By: blue (blue.delete@this.blue.com), August 10, 2019 9:47 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
anon (spam.delete.delete@this.this.spam.com) on August 10, 2019 8:20 am wrote:
> Even half price is an insult when starting from quadruple the price per core. And that's assuming those
> customer would pay 100% of the AMD list price. The really big customers get custom SKUs at reasonable
> prices already, but for the rest not budging on the prices this year is basically a slap in the face,
> especially if they're just doing it to wait out EPYC2 evaluations and drop the prices next year.
My understanding is that the really big customers pay far under 50% of the cost of Intel... like,10-20% (on higher SKUs).
But I'm sure AMD is happy to "just" match that pricing. Which is probably 2-4x what they got with Naples anyways.
Big question is how will they aim Threadripper. Higher TPD (250W) 1P EPYC option--for the tasks that prefer clockspeed to memory bandwidth?
~20% higher base clock, ~30% higher boost clock, from 1P EPYC, based on Gen1 EPYC to Threadripper clocks.
> Even half price is an insult when starting from quadruple the price per core. And that's assuming those
> customer would pay 100% of the AMD list price. The really big customers get custom SKUs at reasonable
> prices already, but for the rest not budging on the prices this year is basically a slap in the face,
> especially if they're just doing it to wait out EPYC2 evaluations and drop the prices next year.
My understanding is that the really big customers pay far under 50% of the cost of Intel... like,10-20% (on higher SKUs).
But I'm sure AMD is happy to "just" match that pricing. Which is probably 2-4x what they got with Naples anyways.
Big question is how will they aim Threadripper. Higher TPD (250W) 1P EPYC option--for the tasks that prefer clockspeed to memory bandwidth?
~20% higher base clock, ~30% higher boost clock, from 1P EPYC, based on Gen1 EPYC to Threadripper clocks.
