Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Let's give him the benefit of the doubt.
Then at the very least they should have scaled the numeric scores
of the mobile and desktop versions differently to make it obvious
they weren't comparable (like SPEC did between CPU 2000 and
CPU 2006). There is no obvious or even subtle indication which
version a result came from. That is completely unacceptable.
We aren't talking quantum chronodynamics here. The difference
between good and bad benchmark practices has been long and
widely known. Geekbench is effectively a hidden multi-tier
Dhrystone on steroids with strong influence by specific idiomatic
niche instructions thrown in for good measure. A poor outing on
version one is understandable if regrettable. Still doing this crap
in version three is something else altogether.
There is no benefit of the doubt to be given.
BTW, since you visit RWT then why don't you do a search on what
Linus Torvalds had to say about it there. He is probably even less
of a fan of it than I am.
iPhone 6 benchmarks out for Geekbench.
Similar to the 2015 Macbook score.
Too bad they aren't directly comparable.
Geekbench runs vastly different dataset sizes on mobile vs desktop:
http://www.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/workloads.pdf
The desktop version runs 3 to 8 times bigger datasets than the mobile
version. Yet another reason Geekbench is a steaming pile of crap that
exaggerates ARM performance and minimizes x86 performance.
Once I believed Geekbench developers were simply ignorant amateurs.
Now I am starting to think they have a deliberate agenda.
AMD chief CPU architect Keller leaves company
I guess Zen is looking a lot less like a Skylake killer and a
lot more like Bulldozer 2, the sequel. :-P
In a notional sense perhaps.
Wouldn't pass regulatory anti-trust scrutiny in the U.S., certainly
not in the EU.
There is also the issue of Apple repatriating all that cash into the
U.S. to actually acquire the INTC shares. I not sure Apple would
have enough left over after uncle Sam took his share.
Remember Intel deals with silicon, not silicone.
There are so many good responses to your post, I wish I could chose just one.
Have you actually run SPEC?
It takes hours.
Yeah a job worth doing must be capable of being done in a few minutes..
What the heck do you do for a living?
BTW, occasionally the simulations I run can take days or even a week
to complete on pretty fast x86 systems.
I don't think most office workers are going to run sustained compute workloads for hours.
A processor under load tends to reach thermal equilibrium within a
few seconds and either throttles or doesn't. A benchmark *suite* that
runs for hours means it is more accurate and repeatable. And it is
representative of how the processor runs sustained after a few seconds.
BTW, Intel has by far the most advanced turbo/dynamic power/voltage/
frequency management systems in the industry which trade off thermal
inertia for brief bursts of activity above TDP. Ridiculously short running
benchmarks run single off give an advantage to Intel.
Intel wants to eliminate all passwords from computing.
If that happens then short 3M. Sales of post-it notes would drop
like a stone.
Wait a few weeks for Chipworks to tear apart the A9. Apple says so
little of value about new products that to speculate about engineering
specifics based on it is like trying to see the future in the entrails of a
freshly slaughtered sheep.
Apple claims - "faster than 80% of PCs shipped in the past 6 months".
LOL, let me guess... based on Geekbench 3?
Apple should submit SPEC CPU 2006 and SPEC CPU rate 2006 scores
for their A9X or just STFU. If Apple repeats this claim in England I hope
someone complains. The advertising regulator there takes a very dim
view of dubious claim making and will slap down companies hard.
apple watch for baby's heart rate
Well people who weren't born yesterday aren't buying them...
Interesting read. ZIRP is a monster that punishes virtuous economic
behaviour and rewards dangerous and unproductive behaviour. The
global economy is lethargic and clapped out despite mountains of
monetary stimulus and many individuals, companies, and governments
are running up debts that will become unsustainable when interest
rates eventually rise up off the floor. I don't see a happy outcome,
just unevenly and unfairly distributed pain coming down the road.
I agree with you. Stiller is pretty sharp. The guy misquoting him
however...
That's not surprising given you're comparing a 1W ARM processor against a 35W Intel processor.
Oh really? Show me the data sheet for an A72 device.
What you mean is a 1W optimistic estimate for core only power, probably
under nominal conditions vs an actual characterized power for an entire
device including 2 cores, L2, L3, clock generation and distribution system,
memory interface, I/O interfaces, test logic, configuration logic etc.
But you probably knew that already and simply want to blow smoke.
Or maybe you didn't.
One way makes a person intellectually dishonest. The other simply stupid.
I wonder where the fabrications for IBM are occurring?
The fabrications for IBM come from the corner office and the marketing
department.
The wafer spinning for z and p system processors is done in the same
IBM fabs that were used before the divestiture, the name on the buildings
and employee paychecks just changed from IBM to GF. Keep in mind IBM
MPUs are made in very expensive boutique SOI/trench eDRAM processes
no one else can afford. GF had agreed to support this very low volume
production for some years which is why IBM had to *pay* GF to take IBM
Semi off its hands. It isn't at all similar to GF's normal foundry business.
I'm not aware of any of their customers other than AMD. Do they have any?
GF has IBM as a customer now after being paid to take IBM Semi assets
off big blue's hands.
According to IDC 2.29 million servers were sold in Q2. Of those, 2.27
million were x86 servers which represented about 80% of sales by revenue.
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS25861515
The non-x86 numbers include mainframes, RISC, and Itanium boxes. Based
on past data and trends the number of ARM servers sold in Q2 is statistically
indistinguishable from zero.
Sure, before tractors farmers always preferred hitching up 64 chickens
to pull a plow instead of one or two horses. Same idea here. :-P
That is SPECint, not SPECint_rate.
The 64 core ARM chip uses 16 DDR3 channels with 8 concentrator chips.
If it can run all 64 cores at 2 GHz with the memory system running at full
throttle at 120 W in 28 nm I would be utterly shocked.
The Xeon integer score quoted is nonsense
The top Xeon single socket SPECintrate2006 score is 715 with 18 cores.
http://www.spec.org/cpu2006/results/res2015q2/cpu2006-20150615-36775.html
The top Xeon single socket SPECfprate2006 score is 474 with 18 cores.
http://www.spec.org/cpu2006/results/res2015q2/cpu2006-20150615-36776.html
Let's see how this ARM chip looks after it reaches silicon, let alone
the market.
ARM SPECint2006 estimates from Freescale
http://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=152735&curpostid=152741
So it appears that freescale has a SPECint_2006 estimate for A72 and A57!
A57 does 12 SPECint_2006
A72 does 13.5 SPECint_2006
This is apparently at 2 GHz.
As point of reference, a non-turbo 2 GHz Celeron G530T from 2011 scores 24.8
http://www.spec.org/cpu2006/results/res2011q3/cpu2006-20110908-18558.html
LOL, small wonder Apple designs its own ARM processor cores.
How Intel's New Skylake Chips May Put Additional Pressure on AMD
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/08/25/how-intels-new-skylake-chips-may-put-additional-pr.aspx?source=eogyholnk0000001
I think Intel's Skylake-based products will further improve the company's already robust competitive positioning vis-a-vis AMD. Although AMD's market share in PC processors is quite low at this point, it's not zero, which suggests that there's still room for Intel to nab market share.
Such a share shift in Intel's favor probably wouldn't have a big impact on Intel's business at this point, but continued share erosion on AMD's part could put it in an already tighter spot than it's already in.
It can't be much fun running that company.
Haven't you heard? The new AMD Zen chip will turn everything around. Intel
will be begging for scrapes while billions fall from the sky at AMD. Jim Keller
designed it single handedly and it is so good it will double Skylake performance,
run at 2W, and cost 17 cents to make.
Must be true. Some guy on a web forum said he heard this first hand from his
secret source at AMD and a couple of other guys backed him up - they heard
the same from their own secret sources. Obviously we better sell off all INTC
now while we can still get two figure price.
It is an interesting business model. They (IBM) have been selling two
classes of processors for system z for a while. A processor with the
microcode enabled allowing it to run zOs and legacy mainframe apps
costs about a million each while a processor fused so it can only run
Linux costs about $100k. Still an extremely expensive way to run Linux
but far cheaper mainframing than the rent collecting IBM does on old
school users.
I bet HP's coming scale-up x86 gear based on its Superdome2 chipset
is probably just as reliable and a cheaper way to run Linux on SMP big
iron.
This weekend I wasted a bit of time googling around to try to find
a way to get rid of the persistent Win10 upgrade pop-up window that
arrived last month in a Win7 update.
This kind of nonsense plus the unprecedented level of user data
slurping in Win10 and the apparent MS move towards "Windows as
a service" business model is tilting me towards a Mac when I buy
my first laptop for myself this fall.
Now that AMD is circling the bowl big customers need something else
to walk their Intel sales rep by before negotiating the price on their next
huge order of Xeon gear.
This story has more to do with the effective elimination of AMD as a
vaguely credible alternative than any new danger to Intel.
LOL, at least AMD gear was cheap *and* software compatible.
Do you really think they are hiring incompetent/bad cpu architects and process engineers?
I doubt it. The issue is good enough vs the best.
Keep in mind an experienced senior engineer or team leader started out
as new hire out of school a decade or two earlier. Out of a population
of newly minted engineers more than half will move into managerial
or marketing roles or simply leave engineering within ten years. It is
a mentally tough job delivering results while keeping up with rapidly
changing technologies and many decide its not for them. A key feature
to keeping the best engineers 1) as engineers, 2) in your company is
fairness and rewarding them based on merit. This isn't simply a matter
of money. Engineers also get rewarded by challenge and the trust shown
to them working on the most interesting and ground breaking new things
in key roles and responsibilities. That is how you grow the senior folks
who ensure that things get done and that they work.
The danger of blathering on about the specific hiring and promoting
of minorities is the perception, often becoming real, that there is a
management thumb on the scale. When it is seen that a *competent*
minority gets a promotion over the *best* candidate who has the bad
luck of not having the favorite shade or naughty bits. That minority
person more than likely can do the job in a reasonably good manner
but the WAY this outcome occurred is extremely demoralizing and
corrosive to team spirit and trust in the company. Once the rank and
file feels the merit system is undermined there are going to be problems
with retention, work ethic, and decline in trust of co-workers. As teams
go so goes projects. As projects go so goes products. As products go
so goes competitiveness. As competitiveness goes so goes companies.
This is an extremely competitive business. Even with the best people
available success is far from assured but with average people odds are
your results will at best be average but more likely poor.
I think some bashers are experiencing intense cognitive dissonance
defending Intel against criticism of its political correctness under BK's
watch. They're more silly and combative than usual.
The N-word he used is as unacceptable as the other one.
Only a liar would claim that they have anywhere near the same level
of offensiveness or are basically interchangeable. The simple fact is
YOU made a claim about the poster in question that was intentionally
misleading to the point of being a FABRICATION and now are making
stuff up arbitrarily trying to evade RESPONSIBILITY when you were
called out on it.
Using the "N-word" twice in one of his last 2 posts
That is not the N-word.
Good thing he didn't write "Caucasian" or your head would've exploded
because that kind of sounds like a bad word too.
Is Advanced Micro Devices Bankruptcy Imminent?
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/081415/advanced-micro-devices-bankruptcy-imminent.asp?partner=YahooSA
The financial struggles AMD is suffering are largely due to the fact that its semi-custom solutions market has been played out. AMD continues to fall further behind its primary competitors, Intel (INTC) and Nvidia (NVDA). AMD used to be a major participant in providing PC processors, but Intel has long since surpassed it. Intel's continuously increasing market share has allowed it to steadily generate greater revenues and profit margins. This has also allowed Intel to boost research and development (R&D), significantly outspending what AMD is able to expend. As of 2015, Intel's R&D expenditures exceed AMD's revenues.
AMD does not fare much better in terms of its position against its other major competitor. In the graphic cards market, AMD's market share has fallen by more than 40% over the last several years. Nvidia, conversely, has continued its prominent position in the industry. The biggest obstacle for AMD in this situation, and with it, Intel, is that its declining revenues, massive debt, and lack of cash have rendered it virtually unable to compete. AMD is attempting to divide its efforts between competing with Intel over the processor market and Nvidia in the graphics market, while Nvidia directs 100% of its resources to developing better graphics technology.
He wasn't trying to say anything, it was a cheap drive by troll. Let it drop.
Thanks for the observations. My experience in high tech in Canada over
the past 30 years and a bunch of different companies is very similar.
Being white was no advantage and I worked with about as many non-white
engineers as white engineers. Contrary to what some folks want to claim,
white engineers that weren't starting player material were quickly weeded
out. Now there were and are very few woman in my field. When I did my EE
degree there were only several woman in my graduating class of ~100. I'd
prefer a more gender balanced work place but woman with the necessary
education weren't there then and so experienced female engineers aren't
here now. I do know that over the past 30 years the extremely rare female
EE was a highly sought after commodity and typically received job offers
that would be considered rather generous and forward looking given their
previous job experience for a uh, more typical candidate. I know this from
managers and project leaders that were making those job offers.
IMHO the tech industry, at least on the hardware and silicon side, has
nothing to answer for. It is about as close to a meritocracy as there is
in this world. It is too transparent and competitive not to be. A late or
poor product is a late or poor product regardless of how white or how
rainbow and diverse the design team and management was.
A no-nonsense leader like Andy Grove or T.J. Rogers wouldn't be cowed
by loud activist BS into throwing real money at "solving" a non problem
with PR. Hopefully Intel's next CEO will "have a pair" (even if it is a she).
JSIII would be proud
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/analyst-amds-executive-bonuses-unbelievable-141556944.html
"We suppose this could also be one last-ditch effort to "align management incentives with shareholders," but at this point it seems far too late for that," Rasgon said.
Following layoffs earlier in 2015, the company is working on additional cost cuts in order to bolster the balance sheet, even as the business appears to be collapsing. "As such, we find these types of large payments, once again, to be extremely distasteful," Rasgon stated.
The analyst believes that the size of these grants indicate that the management and the Board of Directors do not have the interests of the shareholder at heart, while viewing these grants as a sign that things are continuing to worsen at AMD.
"AMD is at a tipping point, with their core PC business under significant pressure from a weak market and increasingly poor competitive position," Rasgon added.
Intel's new PC - political correctness
http://www.siliconbeat.com/2015/08/12/intel-sees-boosts-women-and-african-americans-among-senior-leadership/
Intel reported Wednesday that 43.3 percent of its hires so far in 2015 are “diverse,” meaning that they are women, African Americans, Latinos or Native Americans.
That exceeds the chip maker’s goal of 40 percent.
[..]
In January, Intel’s chief executive, Brian Krzanich, said that by 2020, as we wrote then, Intel would reach “full representation,” meaning that its workforce would reflect the demographics of the available talent pool.
Rosalind Hudnell, Intel’s chief diversity officer, said in an interview that the company is auditing everything.
Like Facebook, Google and other firms, Intel does employee bias training. But Hudnell said that it’s what happens after the training that matters.
“Training drives awareness, but you have to mitigate the bias through the system,” she said. “How people progress in the company relates to retention. Who is getting promoted, Who is getting stretch assignments.”
Wow, smell the pink kool-aid.
Intel is a dominant force in semis and the computer industry today
because of its founding group of very smart and aggressive white
male technical and scientific pioneers. Those guys hired the best
regardless of skin color. Look at the author list of Intel ISSCC
papers going back as far as you want if you don't believe me.
If BK continues to concentrate on political correctness, quotas,
and satisfying activists instead of hiring and promoting the very
best qualified and concentrating on trying to grow the business
into new areas I'll dump this stock. STFU BK and deliver growth
and profits, not PC PR to polish your liberal credentials.
INTC doing well today anyone care to speculate
Markets are all up. Often that is the only explanation there is or is needed.
Keep in mind that on average about 50% of share price movement is
broad market based, about 30% is sector related, and only 20% company
specific. YMMV
Read what I said. I said that the DRAM would be a cache for Xpoint, and replace NAND.
Some one else suggested that DRAM could also be replaced.
You are right. It was golfbum who suggested it would replace DRAM.
For at least two years or so Xpoint will likely be confined to Enterprise Storage Systems, and will be used in conjunction with DRAMs.
I agree with this assessment.
I do not understand your big concern about the finite write cycles of Xpoint.
You previously claimed Xpoint could replace DRAM. I merely pointed
out that was not possible in the general case.
I do not understand your big concern about the finite write cycles of Xpoint.
A DRAM should be capable of supporting 10 million writes a second for
at least ten years of continuous operation. In the same role XPoint
would reach end of life in one second under the same traffic if the
writes were to the same block of cells.
If you can't comprehend this huge gulf in capability then there is no
point in further discussion.
IBM sells/leases several thousand mainframes per year with perhaps 20
Z processor chips on average per system.
POWER sales have probably dropped well under 200k systems per year
with perhaps 4 to 6 POWER processor chips on average per system.
IBM made chips at a big loss to power hardware it sells for around
break even so they could attach profitable software to it along with
extremely lucrative support contracts and consulting services.
The problem for IBM is downward pricing pressure on the extremely
lucrative part of their business is pushing on down the line making
chips and hardware less sustainable. We have seen that with them
having to pay $1.5B to get rid of their semi operation "assets" last
year.
Complete utter piece of crap tech reporting
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ibm-7-nm-chips-change-130531007.html
IBM’s 7-nm chips challenge Intel’s expertise
IBM’s 7-nm chips have put significant pressure on Intel (INTC). However, owing to its investment in fabs for decades, Intel has a leading edge in manufacturing chips. Thus, Intel can’t be ruled out yet.
LOL. IBM just paid 10 figures to have its semi operation hauled away
as trash, their 7 nm slideware is fairy dust but at best "Intel can't be
ruled out yet"? WOW!
Commenting on how IBM’s launch of 7-nm product puts Intel’s position in jeopardy, Richard Fichera, an analyst with Forrester Research, is of the opinion that there is “no guarantee” that the process IBM employs is the most efficient way to make 7-nm transistors.
"Launch"? This author uses words like a monkey would pick around
a Digikey stockroom, completely ignorant of the significance of, and
difference between, individual pieces.