• 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" thread (inc AM4/APU discussion) ***

SiDeards73 said:
Looking at results from that thread, 4770k are getting like 1min 30, 83xx/9590 are getting 2min 30+

So I would say yes, your Haswell is almost twice as fast as an AMD chip in Blender on that test
Click to expand...

When I did the benchmark on my FX-8350, it came out at around 2min 50 seconds. I had ample memory (24GB) but the memory speed may have been slightly low at 1600MHz. Allowing for Zen to have SMT (maybe +60%), higher IPC (+40%) and more and faster CPU cache, it seems feasible that Zen could give the results they demoed.

IF Zen goes toe to toe with the i7-6900 (big IF, it doesn't seem likely), then it wont be as cheap as some here are predicting. As others have pointed out, if it is in the region of i7-6900 performance (note the word "region"), then AMD would sell all the chips they can make priced a little lower than i7-6900 pricing. So going lower would not increase market share. And AMD still need money for all the buoyancy that recent news has given their share price.

Hype seems to be shifting from unrealistic performance expectations to unrealistic pricing expectations. I think Zen will be well-priced, but it's still going to disappoint some people here, I think!
 
h4rm0ny said:
When I did the benchmark on my FX-8350, it came out at around 2min 50 seconds. I had ample memory (24GB) but the memory speed may have been slightly low at 1600MHz. Allowing for Zen to have SMT (maybe +60%), higher IPC (+40%) and more and faster CPU cache, it seems feasible that Zen could give the results they demoed.

IF Zen goes toe to toe with the i7-6900 (big IF, it doesn't seem likely), then it wont be as cheap as some here are predicting. As others have pointed out, if it is in the region of i7-6900 performance (note the word "region"), then AMD would sell all the chips they can make priced a little lower than i7-6900 pricing. So going lower would not increase market share. And AMD still need money for all the buoyancy that recent news has given their share price.

Hype seems to be shifting from unrealistic performance expectations to unrealistic pricing expectations. I think Zen will be well-priced, but it's still going to disappoint some people here, I think!
Click to expand...

Yes and no... the 6900k is a $1100 chip because Intel has no competition in this sector, in reality its actually a $500-$600 dollar chip at most...

AMD wont sell all they can make if they price theres at $1000 or even $900 because the confidence is just not there, thats a lot of money to gamble on a product from a company that has a history of bad designs (Bulldozer, Fiji being most recent).

AMD need Market Share and consumer confidence, they tried the "Were a premium brand" thing with Fury-X, it did not work, people did not buy into it, they subsequently changed tack and are trying to bring gaming to the masses at lower price points, look at their VR drive with Polaris, its worked for them they are gaining market share in the GPU arena again.

Now they need to do the same in the CPU arena, come in low and hard and clean up, they are targetting 50% market share, coming in at high price points wont get them that market share, as 50% of consumers dont buy $1100 CPU's... obviously the 8/16 is not aimed at everyone, but if you aim it at the people who buy i7's and price it a little higher you will get plenty of bites.
 
Martini1991 said:
I'm not saying I wouldn't like 6900K performance for 350 pound.
But I'm not expecting it.
Click to expand...

I think something that a lot of people seem to be missing is that the 6900K is not a $1000 CPU, it's a $400-500 CPU that Intel are selling for $1000 because they know that without competition they can get away with it and that overcharging for the high end CPUs means they can overcharge for the entire lineup.

Seriously, the 6900K is one step down from the extreme models, it's the Q9650 (~£300) of this generation.

Hopefully AMD do take this opportunity to restore some normality to CPU prices, and hopefully it hurts Intel, god knows they deserve it.
 
It's all very speculative at the moment.

We need more benchmarks especially gaming ones.

I'm certainly watching with interest though. Need to know prices and also final clockspeeds.

I may hold off on buying an intel chip until we know more though.
 
Will be interesting to see what the lower Zen chips can do, Blender is a program AMD traditionally do not perform well in, that is why they picked it for a Demo, to show their performance increase is real and not just a chery picked test that favours them.

Check the Blender test results on the AMD Reddit, you will see Intel chips are almost 2x faster than AMD chips at Blender.

Now fast forward to Ryzen, 150 samples, its beating the 6900k. Handbrake, its beating the 6900k.

Yet people still say this is a cherry picked result... surely you would only find applications that you traditional shine in if your cherry picking? why would you show results in a program you traditionally struggle in? unless of course you want to make a point that you have turned things around.
 
just did the same blend to test with mine 4790k @ 4.5 got 76 seconds , if adding 4 more cores shaves half of the render time then would have been 38 seconds , then again im clocked at 4.5 .
 
SiDeards73 said:
Will be interesting to see what the lower Zen chips can do, Blender is a program AMD traditionally do not perform well in, that is why they picked it for a Demo, to show their performance increase is real and not just a chery picked test that favours them.

Check the Blender test results on the AMD Reddit, you will see Intel chips are almost 2x faster than AMD chips at Blender.

Now fast forward to Ryzen, 150 samples, its beating the 6900k. Handbrake, its beating the 6900k.

Yet people still say this is a cherry picked result... surely you would only find applications that you traditional shine in if your cherry picking? why would you show results in a program you traditionally struggle in? unless of course you want to make a point that you have turned things around.
Click to expand...

Yea exactly.
Buy button extracted, pushing asap
 
There is going to be a lot of cheap FX processes and AM3+ motherboards in the New year:) Perfectly OK for home servers, media centres. Well I am hoping, I need to update my DELL Intel Core Duo media server (Plex and MediaPortal).

However, I would still plum for the RyZen for a gaming machine. However, I do plan to move from Windows to Linux once Window 7 support stops, so perhaps it may rule me out the Ryzen in the early days until support is more mature in terms of drivers for the AM4 motherboards.


Any Linux users with any insider information on AM4 motherboard support?
 
Is it looking like good things for AMD then?

I couldn't work it out from all the fanboy nonsense from the previous pages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom