sales information, like MindFactory, report very weak sales of Threadripper and Skylake-X. However, Intel has not shown any particular interest in lowering the price of Core X. It continues to position a 10-core Core i9-9820X as a suitable competitor for chips such as the Threadripper 2950X, despite AMD's superior performance in this game. This strongly implies that Intel has no particular problem the sale The 10-core processors to OEM partners who want it, despite Threadripper's superior price / quality ratio and AMD's share of the workstation market, is quite limited.
While Intel has cut its HEDT prices (the Core i7-6950X at 10 cores was worth $ 1723 in 2016, compared to $ 900 for a Core i9-9820X today), it has never tried to make a price / performance comparison against Threadripper. If this bulwark is to collapse, Rome will be the processor that will do it. Ryzen and Threadripper will be considered more credible workstation processors if Epyc begins to penetrate the server market.
Intel can reduce its prices to meet AMD in the short term. In the long term, we will have to challenge AMD directly. This means that more cores will need to be delivered at lower prices, with larger amounts of memory supported by socket. Cooper Lake, which is built on 14nm and includes additional support for new AVX-512 instructions focused on AI, will arrive in the first half of next year. This chip will allow Intel to focus on some of the markets it wants to compete with, but will not change the base count differential between the two companies. Similarly, Intel may have difficulty setting up a $ 3,000 to $ 7,000 premium for the support of 2TB to 4.5TB of RAM, since AMD is willing to take over up to 4TB of memory on each processor socket.
We do not know yet if Intel will increase the number of central servers with Ice Lake servers or what types of designs it will market, but ICL in the servers is in at least a year. By the time the ICL servers are ready for delivery, AMD's EUV 7 nm designs are also ready. After launching the mother of all refreshment cycles with Rome, AMD's challenge over the next 12 to 24 months will be to demonstrate the continued pace of updates and continuous performance improvement. If so, it is truly able to create the kind of stable business market that has been desired for decades.
When AMD launched the dual-core Opteron and its consumer counterpart, the Athlon 64 X2, the company finally felt that come. A little over a year later, Intel launched the Core 2 Duo. AMD spent the next eleven years roaming the wilderness. Later, the leaders would admit that the company had gone out of sight and was distracted by the acquisition of ATI. A series of problems followed.
The simplistic assumption that P4 Prescott was a disaster for which Intel could not recover had proved inaccurate. In the past, attacking Intel has often been likened to hitting a rubber wall with a Sledgehammer (pun intended). Distorting the wall is relatively easy. To destroy it completely is a much more difficult task. AMD may have the best opportunity to take market share in the company it has always had with Epyc 7 nm, but server sharing construction is a slow and cautious process, not a wind sprint. If AMD wants to keep what it builds this time, it has to play its cards differently from 2005-2006.
But that being said, I do not take lightly phrases like "golden age". I use it now. Although I do not make any predictions as to its duration, the 7nm Epyc's debut officially formalized it: welcome to the second golden age of AMD.
From time to time, a motherboard manufacturer will deploy what can not be called a unusual motherboard There have been motherboards with PCI Express and AGP on the same card, the Aopen TubeAmp has proposed a vacuum tube amplifier and Asrock has already launched a card with outlets, with LGA775 and Socket 478 on the same product. The ECS PF88 Extreme Hybrid had even promised to support AMD and Intel on the same motherboard, via a dual implementation of each socket (the two chips could not be used simultaneously). The DFI Hybrid had an integrated Atom processor next to an Intel Core socket.
The Asrock X570 mini-ITX motherboard Phantom Gaming is not as crazy as some of them, but it still deserves a line in the record books. This is an AMD motherboard that uses an Intel radiator mounting system.
The company has a list of motherboards compatible with the mini ITX motherboard available on the website. Comparing the plans of the X570 Asrock card with an X470 motherboard shows why the company has adapted an Intel processor chiller: the X570 chipset is big enough to make it difficult to mount a standard AMD AM4 chiller. The AM4 standard is more rectangular than the standard Intel grid. The socket is shown above, an enlarged map of the motherboard is shown below:
I'm a little surprised to see that. The sockets (and CPUs) of the Intel and AMD processors are of different sizes. The processor brackets are located at different heights above the motherboard. Cross-compatibility of heat sinks is not uncommon, but manufacturers typically offer platform-specific mounting kits for Intel and AMD. This is perhaps why Asrock has published a specific list of compatible coolers known – in this case, probably is not It's a good idea to assume that any Intel LGA115X cooler supports an AMD processor if it is mounted on said processor with the help of an Intel editing kit. Common sense should serve you well here – do not overtighten no matter what when you work with PCBs and brittle pins – but I would definitely be a bit conservative if you choose to experiment with this motherboard.
The other nice feature of this motherboard is the support of Thunderbolt 3, making it one of the first motherboards to offer this feature on an AMD mini-ITX card. Asrock was launched early with the global support of Thunderbolt 3 on AMD hardware. We will be curious to know if the Intel X570 + cooler lasts longer. Frankly, this sounds extremely strange – AMD would certainly have designed a different cooler standard or locked the X570 on mini-ITX if he thought he could not cool his own hardware in that format. Whatever the case may be, the Asrock X570 Phantom Gaming mini-ITX is a unique card. Hat tip to Overclock3D for the link.
Intel may have launched Cascade Lake relatively recently, but another refresh of the 14-nm server is already on the horizon. Intel has lifted the veil on Cooper Lake today, giving new details on how the processor integrates into its product line with the 10-nm Ice Lake server chips supposed to be queuing for the deployment in 2020.
Cooper Lake features include support for Google's bfloat16 format. It will also support up to 56 processor cores in a snap-in format, unlike Cascade Lake-AP, which can scale up to 56 cores but only in a welded BGA configuration. The new take would be known as LGA4189. There is reports that these chips could offer up to 16 channels of memory (since Cascade Lake-AP and Cooper Lake use multiple chips on the same chip, Intel could run up to 16 channels of memory per socket with version double chip).
Bfloat16 support is a major addition to Intel's artificial intelligence efforts. While 16-bit semi-precision floating point numbers have been defined in the IEEE 754 standard for over 30 years, bfloat16 changes the balance between the format used for significant digits and that used for exponents. The original IEEE 754 standard is designed to give priority to precision, with only five bits of exponent. The new format allows a much larger range of values but with less precision. This is particularly useful for artificial intelligence and deep learning calculations, and is a major step on Intel's path to improving the performance of artificial intelligence and deep processor learning computations. Intel has released a White Book on bfloat16 if you are looking for more information on the subject. Google says that using bfloat16 instead of the conventional semi-precision floating point can generate significant performance benefits. The society written"Some operations are related to the memory bandwidth, which means that the memory bandwidth determines the time spent in such operations. Storing the inputs and outputs of memory bandwidth-related operations in bfloat16 format reduces the amount of data to be transferred, improving the speed of operations. "
The other benefit of Cooper Lake is that the CPU would share a socket with the upcoming Ice Lake servers in 2020. A theoretically important distinction between the two families is that Ice Lake servers at 10 nm can not support bfloat16, while 14nm Cooper Lake servers will. This could be the result of increased differentiation of Intel's product lines, although it is also possible that this reflects the difficult development of 10 nm.
The introduction of 56 cores as a base indicates that Intel expects Cooper Lake to expand to more customers than the Cascade Lake / Cascade Lake-AP target number. It also raises questions about the type of Ice Lake servers that Intel is going to market and the possibility of seeing 56-core versions of these chips as well. To date, all of Intel's 10-nm Ice Lake messaging has focused on servers or mobile devices. This may reflect the strategy used by Intel for Broadwell, where desktop versions of the processor were scarce, and where server and server components dominated this family – but Intel says later the fact of not publishing Broadwell desktop was a mistake and that the company had gaffed by skipping the market. Does this mean that Intel keeps launching an Ice Lake desktop or if the company has decided to no longer use its desktop computer? made understand that this time is not yet clear.
Cooper Lake's attention to AI treatment means that it is not necessarily meant to go with AMD's next 7 nm Epyc. AMD has not talked much about AI or machine learning on its processors and, although its 7nm chips add support for 256-bit AVX2 operations, the company's CPU division does not tell us has not yet hinted that a particular goal is the AI market. AMD's efforts in this area are still based on a graphics processor and, although its processors will certainly work with AI code, it does not seem that the market is at the same level as that of Intel. Between the addition of a new support for AI to existing Xeons, its products Movidius and Nervana, projects like Loihiand plans the data center market with Xe, Intel is trying to build a market to protect its high-performance computing and high-end server operations, and to address Nvidia's current dominance of the industry.