*** AMD "Zen" thread (inc AM4/APU discussion) ***

[SiDeards73]

Way i look at it is this, if it matches the perf of my 4770k or even betters it but i get twice the amount of cores and it runs cooler, then for whatever price increase it is im all over it.

 

[RavenXXX2]

its obvious why because its slower.if it was faster than big intel chips you would be hearing about it.promotion is massive for sales.why would you not promote a faster cpu before release.its because its slower than the intel counterpart.

so its going to be slightly slower than intel counter part at a cheaper price.basically same as every other amd cpu release for last 15 ish years.

They are promoting it on dec 13th.

 

[Bonjour]

its obvious why because its slower.if it was faster than big intel chips you would be hearing about it.promotion is massive for sales.why would you not promote a faster cpu before release.its because its slower than the intel counterpart.

so its going to be slightly slower than intel counter part at a cheaper price.basically same as every other amd cpu release for last 15 ish years.

Still peddling that '15ish years' nonsense, i see. It's closer to 10 years, though admittedly it's still way too long.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Still peddling that '15ish years' nonsense, i see. It's closer to 10 years, though admittedly it's still way too long.

Well even that is not entirely true - the Phenom II chips were reasonably competitive too and it is really only from the end of the Phenom II era they have had big problems. Sure the top-end was a different scenario but at under £200 it was quite competitive with the Core2 quads,etc.

I would argue it was Sandy Bridge which is where things started getting bad,which would be 2011 onwards.

Anyway,I am not sure why enthusiasts on the internet think AMD "would shout from the roofs" - even if Zen is any good it would give Intel three to four months to drop prices,then the people saying "AMD should shout" will just buy an Intel chip anyway saying there is no point waiting for Zen since Intel has dropped prices,etc and then blame AMD not having it on sale NOW.

 

[~>Dg<~]

they were decent i had two phenom rigs still have them a 940 and a 955.also before that xp2000,xp 3000,3500,3800x2,5000x2,

so its not like i havent had any

hope they are great id buy one if they good and at a reasonable price thing is realistically we know the trend.

 

[ubersonic]

Bit of mental arithmetic by a retard here, but if they bring out a 3.2GHz Zen chip, and Zen does have +60% IPC over FX as touted, that puts that chip ahead of a 5GHz FX CPU (In single thread, it will crush it in multi).

So from a simple competing with yourself POV ZEN only needs to be 3GHz to be an improvement on what they sell now (and people buy what they sell now). If it's clocked higher (or easy to OC) that will make for quite a formidable chip.

 

[Undesirable]

Another thing that is slightly less obvious, but I think is also very important, is whether they use paste or welding under the IHS. If they cheap out there, then I'm afraid I may as well go Intel again in my next build.

 

[humbug]

Another thing that is slightly less obvious, but I think is also very important, is whether they use paste or welding under the IHS. If they cheap out there, then I'm afraid I may as well go Intel again in my next build.

Intel already cheap-out on paste to bond the Heat Spreader.

 

[RavenXXX2]

Another thing that is slightly less obvious, but I think is also very important, is whether they use paste or welding under the IHS. If they cheap out there, then I'm afraid I may as well go Intel again in my next build.

AMD is using high-quality TIM between the die and the IHS which could either be solder or liquid metal

 

[Bonjour]

Another thing that is slightly less obvious, but I think is also very important, is whether they use paste or welding under the IHS. If they cheap out there, then I'm afraid I may as well go Intel again in my next build.

That's been the weakest point of the last few iterations of Intel's processors, which is why de-lidding is so popular.

 

[Martini1991]

As long as Zen has absolutely no performance loss per core over my Haswell, then it's a winner for me.

I guess I could stomach 5% slower core for core, if I end up with double the cores, but it depends on price.

 

[jigger]

It's still very misleading because Zen won't be clocked anywhere near as high as the FX series was, if 40% IPC is to be believed then a 3ghz Zen is going to be roughly the same as an FX9590 @ 4.7ghz, so given that clockspeeds are rumoured to be circa ~3.2ghz you're only likely to see a significant gain when overclocking (assuming Zen overclocks to 4ghz+).

So how would a 3Ghz FX 8 core get on with a 3Ghz 10 core Broadwell-E ?

 

[jigger]

As long as Zen has absolutely no performance loss per core over my Haswell, then it's a winner for me.

I guess I could stomach 5% slower core for core, if I end up with double the cores, but it depends on price.

Well unless AMD have made an exact replica of Haswell thats probably pretty unlikely to happen all the time. If you want a Haswell performance buy Haswell.

 

[Martini1991]

Well unless AMD have made an exact replica of Haswell thats probably pretty unlikely to happen all the time. If you want a Haswell performance buy Haswell.

I've got a Haswell, it'll be years old heading into 2017.
I want better than, all the time. That's not a big ask from an upgrade.

 

[David Bisset]

I suspect the point he was making was that even if it's faster in most cases there will always be some scenarios where a different architecture will be better so regardless of if it's the performance king overall or not you may still not get absolutely no performance loss in some scenarios.

(or, that's how I read it - if that's not what you meant jigger then my apologies!)

 

[SiDeards73]

Im in exactly the same boat as Martini, if Zen matches or betters my 4770k i will buy it purely for the increased core count as i would get the 8/16.

To me thats a progression, while i might not be getting anything significantly faster i would be doubling my available cores, and if anything ever comes along to make more use of extra cores to improve the game play, then happy days even further.

Also it would mean i could move into DDR4 etc too.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I just want a reasonable 4C/8T CPU under £250 even if its locked as eventually I will need to replace my current Xeon E3 1230 V2 at some point in the next two years.

 

[Sayso]

Crossing fingers on these looking at the 8c/16t.

 

[tyler_jrb]

Intel already cheap-out on paste to bond the Heat Spreader.

Not always it depends on the chip. X99 series are soldered directly to the IHS.

Cheaper variants then yeah but temps dont mean a great deal unless its thermal throttling. All the "keep below 70c" is a load of crap anyway.

Looking forward to zen to see what it has to offer and hopefully, give Intel some much needed competition. I won't either way be upgrading over my 5930k for another year or two yet anyway.

But, this may set as to whether my next chip is AMD or Intel though.

 

[mmj_uk]

So how would a 3Ghz FX 8 core get on with a 3Ghz 10 core Broadwell-E ?

In closed testing by AMD using a single application that probably benefits Zen's architecture the most? probably not so well.

Since that piece of AMD marketing we've seen Zen R7 mostly being compared to Intel's 6c/12t 6850K on a performance level.