• 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 5 rumours

Joxeon said:
To put into context the 7950X delivered 52% better MT performance over the 5950X in the productivity tests HW unboxed run yet the 9950X was only 3% faster than the 7950X in those same tests so I'd say Zen 5 has been a disaster, barely any gaming or productivity improvements outside a few select obscure linux workloads and no real efficiency gains.
Click to expand...
100% disaster. Anyone suggesting otherwise is lying. I don't get it. If a GPU came out after two years with 1-3% whilst drawing more power it would be torn.

There is literally nothing good for the general desktop/gamer person. Suggesting that previous gens been so good they allowed a bad cpu is bad. It just as bad as Intel going one gen to another. The same thing people called out for last decade.

At minimum you want to be expect 10-15% performance at same power usage. Not averaged 1% at +10% power usage average which how this has gone. That is not good in any metric at all for General desktop/gaming performance.

AMD genuinely disappointing here.
 
Really does look like it was built for server type stuff and desktop was an after thought

Find it amusing still few trying to defend it, it's fast on Linux it's windows fault :cry:

I'll be sticking with the 5800x3d :) and see what next gen GPU offer to replace the 3080
 
Last edited:
Curlyriff said:
Sorry it all rubbish honesty. Worst release in last decade of a CPU. Can't believe just how bad this release has been. It isn't just that.

It's not any improvement for desktop/gamers at all in slightest. This is genuinely worse than an Intel release in terms of performance/power usage. I am baffiled that anyone suggest what you have.

And to claim an XT variant when it really just a bad X variant anyways. I don't get how you can even defend this tbh. It's awful.
Click to expand...

You think upping the TDP will help?
 
humbug said:
You think upping the TDP will help?
Click to expand...
No I think nothing will help because it's shown that from being limited to 50w to PBO it's worse than previous gen for desktop and gaming users without even cou ting on x3D chips.

It's a fail of an improvement after 2yrs. It cost more, runs at best similar performance at more wattage in terms of games and desktop. There is zero reason to look at these chips at all.

Just pick a 7000 series even if upgrading now. Ideally an x3D if gaming but even that not critical compare to 9000 series.
 
Last edited:
Curlyriff said:
No I think nothing will help because it's shown that from being limited to 50w to PBO it's worse than previous gen for desktop and gaming users without even cou ting on x3D chips.

It's a fail of an improvement after 2yrs. It cost more, runs at best similar performance at more wattage in terms of games and desktop. There is zero reason to look at these chips at all.

Just pick a 7000 series even if upgrading now. Ideally an x3D if gaming but even that not critical compare to 9000 series.
Click to expand...

My point was upping the TDP would be a daft idea.
 
Someone who bought into AM4 near the start would have seen gaming performance go up by over 100% over the lifetime of the platform but those buying into AM5 might only see a 10-20% gain depending on how Zen 6 goes at this point.
 
humbug said:
My point was upping the TDP would be a daft idea.
Click to expand...
Yeah 100% but you also said it is fine at it was and people looking for a low power cpu but the previous gen still better for that as it clearly does that better still.

It isn't as efficient or give same performance at same power drawer as the previous gen at least for gaming and desktop.
 
Joxeon said:
Someone who bought into AM4 near the start would have seen gaming performance go up by over 100% over the lifetime of the platform but those buying into AM5 might only see a 10-20% gain depending on how Zen 6 goes at this point.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but AM4 had 5 SKU's :D
 
Curlyriff said:
Yeah 100% but you also said it is fine at it was and people looking for a low power cpu but the previous gen still better for that as it clearly does that better still.

It isn't as efficient or give same performance at same power drawer as the previous gen at least for gaming and desktop.
Click to expand...

Is that universally true or is it more nuanced than that?
 
Joxeon said:
It was originally 2026 but AMD then upped it to 2027, given the near 2 year release cycle we now have I can see only one more generation on AM5 unless DDR6 gets delayed.
Click to expand...
Good point, i never though about DDR6, that will requite a new platform for sure.
 
Joxeon said:
It was originally 2026 but AMD then upped it to 2027, given the near 2 year release cycle we now have I can see only one more generation on AM5 unless DDR6 gets delayed.
Click to expand...

Really hope not much longer, as I might end up having to upgrade. I don't want to wait more than 2027/28.

Really like the idea of going first and final gen of AM6.
 
Robert896r1 said:
You can have platform longevity on one platform while still having a new one in circulation. Reminder the 5900xt just came out on am4. I’m not entirely convinced zen6 won’t require a new platform.
Click to expand...
If zen 6 needs a new platform then that would make AM5 no better than any Intel platforms from the stagnation era which would be a huge disappointment given the higher premium costs of the AM5 motherboards.
 
While post mortem keeps coming back to server first, second, and at least third, I do wonder whether for desktop more is at play.

Sure a new IDO, new fabric, a move to more advanced packaging, etc. would probably have made a big difference. One packaging alone, Intel may be very late to the party but their first tiles should be more like Zen 3D rather than the CCD + IOD on a mini PCB.

And those things AMD could claim they couldn't do because of time (but 22 months is a slow cadence - and any COVID excuse would equally apply to Qualcomm, Apple etc.).

But simulations should have seen the desktop performance years ago, and one obvious scrap they could have throw to the desktop market would be spending more die space area on cache, buffers pre-fetch etc.

And that's where I suspect bean counters and penny pinching came in. Rather than spending another 5mm² to 10mm², AMD saved the pennies to lose the pounds. Again.

Robert896r1 said:
You can have platform longevity on one platform while still having a new one in circulation. Reminder the 5900xt just came out on am4. I’m not entirely convinced zen6 won’t require a new platform.
Click to expand...
Problem surely is that DDR6 will be expensive for the first few years. Zen 4 and AM5 had no dual memory option like Intel offered - despite AMD's chiplet approach which should make that easier - and going DDR6-only in 2026, for example, could see desktop sales really suffer.
 
Rroff said:
Could make sense if they really were spun off from a design intended more for server type task as some claim and optimised for crunching data.
Click to expand...


It doesn't make sense from what we know of the architecture so far but it's real; hardware unboxed touched out at the end of their video, though they did provide benchmarks for it, but they said if you don't use core parking with the 9950x you see a large gaming performance drop

And in any case, even with core parking working the 9950x averaged like 1% faster than the 7950x in games and often used more power as well
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom