←back to thread

AMD outsells Intel in the datacenter space

(www.tomshardware.com)
499 points baal80spam | 1 comments | 05 Nov 24 19:27 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
gautamcgoel ◴[05 Nov 24 20:46 UTC] No.42055008[source]▶
Damn, first Intel missed out on Mobile, then it fumbled AI, and now it's being seriously challenged on its home turf. Pat has his work cut out for him.
replies(6): >>42055079 #>>42055125 #>>42055190 #>>42055260 #>>42055329 #>>42057153 #
kevin_thibedeau ◴[05 Nov 24 21:29 UTC] No.42055329[source]▶
They didn't miss out. They owned the most desirable mobile platform in StrongARM and cast it aside. They are the footgun masters.
replies(4): >>42055469 #>>42055486 #>>42056360 #>>42057167 #
hajile ◴[05 Nov 24 21:50 UTC] No.42055486[source]▶
They killed StrongARM because they believed the x86 Atom design could compete. Turns out that it couldn't and most of the phones with it weren't that great.

Intel should be focused on an x86+RISC-V hybrid chip design where they can control an upcoming ecosystem while also offering a migration path for businesses that will pay the bills for decades to come.

replies(5): >>42055656 #>>42055769 #>>42057190 #>>42057359 #>>42057715 #
kimixa ◴[05 Nov 24 22:13 UTC] No.42055656[source]▶
I'd argue that the Atom core itself could compete - it hit pretty much the same perf/watt targets as it's performance-competitive ARM equivalents.

But having worked with Intel on some of those SoCs, it's everything else that fell down. They were late, they were the "disfavored" teams by execs, they were the engineer's last priority, they had stupid hw bugs they refused to fix and respin, they were everything you could do to set up a project to fail.

replies(3): >>42056070 #>>42056414 #>>42057368 #
raverbashing ◴[06 Nov 24 05:30 UTC] No.42057368{3}[source]▶
Maybe the Atom core itself was performant, but I doubt they could take all the x86 crap around it to make it slim enough for a phone
replies(1): >>42057555 #
kimixa ◴[06 Nov 24 06:29 UTC] No.42057555{4}[source]▶
They were SoCs, fundamentally the same as any ARM-based phone SoC - some atom SoCs even had integrated modems.

The BoM was pretty identical to other devices.

replies(1): >>42060807 #
1. ksec ◴[06 Nov 24 12:03 UTC] No.42060807{5}[source]▶
Exactly. Most people still dont get it. What killed Atom on Phone wasn't x86. It was partly software and mostly hardware and cost. It simply wasn't cost competitive, especially when Intel were used to high margin business.