AMD Zen processors...Are you interested?

[Vash The Stampede]

My next CPU is a ZEN so yes, unless it's terrible.

[Fascinate]

I really am not taking an AMD press conference as proof of anything lol. I want to see third party reviews for the games i play in a real world scenario. And 300 bucks for an 8 thread CPU is absolutely in the realm of possibility, the 6800k was 320 bucks for black friday and you can regularly find the 5820k for 300 or less. AMD is not going to match EITHER of those CPU's in IPC that i am sure of, they will have to bargain price it against them so 300 for an 8 core makes sense.

[Remilia]

I'm interested, not really in buying it cause I had to replace my motherboard and parts which decided to say fuck off. So I ended up with a 5820k. However we do have a 3rd computer that often gets used as a server or some other garbage and if we ever need to replace parts then at a price point we'll see what's best for the price range we set.

I have an odd feeling about zen, i think its gonna do great in synthetics but it wont translate into CPU intensive games. My guess is single threaded synthetics it will do pretty good, but the first WoW benchmark we see will put it at ~ivy bridge levels or slightly above.

It's pretty hard to benchmark WoW for CPU though. Benchmarks have to be consistent and to load up the CPU to that point, so a raid or a city full of people, and neither are consistent. It'd be better to just load up other games and just reduce the resolution as small as possible and see how it goes.

[IKT]

Its AMD, cannot say I care. been going with Intel since forever and AMD has nothing that would convince me to change from this tradition.

This sort of tradition in tech is sad.

I remember selling pentium 4's that were hotter and slower than AMD's offerings at the time because of this sort of stupidity.

[Sorshen]

From all the previews and 'leaks', I have little faith ATM in Zen's single core power. They might win price/performance vs 2011-3, but not vs. Kaby Lake gaming (since it kinda seems Intel's gonna release that along with Zen).
AMD is still going the 'many cores many threads' to win synthetics, but that just reminds me of Mediatek in the mobile sector - they're getting destroyed by Qualcomm Snapdragon.

[Remilia]

It's not really many cores many threads though like the construction cores. It's a completely new architecture with emphasis on single core performance. Supposedly the base set up is 8c/16t and scale from there, with cheaper SKUs being cut down / disabled cores and such for defect chips. From a design simplicity standpoint it's a lot easier than developing a different chip for different price segments.

Whether or not it lives up to expectation is a different thing.

[bwolfman]

im excited t hear more on this

[IKT]

AMD is still going the 'many cores many threads' to win synthetics

How is AMD 'still going' many cores many threads? The previous gen with bulldozer was 'still going' with many ghz, much power.

[Lillyth]

This sort of tradition in tech is sad.

I remember selling pentium 4's that were hotter and slower than AMD's offerings at the time because of this sort of stupidity.

I would change my mind if AMD wasnt as whiny and as shady as it is now and has always been.

[chazus]

How is AMD 'still going' many cores many threads? The previous gen with bulldozer was 'still going' with many ghz, much power.

AMD was 'still going with many cores many threads' because that was their 'thing'. Bulldozer was not 'many ghz, much power' as you say. Ghz (speed) is the same across the line, its a limitation. That's like comparing a BMW to a Honda Civic that both go 65 on the highway and saying they're as good as eachother.

Intel has largely had a 'power' lead in the last.... decade.

- - - Updated - - -

I remember selling pentium 4's that were hotter and slower than AMD's offerings at the time because of this sort of stupidity.

I loved my AMD 2500+ Barton core. I overclocked that thing and it was a dream come true over my Celeron 800.

The only thing that pulled me to Intel was that, at the time, I worked for a company that had us in the Retail Edge program. $200 for a flagship CPU (P4 3.0 800 at the time), a board, and XP Pro for $200. It was too good a deal to turn down, and by the time I left that company, Core 2 Duos were already stomping the playground.

[Fascinate]

Id probably still be on AMD but i live near a microcenter. in 2011 got a 2500k and a p67 board for 265 bucks after tax......still using it to this day lol. First desktop i ever owned i built, still surprised how my roomate even knew about newegg but dam i owe that guy lol. I had a athlon xp 1600, i just recall when pentium 4's came out a year later or whatever it was still holding its own clocked at half what the P4's were lol.

Oh how those days have changed.

[IKT]

AMD was 'still going with many cores many threads' because that was their 'thing'. Bulldozer was not 'many ghz, much power' as you say. Ghz (speed) is the same across the line, its a limitation.

http://www.extremetech.com/computing...ad-performance

When AMD designed Bulldozer, it was aiming for a CPU that would be easier to ramp to higher frequencies while maintaining the same IPC (instructions per clock cycle) as its six-core predecessor. In order to hit higher clockspeeds, AMD lengthened the CPU’s pipeline and increased latencies throughout the architecture. The concept of building chips for higher frequency has had a bad rap since the disastrous Prescott Pentium 4; after seeing Bulldozer’s overall performance, AMD’s decision to take this route may not have been a very good one

[Gilgemesh]

I'll be building a new rig in early 2017.
I will use the best bang for the buck processor I can get. Judging by AMD's video card strategy, I'm betting they're going to try to compete with Intel by offering better performance per dollar rather than straight performance. If they can give good overclocking potential(as nearly all 14nm products have), and benchmarks are accurate, then Its just a wait to see prices.
AMD was so ready to show their cores were as strong as current Intel at the same clock speeds. Will the final product be this good? If so, It becomes a price war and clock speed war(at least for this generation). Might even push the process down to 10 or 7 nm even faster. Can't go less than 7nm with current technology. So it seems clock speed and overclockability are going to become much stronger selling points in the next 18-24 months.
This bodes well for consumers. Pushing the prices down on chips brings more buyers to the market. Everyone wins.

[Evildeffy]

I really am not taking an AMD press conference as proof of anything lol. I want to see third party reviews for the games i play in a real world scenario. And 300 bucks for an 8 thread CPU is absolutely in the realm of possibility, the 6800k was 320 bucks for black friday and you can regularly find the 5820k for 300 or less. AMD is not going to match EITHER of those CPU's in IPC that i am sure of, they will have to bargain price it against them so 300 for an 8 core makes sense.

You're comparing 2 x 6C/12T CPUs (5820K and 6800K) vs. an 8C/16T CPU (ZEN) which is supposedly equal to superior in performance clock-for-clock and core-for-core and the higher complexity degree of previously mentioned Intel CPUs whom are more expensive and you think that should be in the realm of possibility?
That is some seriously deluded thinking if I'm honest as you are completely ignoring the physical constraints of actual chip design.

It's also hilarious of you to already jump to conclusions saying they won't beat them in IPC because that would mean you've already made up your mind and that's that, meaning you have not got an open mind to see the possibilities.
If they can offer 5960X/6900K performance for half the price, which is ~500, then they have already won a major point in any battle.

Just because a company is smaller than the other does not mean they automatically suck.

- - - Updated - - -

From all the previews and 'leaks', I have little faith ATM in Zen's single core power. They might win price/performance vs 2011-3, but not vs. Kaby Lake gaming (since it kinda seems Intel's gonna release that along with Zen).
AMD is still going the 'many cores many threads' to win synthetics, but that just reminds me of Mediatek in the mobile sector - they're getting destroyed by Qualcomm Snapdragon.

You do know that Kaby Lake has no IPC increase whatsoever over Sky Lake right?
The only thing so far is that it can clock slightly higher due to using solder between the IHS and die again but the thing in power tests is a wreck vs. Sky Lake as it consumes considerably more juice and gets VERY hot comparatively.

So Kaby Lake gaming will not be different from Sky Lake gaming.

Also "many cores many threads" .. you do know that it matched Intel's 6900K which has the same amount of cores/threads right?
So where's this "many cores many threads" coming from ... is Intel using that same tactic then? It's a little bit off to say something like that.

May I also remind you that Broadwell's IPC is less than 2% under Sky Lake and since there's no difference in Sky Lake and Kaby Lake in regards to IPC ... the balance on that won't change?

[SoulForge]

This sort of tradition in tech is sad.

I remember selling pentium 4's that were hotter and slower than AMD's offerings at the time because of this sort of stupidity.

I agree. And sadly its something I see with CURRENT AMD products just because people refuse to buy intel.

I go with price/performance comparison. Based on what I do Intel equipment is the current winner.

I hope to see competition with AMD Zen.

[Life-Binder]

for gaming - no .. I am confident that Zen wont match 6700K or 7700K in todays games .. ive seen tests and there is virtually 0% increase past ~6/8 threads

most likely Zen will have Ivy/Haswell IPC and max OC below Intels models & more mature nodes/fab process .. even BW IPC is going to fall below Intels Skylake IPC @ 4.7-4.8+ (or maybe 4.9-5.0 for Kaby)

so if you want the best gaming CPU - 6700K or 7700K is your choice


however, the appeal of Zen is that it offers 6c/12t & 8c/16t for much less money than Intel does currently

so if you actually can utilize all those 16 threads somehow (which is not in games) then a ~350$-400$ 8c/16t Zen is by far the cheapest 16t CPU, while still performing adequately

however, thats assuming Intel doesnt price-drop its current 6c & 8c chips

The IPC you want is pretty much irrelevant when they've already shown us that they can edge out BW-E

they did no such thing

From all the previews and 'leaks', I have little faith ATM in Zen's single core power. They might win price/performance vs 2011-3, but not vs. Kaby Lake gaming (since it kinda seems Intel's gonna release that along with Zen).

^ this

- - - Updated - - -

The only thing so far is that it can clock slightly higher due to using solder between the IHS and die again but the thing in power tests is a wreck vs. Sky Lake as it consumes considerably more juice and gets VERY hot comparatively.

wrong

Tomshardware redid their tests - read it


also:
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/99...y-lake/?page=7

We decided to overclock both chips using the same methodology so as to keep a level playing field. We raised the CPU voltage a fraction, to 1.30V, which we consider a safe limit for long-term running. Both CPUs ran at below 75°C using a single Noctua fan.

this is with 7700K being 250 Mhz higher

[Evildeffy]

for gaming - no .. I am confident that Zen wont match 6700K or 7700K in todays games .. ive seen tests and there is virtually 0% increase past ~6/8 threads

Relevancy? AMD's Blender test on the same speed is kinda indicative of how much IPC equivalent it has so the ZEN CPUs have the potential to match the Sky Lake/Kaby Lake CPUs at the same clock speeds, the bigger question is: CAN AMD actually reach those clock speeds?
Threads are irrelevant in general to this matter it's IPC and Clock speed and if ZEN can be clocked to match the clock speeds then yes they will match Sky/Kaby Lake blow for blow.

most likely Zen will have Ivy/Haswell IPC and max OC below Intels models & more mature nodes/fab process .. even BW IPC is going to fall below Intels Skylake IPC @ 4.7-4.8+ (or maybe 4.9-5.0 for Kaby)

so if you want the best gaming CPU - 6700K or 7700K is your choice

As I stated above... we'll see indeed IF ZEN can reach the same clock speeds, that said I will remind you again that Kaby Lake and Sky Lake have 0 IPC difference, nada. Kaby Lake can clock higher due to soldered IHS.

however, the appeal of Zen is that it offers 6c/12t & 8c/16t for much less money than Intel does currently

so if you actually can utilize all those 16 threads somehow (which is not in games) then a ~350$-400$ 8c/16t Zen is by far the cheapest 16t CPU, while still performing adequately

however, thats assuming Intel doesnt price-drop its current 6c & 8c chips

Damn straight, competition is something we want back.. the more there is the more WE benefit off of it ... that said it's the content creation space where this will have a massive impact vs. Intel's line-up.
Even if you cannot utilize ALL threads available in a game .. if you have a 6700K and a ZEN 8C/16T equivalent .. if the ZEN CPU can match the inherent clock speed, if the current IPC calculations are indeed true, of the 6700K then you'll STILL have a better CPU for the same money.
It's a Win-Win situation for you as a consumer.

they did no such thing

They did actually... however they showed no behind-the-scenes information which is always dangerous.
If we are to assume that the playing field was indeed equal then they can and will edge out BW-E, I am truthfully hoping for this to be the case.
Not because people may think of me being an AMD fanboy (I have 2 x € 1100,- Intel CPUs that say I'm not) but because of competitive reasons only, I want to have a choice and I want to have sweet prices when building a rig where Intel has pretty much had a monopoly on gaming performance.

^ this

Kaby Lake = Sky Lake + more speed, so we'll see about this on the 13th hopefully with the ZEN stream.

wrong

Tomshardware redid their tests - read it

also:
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/99...y-lake/?page=7

this is with 7700K being 250 Mhz higher

You are indeed correct, a different motherboard with better firmware showed better power consumption and thermal numbers, I did not notice this because the article itself was updated without a tag nor a re-post thus I kinda didn't look for it.

However the rest of the stated information does not change though.

[Artorius]

they did no such thing

"On the right an Intel Broadwell-E Core i7 6900K CPU, on the left is that Summit Ridge 8C/16T running at 3GHz. We've set both at 3GHz so we can have a clock to clock, core to core, thread to thread comparison in Blender. You see that the Zen CPU just edged out the Broadwell-E processor in that demo"

So, I'll repeat since I'm a nice guy: Blender could be a best case scenario for Zen and we have no idea how AMD compiled it for the test (we don't know if it has AVX/2 enabled or just SSE3/4, we don't know how well Zen does under AVX2) and we have no idea if the other factors are the same for both systems. It's safe to assume that they are because AMD isn't stupid, but we should take the demo with a grain of salt since it's a PR move regardless.

But anyway, it does prove that at least in that scenario (Blender), the 8C/16T Zen can edge out a 8C/16T BW-E under the same clockspeed. Whether this result will be the same in other scenarios and different workloads is something that we'll only know when people can benchmark it.

I wouldn't be concerned about Zen's IPC. What's completely uncertain is how well it can clock since the demo was performed at 3GHz. The 6900K by default runs at 3.2GHz, was it too hard to put the damn SM ES at 3.2GHz? They had to downclock the i7. We can take it with a grain of salt since the SM was an engineering sample, believe that it can't clock higher (or that it can, but with shit efficiency) or simply wait a fucking week and see their next presentation which should give us valuable information.

[Gaidax]

Well it seems Intel intends to offer Hexacore processors to the filthy I5/I7 casuals in 2018, so I guess it's one of the effects of Zen.

Another I hope for is that Zen will be competitive enough to initiate price war with Intel at least for the upper-mainstream or lower-highend segment.

[Artorius]

Well it seems Intel intends to offer Hexacore processors to the filthy I5/I7 casuals in 2018, so I guess it's one of the effects of Zen.

Another I hope for is that Zen will be competitive enough to initiate price war with Intel at least for the upper-mainstream or lower-highend segment.

From Intel president Dr. Venkata Murthy Renduchintala:
"Our faith in 10 nm raising the bar for enthusiast PCs is why we see the threat presented by AMD’s Zen as being fairly manageable, with only short term disruption in 2017."

We don't know if Zen will be great or if it'll suck again, but at least we know Intel considers it a threat and even went as far as to say that it would cause a disruption in 2017. That in itself is already a pretty good sign. At the very least we'll get better prices on 6C/12T i7s.