This whole thread is comedy gold!
Intel got caught with their pants down when AMD dropped Ryzen. And going by the slides, Intel pissed themself when trying to get their pants back up.
On the topic of "glued on" parts:
Intel, what exactly is this then?
wtf
My god that's disappointing. How do you let this slide as a fucking corporate empire. This is juicy shit.
Part of me wants AMD to include "my cpu is glued together" with their CPUs.
Sounds like Intel got a bad case of the "butt hurt" and has taken to cheesy pot shots and buzz words. Or at least their marketing team has.
They would have done better to just stick to what they know. Intel can still ride their previous track record of success for a couple years, until they come up with some more competitive cpu's and pricing. Resorting to name calling is just bad form.
They're scrapping the barrel like Mayweather was at the Toronto press conference.
I actually expected some shit like this way earlier but it makes sense to start really flinging it now. This is the server side, the holy land of barely limited budgets.... They are not thrilled about losing one inch of it. And they will.
More like got their junk stuck in the zipper...
Their best bet (as I believe someone has already mentioned) would have been to not mention AMD at all in any marketing material.
From reading the article on anandtech it looks like AMD have knocked it out of the park, intel is right to be worried.
I read the AnandTech article yesterday and wasn't quite sure if it is legit because is it so in favor of AMD because of price/performance.
But then again, that's what AMD is about and does way better than Intel.
After reading all the linked material and the reply's i think that intel was taking it easy in the server and consumer market, when amd launched ryzen they shat themselfes and are now trying to sell there shiny turd to the world.
imo it is nothing more then marketing bullshit and everybody knows it (including intel)
if they cannot come up with something more than a incremental improvement on there cpu's they will have to yield to amd in the server and consumer market for a while 
I just....
I can't...
Whaaa????
I'm no expert... Least of all in US law...
But where I'm from, if these slides were part of a presentation to ANYONE outside of Intel, then AMD would have a decent shot at a defamation(or whatever the corporate version is) case.... Especially since it is direct statements, about a specific company, basically lying about them/or just shitting all over them...
In fact I would say that Intels legal team are probably tearing their hair out and climbing the walls right now....
I dont know if this is new but i just saw that https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-to-cost-999-usd
has listed the TR 1950X at 999$ MSRP.
AMD: Hey! Look at those great Price / Value CPUs
INTEL: Those are Shit! They are glues together and stuff! ALSO WE HAVE 2 MORE CORES ON HEDT!!!
AMD: R7 8C/16T 499$ TR 16c/32T 999$
INTEL:
Those 4 glued together chips have more egineering involvet than intel got the whole decade together. I "upgraded" from my old 760 at 4.2 to now my new/used 4670K at 4.5. Do you want to know what's the difference. THERE IS NONE.
AMD did wonderfully in a variety of workloads. They lose it in database operations, which is what my company relies on, being big data. We may end up going with AMD because of price, but the fact of the matter is that Intel performs better in database workloads.
I was wary of the article, it was put together by two people and I'm sure the people are personally biased towards AMD. Whether that came out in the article is debatable. They spent a lot of time discussing all the things that Intel has going for them. The best, for my company at least, is the 4x10GbE support in C620. That would be awesome to have on AMD.
The way I see it, AMD has positioned themselves in a situation on desktop where anyone buying for non-144hz+ workloads should never even consider Intel. It's just a smart buy. Not that they're too much cheaper, but you just get so much more for your money at every price point.
On the server market, it looks like they've done something similar. I think what they're doing here is forcing their prices down further to ease the whole initial adoption phase. This will encourage companies to buy their hardware. I'm interested to see pricing on 1u systems with EPYC 7501's, 4x500GB HDD and 512GB ram. That would fit my company's use case perfectly and I'd throw down a ton of money on that. I'd also like to compare gflops per dollar on complete intel vs amd systems. (avx512 on and off)
On top of this, I'm also interested in seeing how different memory speeds will change the performance of EPYC. I know Ryzen benefits a lot from 3200mhz, I wonder if this is the same on EPYC. From what I can see, on most benchmarks, the ram speed is staying under the 2667mhz point.
Is >2667MHz ECC a thing?
I mentioned this to corsair when I met with them in computex, they could neither confirm nor deny they were working on something 
is right.
There was some controversy that the database may have been small enough to reside fully in cache on that particular test, according to the comments
given that the company I work for has databases in the order of terrabytes then small db size results don't seem that applicable to me as representative of real world (if true).
..going to reserve judgement and wait for proper tests when people are in such a rush to get their tests out the door for exclusives
gets pitchfork
Yeah, that's the problem here as well. So far today, our ingestion servers have loaded up 550GB of data. I wouldn't call that small scale.
That's probably the best option. I'd be happy to take some test units, pop them into the Vegas DC and see how they perform. The problem is that I'm just some random jackoff. No one will give me $40k worth of server hardware. (except my boss, who's probably not making a sound decision there)
