Slashdot Mirror
Intel Addresses CPU Shortage: 'Supply Is Undoubtedly Tight' (crn.com)
Intel interim CEO Bob Swan publicly addressed the company's CPU shortage issue for the first time since July, when he acknowledged that meeting additional demand would be Intel's "biggest challenge." From a report: In a message posted to Intel's website Friday, Swan said the "surprising return" to growth in the PC market "has put pressure on [the company's] factory network." He added, "We're prioritizing the production of Intel Xeon and Intel Core processors so that collectively we can serve the high-performance segments of the market. That said, supply is undoubtedly tight, particularly at the entry-level of the PC market."
Intel partners and at least one distributor previously told CRN they were seeing a shortage of Intel's current generation, 14-nanometer CPUs, most notably in lower-end client processors.
Intel partners and at least one distributor previously told CRN they were seeing a shortage of Intel's current generation, 14-nanometer CPUs, most notably in lower-end client processors.
It is depending if the end users are willing to pay for it or not?
While typically Supply vs Demand means low supply will raise the price. However the Demand of AMD Chips may not coincide the Demand for Intel Chips. Or people are willing to wait for the Intel Chips to come out. Then we need to factor the rest of the supply chain.
Hobbyist who mash up parts to build their own PC, is a rather small market. Most of them are from the big Names, the Apple, Dell, HP, Lenovo... who have a big supply chain behind them. Having that XPS laptop switch from Intel to AMD, will need a different motherboard, which would have different shape heat considerations... So the case will need to be redesigned...
More likely other then switching to AMD, our PC's built for Intel would just be more expensive.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
And why does AMD always perform great in benchmarks but badly in real world tests compared to Intel?
That hasn't been my experience at all. The K6 blew the doors off the P2, clock for clock, when you compiled for it. Of course, no commercial software was, but if you run Linux you can compile most things yourself and reap the rewards. And the original Athlon likewise absolutely slaughtered the P3, clock for clock. The FP performance was hilariously superior. Today, AMD only outperforms Intel abusively dollar for dollar, and yeah if you need maximum single thread performance you have to go with Intel. That only matters to gamers though, since everything else that needs much performance is multithreaded now.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Today, AMD only outperforms Intel abusively dollar for dollar, and yeah if you need maximum single thread performance you have to go with Intel. That only matters to gamers though, since everything else that needs much performance is multithreaded now.
A lot of tasks are only semi-parallel though. Take building code - you can compile lots of files in parallel, but then you have to link the executable on a single thread. Even though the majority of the work is done across multiple cores, the single core performance can still make a noticeable difference.