Someone who knows what they're talking about. It may be boring, but the fact of the matter is that AMD doesn't have the resources to make a Steamroller-based Opteron.
Intel continues to make new architectures and revisions of their chip, but AMD is still stuck on a several-year old architecture. Granted, this one has a solid price/performance ratio... but being stuck on Piledriver is a real downer for AMD's server line.
I'm not sure it's such a bad thing. Intel already does something similar to their server line; Ivy Bridge-EP came out after Haswell was released, Sandy Bridge-EP came out after Ivy Bridge was released. Thinking this could very well be a way for AMD to use the consumer line to get the arch out the door, and then give it over to the server team for fine tuning. In fact, it could give a good way for AMD to get back into the performance desktop market as well -- given the leaks on how the arch is going to have three sets of pcie 3 lanes for single/dual proc machines, I can very much see AMD leapfrogging in terms of getting 3+-way crossfire rigs for people who want ridiculous gaming machines. But, as you mentioned, the difficult part is seeing if AMD has the engineers to properly exploit all the groundwork they've made for ridiculously parallel system. I'm hoping so, because I like the direction AMD's going, I'm just hoping it's not a case of too little too late.
AMD has not "chosen" to do this strategy, they were forced to. With a $1 Billion shortfall in 2012, and millions of dollars shortfall in 2013 (despite cutting tons of staff and selling off their headquarters)... AMD is strapped for cash and their strategy proves it.
Its probably the best AMD can do for the moment. It will take them several years to build up the staff and resources to once again compete against Intel in the high-end CPU market, but the time is not now.
On the other hand, AMD is pushing very interesting technology in the form of APUs, which honestly are going to be the future of general purpose computing. APUs are good enough to serve as the primary CPU/GPU hybrid for XBox One and PS4... and while their Desktop / Laptop APUs aren't quite as powerful... the concept has been proven.
Anyway, Bulldozer was years ago. AMD has shown the world 12 and 16 core devices at lower GHz, but people prefer to buy Intel's 4 or 6 core devices at higher GHz and IPC. Waiting a few years... or even a decade, before another "high-core count" CPU is in the works.
The current market prefers high IPC devices at higher GHz still. Single threaded performance is king in current games. Only when games and applications take advantage of the massive amounts of cores should AMD bet on heavy multi-core boxes again.
