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.
AMD has kept details of his next family of Epyc products remarkably close to his chest. A recent leak (now removed) of the publicly accessible Open Benchmarking database shows fierce competition between AMD's upcoming Epyc 7nm processors and Intel's equivalent Xeon products. Intel CEO Bob Swan said that AMD offered increased competition in the last half of 2019, especially in data centers. So these numbers are not automatically surprising – unless, of course, you remember when the AMD market went into the servers was essentially zero.
According to the text of the leak now removed (picked up by THG Before breaking down, the AMD Epyc 7742 is a 64-core processor with 128 threads, 256 MB L3 cache, a 225-Watt TDP, and a 2.25 GHz / 3.4 GHz base / boost clock , respectively. The Epyc 7601, already launched, is a TDP 180C processor, 32C / 64T, with 64 MB of L3 and an almost identical boost clock of 2.2 GHz / 3.4GHz. The Xeon Platinum 8280 measures 28C / 56T, 2.7GHz, 4GHz and 205W, while the Xeon Gold 6138 (included for reference) measures 20C / 40T, 2GHz / 3.7GHz and 125W.
If these rumors are correct, AMD managed to double the number of cores and increase the clock very slightly in a larger TDP envelope of 1.25. I'm not sure what the "RDY1001C" refers to at the bottom of the results, although this configuration is still the fastest in the list. Googling the term has given no results.
There are more tests at THG than what we have reproduced here; check their article for complete results. And, as always, treat all results with great caution. These are disclosed results. Even though they are accurate, they may reflect engineering samples that are not representative of the final performance.
SVT is a highly optimized video encoder for Intel processors, but optimizations for Intel chips also work well for AMD processors, and we certainly see it here. None of the codes seems to evolve particularly well when adding new cores, so we will not attempt to make sense of the dual figures. A simple 7742 is significantly faster than the Xeon Platinum 8280 and the 7742 is more than twice as fast as the 7601.
In HEVC, the performance figures change. Here, Intel and AMD are globally at par, but the 7742 represents a huge increase over the Epyc 7601.
POV-Ray 3.7 is evolving with an increased number of threads, but the gain of a dual processor is much smaller than that of the 7742 compared to the 7601. AMD averages only 24% more performance adding 64 additional cores, compared with 42 percent scaling for the 8280 Xeon Platinum. This difference in scaling means that a pair of Xeon 8280 doubles is roughly equivalent to a Epyc 7742 pair, although an Epyc 7742 is significantly faster than a Platinum Xeon 8280.
Blender, and more generally rendering, are tests for which AMD processors are generally excellent. AMD resolutely wins this test, although it is interesting to note that we are also seeing signs of significantly improved scalability for Intel processors. This may simply reflect the fact that Intel processors have far fewer cores. The Xeon Platinum 8280 is only a 28-core chip compared to the performance of a 64-core chip. This is a pretty important benefit for AMD. Of course, there is also the question of pricing and positioning – Intel has generally charged its Xeons well above AMD's Epyc processors, and we tend to prioritize price comparison over other factors. .
However, readers should be aware that there are sizing issues with AMD processors due to the large number of 128C / 256T cores, while Xeon Platinum processors only have 56 cores in a 2S configuration. Applications themselves may not adapt to these types of thread counting.
If these numbers are accurate, they suggest that AMD's Epyc 7nm processor will be a major challenge for Intel in more markets – which is exactly what we expected from previous third generation Ryzen claims and from AMD on Epyc 2. Factor in Bob Swan's recognition of increased competition in the market, and we plan a scenario in which Intel will reduce its Xeon prices either by reducing them directly or by launching Cooper Lake (currently the first half of 2020). Intel processor prices have always been much higher than those of AMD, but it's hard to know exactly how much, because the company's list prices (the best indicator to follow) do not reflect the volume actually paid by customers.
If AMD's Rome is as good as it looks, we should see an increased adoption of this piece by OEMs over first-generation Epyc, as well as some reaction from # 39; Intel. It may take several generations of products for server clients to switch to new providers, but they take this into consideration.