• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

*** AMD "Zen 4" thread (inc AM5/APU discussion) ***

It's interesting isn't it. I think they will end up being very close in single core performance. Differences in real world Performance might come down to cache amounts, DDR5 RAM frequency, and possibly memory controller settings.

It wouldn't surprise me if Intel can achieve slightly better single core speeds with very high end cooling though, but I think we will see similar all core speeds. Intel will of course win in highly multithreaded tasks.
 
Yeah this year should be about a price war but if they are pretty similar it does make AMD pretty compelling for those buying into new system when they could have 2, 3 or even 4 year further CPU support drop in and not need to worry about anything else.
 
Yup, I think the 7700 and 7800X3D are going to be quite competitive CPUs. I think the 7800X3D will provide the most stable framerates in games of any Zen4 or Goldencove CPU.

The 12 core 7900 will no doubt find a niche too, maybe even benefiting some CPU heavy games.

I will most likely buy a 7700 if I can get one for ~£300. This is what I'll be recommending to my dad also.
 
Yeah this year should be about a price war but if they are pretty similar it does make AMD pretty compelling for those buying into new system when they could have 2, 3 or even 4 year further CPU support drop in and not need to worry about anything else.
The only thing they need to worry is AMD not offering the support they promised, or offering it 2 years later when the CPUS are obsolete :P
 
AMD know that's one edge they have over intel platforms so can't see them not giving long support and amount of features these boards are loaded with points to that
 
More interesting benchmarks for Zen 4 (7700X):

About the same score as 12900K (KS is still slightly ahead). So, it looks like performance differences will come down to clockspeed.
 
AMD can afford to keep prices low on Zen 4 vs Raptor lake where as Intel will likely have to raise prices because it has been made clear that they are struggling with the current generations pricing. Plus even if raptor lake ends up being faster in some gaming scenarios you have to remember that this is vs the vanilla Zen 4 chips and not the 3D-V cache versions which will likely have a huge advantage in gaming scenarios vs raptor lake
 
AMD can afford to keep prices low on Zen 4 vs Raptor lake where as Intel will likely have to raise prices because it has been made clear that they are struggling with the current generations pricing. Plus even if raptor lake ends up being faster in some gaming scenarios you have to remember that this is vs the vanilla Zen 4 chips and not the 3D-V cache versions which will likely have a huge advantage in gaming scenarios vs raptor lake
IMHO the last thing Intel needs is a price war. 8 big + n x little cores plus 2 coherent ring busses, IO and cache all on 10nm ain't going to be cheap to produce. They already have falling margins, so how far can they go, especially now the DC 'cash cow' has moved on to greener pastures.
AMD priority is to DC with lesser chips for DIY. Owning the 'willy waving' gaming flag probably ain't AMD's top priority (as good or better and cheaper will do) until Zen 4 3d v cache pops up of course.
 
If previous generations are anything to go by, I think a lot of people won't be bothered much by multithreaded performance. 8 or 12 cores is plenty for the vast majority of PC/ laptop users.

Increasing the E-core count for Intel's 13th gen from 8-16 is going to make very little difference. It's useful for devices that need to consume less power, like laptops.
 
AMD can afford to keep prices low on Zen 4 vs Raptor lake where as Intel will likely have to raise prices because it has been made clear that they are struggling with the current generations pricing. Plus even if raptor lake ends up being faster in some gaming scenarios you have to remember that this is vs the vanilla Zen 4 chips and not the 3D-V cache versions which will likely have a huge advantage in gaming scenarios vs raptor lake
According to prices leajed today Intels have raised pruces quite a bit

13900k - $725
13700k - $511
13600k - $355
 
So, anyone with a 5800X or 5900X looking to upgrade soon? :)

I have a 5900X and likely will be skipping AM5 and waiting for AM6. It still feels like I upgraded not so long ago so don’t have the itch. Would like to wait and go for another 12 core CPU in 3-5 years time that will at least double single core and multi core performance. As long as things don’t stagnate again I can see us getting there in 5 years or less.

Weird how it goes. I love upgrading my GPU at least once per gen, yet don’t feel the same way about the CPU. My Intel 4770K lasted around 7 years :cry:
 
More interesting benchmarks for Zen 4 (7700X):

About the same score as 12900K (KS is still slightly ahead). So, it looks like performance differences will come down to clockspeed.
+26% in MT, with the same core count.

If 10% of that is IPC its running at 5.4Ghz, that's 5.4Ghz Multithreaded in Cinebench.

If we consider the 5950X only runs at about 4.0Ghz MT in Cinebench and scores 26,000, with +10% IPC at 5.4Ghz the 7950X would score about 38,500.

If true i think it quite impressive how much more performance AMD have managed without changing the core count.

There are rumours of an eng' sample floating around that's boosting to 6Ghz ST, if its pushing 5.4Ghz in Cine' MT i can well believe it.
 
7950X has 65 Watts more headroom vs the 7700X, and a cited boost of 5.7Ghz.

The 7700X is cited at 5.4Ghz, it seems to be doing that MT in Cinebench, not saying the 7950X will do 5.7Ghz MT, but holly poo....

Fl1TT9h.png
 
Back
Top Bottom