The AMD Execution Thread [2007 - 2017]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Zen has already demonstrated good area efficiency, and good power efficiency at moderate frequencies. This bodes well for laptops and servers, which is where the real money is.

Vega remains an unknown quantity, but on paper it looks good.
I think zen true power will be in the server space with high margins and a never ending growing market that is desperate for competition(lower prices). This market is a big rewarding one but also needs a big investment AMD have no ecosystem and they need one. But I think AMD is doing it as good as they can prioritizing 1 thing at a time because they can't do more.

In anyway Laptops looks promising also, 8C16T and 3.5GHz? or 4/8 APU sounds pretty good.
 
what ecosystem dont they have? what do you really need outside of ?:
hardware: dell,HP, super micro , check ( im sure lenovo and cisco would add products in short order)
hypervisor: kvm, hyperv, esxi ( two of those work, one kind of works, im sure it will all be sorted by naples release)
software side: just compile to haswell uarch target......

its just going to come down having a solid stable product and a solid road map so market share can grow over time.
 
what ecosystem dont they have? what do you really need outside of ?:
hardware: dell,HP, super micro , check ( im sure lenovo and cisco would add products in short order)
hypervisor: kvm, hyperv, esxi ( two of those work, one kind of works, im sure it will all be sorted by naples release)
software side: just compile to haswell uarch target......

its just going to come down having a solid stable product and a solid road map so market share can grow over time.
Like the 200 Mobos that will be available for ryzen launch and at the time of launch they were like 5 models and all fully bugged? Intel have almost a decade building its ecosystem in both hardware and software and it will take time for AMD to get there, even if we assume AMD will have a non-trouble launch.
 
AMD's game plan to become a machine-learning giant
AMD has long had plans to fight back. It’s been prepping hardware that can compete with Nividia on performance and price, but it’s also ginning up a platform for vendor-neutral GPU programming resources — a way for developers to freely choose AMD when putting together a GPU-powered solution without worrying about software support.

AMD recently announced its next steps toward those goals. First is a new GPU product, the Radeon Vega, based on a new though previously unveiled GPU architecture. Second is a revised release of the open source software platform, ROCm, a software layer that allows machine-learning frameworks and other applications to leverage multiple GPUs.

Both pieces, the hardware and the software, matter equally. Both need to be in place for AMD to fight back.
...
http://www.infoworld.com/article/31...-plan-to-become-a-machine-learning-giant.html
 
NV gained 2% market share over AMD as of Q1 2017. Also interestingly, market share last year didn't differ much from the year before. NV enjoyed a total share of ~77% of dGPUs, which is really close to 2015's 80%. AMD did gain a 3.3% share all year though.

AIB-pr1.PNG


http://jonpeddie.com/press-releases...in-q117-from-last-quarter-with-nvidia-gaining
http://jonpeddie.com/publications/add-in-board-report
 
NV gained 2% market share over AMD as of Q1 2017. Also interestingly, market share last year didn't differ much from the year before. NV enjoyed a total share of ~77% of dGPUs, which is really close to 2015's 80%. AMD did gain a 3.3% share all year though.

AIB-pr1.PNG


http://jonpeddie.com/press-releases...in-q117-from-last-quarter-with-nvidia-gaining
http://jonpeddie.com/publications/add-in-board-report

The next quarterly report is going to be the interesting one as that's when Polaris entered the market and regained a lot of AIB market share for AMD. While they had no competition for NV's higher end cards Polaris was able to compete quite well in the higher volume budget and mainstream markets. NVidia has steadily been regaining that lost market share but still aren't back to where they were pre-Polaris. We should see AMD show a significant YoY decline in share and a large YoY increase in NVidia market share in the next quarterly. This is assuming that AMD doesn't release Vega into the consumer market and more importantly new product into the mainstream channel.

Anyway, there's some interesting information contained in that report.

PC Shipments drop 7.3% YoY, but GPU shipments dropped a staggering 19.2% YoY. This means that the trend for discrete GPUs being replaced by integrated GPUs that are good enough in new PCs is accelerating.

On the bright side for GPU manufacturer's is that shipments of gaming oriented GPUs is still going strong. This is particularly beneficial for NVidia currently as it has dominated the high end with no competition since Pascal's launch. As this segment of GPU's is generally high margin that can offset the reduction in GPU shipments quite significantly. In the case of NVidia where there is little to no competition at the high end, this means that despite lower GPU shipments, revenue and margins have skyrocketed. Conversely while Polaris regained significant market share for AMD, it was in the higher volume lower margin market that is shrinking.

All of which means, AMD needs Vega to be competitive. While it wouldn't be the death of them if they can't be competitive in the high end of the gaming market, it also wouldn't be good as the lower end of the market is shrinking and is lower margin. However, that isn't all bad either as APUs using Zen with integrated graphics will hopefully see those lost GPU shipments shift to AMD APUs instead of Intel products. That doesn't help much with the lower margins, however.

Interesting times.

Regards,
SB
 
Alienware is the only OEM Allowed to Sell Threadripper PCs this Year
Yesterday we reported that AMD 12 and 16-core Ryzen Threadripper processors will end up in Dells Alienware Area 51 range PCs. It seems that Dell was keen on exclusivity, and got it. Alienware is the only party that is allowed to sell Threadripper PCs this Year.
...
Alienware may have a partial lock on Threadripper, but Threadripper doesn't have a lock on Alienware. The company said it will also offer Intel’s new 12-core Skylake-X for the Area-51 product line. AMD officials sidestepped any questions of controversy among other PC makers, instead saying the exclusive with Alienware would help build momentum for the new chip.
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/al...lowed-to-sell-threadripper-pcs-this-year.html
 
...instead saying the exclusive with Alienware would help build momentum for the new chip.

Not to mention that makes it easier for them to manage stock if it proves popular. It wouldn't be very good if it was available at all gaming OEMs and then demand was high enough that everyone went out of stock for long periods of time.

Note - this doesn't imply low supply only a situation in which demand is much higher than supply. This can happen regardless of whether you have low quantities of a product or very high quantities of a product.

Regards,
SB
 
Not to mention that makes it easier for them to manage stock if it proves popular. It wouldn't be very good if it was available at all gaming OEMs and then demand was high enough that everyone went out of stock for long periods of time.

Note - this doesn't imply low supply only a situation in which demand is much higher than supply. This can happen regardless of whether you have low quantities of a product or very high quantities of a product.

Regards,
SB

Seems a smart move to go with Dell if they are a keen channel/solutions-service providor partner; they have a strong presence as well in the business server space.
With the resources at AMD, makese sense to work with one large OEM/server space company for now, especially if they are keen as it seems Dell is.
That is assuming this is a strong relationship carrying over to business/server space, or will do in the near term.
Cheers
 
saying the exclusive with Alienware would help build momentum for the new chip.
How the hell can limiting the supplies of your component increase momentum? AMD genuinely believe that putting ThreadRipper into ASUS ROG and MSI and all these recommended PC providers would decrease sales and momentum of its CPU?

Biggest load of PR bollocks I've heard in a whiles. Alienware paid lots of money up front, reducing ThreadRipper adoption and momentum but paying AMD more money than they thought they'd otherwise get, or paying enough of a lump sum up front to offset the lost earnings. Perhaps limited supply means a single vendor is worth limiting your audience.
 
This is a very bad move.

Us developers , or users with computationally expensive hobbies (folding, rendering) would be the target audience for such a CPU. I feel this audience will also purposely stay away from flashy, expensive boutique PCs.
 
To my understanding the Dell-deal is only about OEM manufacturers, the CPUs will come available in retail channel around the same time as those Dell Alienwares.
So those seeking power for "hobbies" should be just fine building their own rigs like before
 
Maybe AMD is trying not to compete too hard with EPIC 1S systems by limiting OEM business to only one very expensive Alienware range.

I for one am not bothered by this at all as I have never planned on buying OEM Threadripper system. I hope to build one myself!
Where this decision will matter is commercial clients looking for best performace/$ systems. They will have to either go with Dell TR or pick EPYC instead. What AMD is risking here is loosing that sale to Intel Skylake-X system, but I think it is a calculated risk.
 
AMD Plays Catch-Up in Deep Learning with New GPUs and Open Source Strategy
June 28, 2017
While all of these GPUs are focused on the same application set, they cut across multiple architectures. The MI25 is built on the new “Vega” architecture, while the MI8 and MI6 are based on the older “Fuji” and “Polaris” platforms, respectively.

The top-of-the-line MI25 is built for large-scale training and inferencing applications, while the MI8 and MI6 devices are geared mostly for inferencing. AMD says they are also suitable for HPC workloads, but the lower precision limits the application set principally to some seismic and genomics codes. According to an unnamed source manning the AMD booth at ISC, they are planning to deliver 64-bit-capable Radeon GPUs in the next go-around, presumably to serve a broader array of HPC applications.

For comparison’s sake, NVIDIA’s P100 delivers 21.2 teraflops of FP16 and 10.6 teraflops of FP32. So from a raw flops perspective, the new MI25 compares rather favorably. However, once NVIDIA starts shipping the Volta-class V100 GPU later this year, its 120 teraflops delivered by the new Tensor Cores will blow that comparison out of the water.

A major difference is that AMD is apparently building specialized accelerators for deep learning inference and training, as well as HPC applications, while NVIDIA has abandoned this approach with the Volta generation. The V100 is an all-in-one device that can be used across these three application buckets. It remains to be seen which approach will be preferred by users.

The bigger difference is on the software side for GPU computing. AMD says it plans to keep everything in its deep learning/HPC stack as open source. That starts with the Radeon Open Compute platform, aka ROCm. It includes things such as GPU drivers, a C/C++ compilers for heterogeneous computing, and the HIP CUDA conversion tool. OpenCl and Python are also supported.

New to ROCm is MIOpen, a GPU-accelerated library that encompasses a broad array of deep learning functions. AMD plans to add support for Caffe, TensorFlow and Torch in the near future. Although everything here is open source, the breadth of support and functionality is a fraction of what is currently available to CUDA users. As a consequence, the chipmaker has its work cut out for it to capture deep learning customers.
https://www.top500.org/news/amd-plays-catch-up-in-deep-learning-with-open-source-strategy/
 
I am not sure if that means there's dedicated hardware, or if it's retroactively labeling the lower MI tiers as being "specialized" relative to the fully-featured Volta chip.
The context in the writing seems more consistent with the latter case, which looks to be more of a rationalization of a improvised product line.
 
I am not sure if that means there's dedicated hardware, or if it's retroactively labeling the lower MI tiers as being "specialized" relative to the fully-featured Volta chip.
The context in the writing seems more consistent with the latter case, which looks to be more of a rationalization of a improvised product line.

Well the article says "The V100 is an all-in-one device that can be used across these three application buckets." which is true of Vega 10 too. So it sounds like a reference to some kind of deep learning ASIC but I've never heard of anything like that from AMD.
 
Well the article says "The V100 is an all-in-one device that can be used across these three application buckets." which is true of Vega 10 too. So it sounds like a reference to some kind of deep learning ASIC but I've never heard of anything like that from AMD.

The third bucket is DP-focused HPC, which Vega lags in. GV100 is highly performant across training, inference, and more traditional FP64 workloads.
AMD's accelerators are optimized in this context by not being compelling in 1 or 2 of those buckets. That they are considered adequate at what they are targeted at is not necessarily by AMD's choice--given that the various products have certain demerits such as the limited grunt of Polaris and the constricted memory of the slightly higher-tier Fiji board.
 
You're probably right. That was awkwardly worded in any case.

By the way:
AMD-_Intel-_Q3-2017-_CPU-_Market-_Share.png

This is from PassMark, so absolute numbers aren't representative of much, but I think the trend is real, if exaggerated. Hopefully this can bring AMD back to profitability, especially when Raven Ridge comes out.
 
What is shown there? From their website, I think it is this:
„This graph counts the baselines submitted to us during these time period and therefore is representative of CPUs in use rather than CPUs purchased.“
So IMHO it is rather CPUs being benchmarked & their results submitted during the respective time period. You can draw your own conclusions as to what this says. I for one do not benchmark my home system on a daily (or monthly or even quarterly) basis, when I do not change it's config.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top