AMD also said that Intel had increased prices as it wished due to the lack of "meaningful competition".
"In a market without meaningful competition, Intel has been able to increase prices at 19% compound annual growth rate between 2012 and 2017," AMD said in a two-page whitepaper.
"In this comfortable situation, Intel missed delivering what the market needs: more and balanced server resources, increased application performance, and reduced total cost of ownership."
"Virtualisation and cloud workloads need larger and faster memory with faster access and more cores. Big data needs fewer cores but more memory and massive amounts of disk storage and I/O capacity. HPC needs high floating-point throughput and threads."
The whitepaper said when one tried to optimise a server design using Intel Xeon Scalable processors, "you find yourself in a maze of more than 42 different processor SKUs, 4 different metal codes, and 5 different series".
"You can quickly find yourself having to buy what you don’t want in order to get what you need. Almost like buying a car: you just want to stream music from your phone, but to do that you need to buy the US$3000 navigation system."
It said Intel’s product line was filled with self-imposed, designed-in performance bottlenecks that affected real-world results. "You are forced to buy a more expensive processor to get the performance that you need."
The solution to all these problems? Of course, buy AMD's EPYC processors instead.
Intel has been contacted for its take on AMD's claims.