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

[humbug]

Im thinking business and servers will pay, they dont have the VAT part so the prices make more sense. In many ways if they can utilise the extra capacity of a chip then they will do it.
Most home users is where its silly to have this much power, so many wont use it really. Most core game development is driven by averages which can be low, though I realise people are then wanting high res setups and just want the best etc

I got an old 8 core chip, its low ghz and I almost got a 12 core that happened to appear server surplus but I dont especially regret not having it as I dont do CAD or anything. 16 threads and Im waiting for most common software that will want or use that much. Windows is multitasking of course, 16 threads fits with 32gb I think


I thought this would be fully retail by now tbh

If by "Most home users is where its silly to have this much power, so many wont use it really" you mean FaceBook browsers then yes, all they actually need is a Tablet

Anyone who uses their PC for Video rendering, advanced Photoshop, Blender and even gaming can and will benefit from more threads, this is far more PC users than you think, if they don't have any use for this kind of power they have no use for a PC full stop.

 

[ubersonic]

$300 for 8c/8t
$600-700 for 8c/16t

huh?

hardly anyone is going to pay that much over the $300 part for what is effectively Hyperthreading.

Look at it another way, $300 for a 8c/8t CPU that should be a competitor for the 7700K (4c/8t $350) and $600-700 for a 8c/16t CPU that should be a competitor for the 6900K (8c/16t $1100).

 

[mmj_uk]

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inte...ocket-lga1151-processor-retail-cp-62f-in.html

well £349 for a quad with HT.......

7700K is 50% more expensive than 7600K and it's in a price range that a lot of people will pay.

$300 for 8c/8t v $600-700 8c/16 is a no brainer, it's as though AMD don't want to sell the 8c/16t part (poor yields?).

 

[mmj_uk]

Look at it another way, $300 for a 8c/8t CPU that should be a competitor for the 7700K (4c/8t $350) and $600-700 for a 8c/16t CPU that should be a competitor for the 6900K (8c/16t $1100).

Who is going to pay for ANY $600+ 8c/16t part though when you can get 8c/8t for $300? 8c/16t will have to come down in price if either AMD or Intel want to sell them.

 

[humbug]

Look at it another way, $300 for a 8c/8t CPU that should be a competitor for the 7700K (4c/8t $350) and $600-700 for a 8c/16t CPU that should be a competitor for the 6900K (8c/16t $1100).

That depends on performance, ideally AMD's 4 core 8 thread is the competitor for Intel's 4 core 8 thread.

The sad truth is if AMD need's 8 cores to compete with Intel's 4 core 8 thread then AMD aren't really competing at all because be THAT as it may their single threaded performance is way behind Intel, still.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The price difference between the Core i7 7700K and Core i7 6800K is not massive AFAIK,so an 8C/8T Ryzen would be competing with both.

Edit!!

Considering AMD said the minimum base clockspeed will be 3.4GHZ,and we don't know the boost clocks,if AMD has decent boost clocks for lightly threaded software,its going to be the best of both worlds,IMHO OFC.

 

[Harlequin]

Who is going to pay for ANY $600+ 8c/16t part though when you can get 8c/8t for $300? 8c/16t will have to come down in price if either AMD or Intel want to sell them.

how do you know these are the prices? or are you simply guessing?

 

[mmj_uk]

how do you know these are the prices? or are you simply guessing?

They are in the article I quoted before.

 

[humbug]

Personally i think this rumoured line-up of:

4 Core - 8 Thread
8 Core - 8 Thread
8 Core - 16 Thread

Is just as with all unconfirmed rumours surrounding Zen to date, utter nonsense, i use that term because it make no sense at all to layout your 8 Core SMT SKU out like that, only one salvage version given that the other 8 core isn't, only the 4 core is salvage, what do they do with those that have 2 failed cores, disable them to make a 4 core? no... Intel don't do it like that and for good reason, its a waste of a pricing tier.

 

[Harlequin]

They are in the article I quoted before.

so they are guessing then

 

[mmj_uk]

so they are guessing then

Well this thread is all about discussing the latest rumours and speculation, I was just pointing out that if this particular one is true ($300 8c/8t and no 6 core) then AMD are going to wipe out the high end unless there are significant price cuts. (unless their $300 8c/8t part is locked or something)

 

[humbug]

Other 'Rumours' say there are actually four CPU's

8 Core 16 Thread Binned (Think FX-9590 vs FX 8350) $500
8 Core 16 Thread Mainstream $350
6 Core 12 Thread $250
4 Core 8 Thread $150

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Personally i think this rumoured line-up of:

4 Core - 8 Thread
8 Core - 8 Thread
8 Core - 16 Thread

Is just as with all unconfirmed rumours surrounding Zen to date, utter nonsense, i use that term because it make no sense at all to layout your 8 Core SMT SKU out like that, only one salvage version given that the other 8 core isn't, only the 4 core is salvage, what do they do with those that have 2 failed cores, disable them to make a 4 core? no... Intel don't do it like that and for good reason, its a waste of a pricing tier.

Ryzen is made of two 4 core modules. So I don't see a problem with an 8C/8T SKU against the Core i7 7700K and Core i7 6800K.

Games tend to scale better with cores than SMT. So you have 8 cores at 3.4GHZ to 3.6GHZ which should mean it won't lose in MT games to a Core i7 6800K. In more lightly threaded scenarios,ie,upto 4 threads,if the CPU has a Turbo clockspeed of 4GHZ to 4.2GHZ,and if it is close to Broadwell level IPC,it won't be much slower than a Core i7 7700K in that scenario in most games,IMHO OFC.

 

[humbug]

Ryzen is made of two 4 core modules. So I don't see a problem with an 8C/8T SKU against the Core i7 7700K and Core i7 6800K.

Games tend to scale better with cores than SMT. So you have 8 cores at 3.4GHZ to 3.6GHZ which should mean it won't lose in MT games to a Core i7 6800K. In more lightly threaded scenarios,ie,upto 4 threads,if the CPU has a Turbo clockspeed of 4GHZ to 4.2GHZ,and if it is close to Broadwell level IPC,it won't be much slower than a Core i7 7700K in that scenario in most games,IMHO OFC.

Thats Bulldozer, RyZen is a proper 8 core.

 

[DragonQ]

To be fair, there is at least some weight behind the "no 6 core parts" rumour because we already know Zen is organised into modules of 4 cores. However, I find it hard to believe that they designed it in such a way that they cannot salvage 2-3 cores with a single module.

Thats Bulldozer, RyZen is a proper 8 core.

Zen being a 4-core-per-module design doesn't preclude it being a "proper 8 core" part. Bulldozer modules were different in that they had two integer cores and one floating point core per module, with various shared parts. All CPU modules have shared parts to some degree though (L2 and L3 cache for example).

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Thats Bulldozer, RyZen is a proper 8 core.

??

This has nothing to do with BD - Ryzen is made of two modules known as a CCX.

Each CCX has 4 cores. Now it is quite possible,the way the CCX is arranged,that defects in one CCX would mean that it is more economic to deactivate one module instead of having half a module active.

Or it simply could be segmentation. AMD can sell 8 cores against Intel 4 and 6 cores and this time have the performance to back it up.

Edit!!

Plus I don't see how 8C cores with BW level IPC would be uncompetitive against 6C/12T BW-E CPUs if Turbo is well implemented.

Lots of software which threads better will gain more from actual cores than SMT.

 

[humbug]

??

This has nothing to do with BD - Ryzen is made of two modules known as a CCX.

Each CCX has 4 cores. Now it is quite possible,the way the CCX is arranged,that defects in one CCX would mean that it is more economic to deactivate one module instead of having half a module active.

Yes but no one core shares its L2 with another, they are all independent individual cores, unlike Bulldozer which share L2 between two cores.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Look at the difference between the Core i7 7700K and Core i7 7600K.

With HT and slightly more L3 cache,you seeing at most a 30% increase in MT performance with HT enabled.

Hence,an 8C/8T SKU would actually be quite competitive in very MT scenarios,and games tend to scale better with cores if they are MT.

As long as lightly threaded Turbo is around 4GHZ,I think an 8C/8T SKU(and not a 6C/12T SKU) would actually be better for most of us as we tend to game,do some video encoding,etc,and probably would actually fit in well with the console ports as they are coded on a low power 8 core CPU with no SMT.

SMT/HT is more a cheaper way to improve throughput as a substitute for more cores.

TBH,as long as there is a reasonably competitive 4C/8T SKU,that will do me fine at least for my purposes!!

 

[humbug]

Look at the difference between the Core i7 7700K and Core i7 7600K.

With HT and slightly more L3 cache,you seeing at most a 30% increase in MT performance with HT enabled.

Hence,an 8C/8T SKU would actually be quite competitive in very MT scenarios,and games tend to scale better with cores if they are MT.

As long as lightly threaded Turbo is around 4GHZ,I think an 8C/8T SKU(and not a 6C/12T SKU) would actually be better for most of us as we tend to game,do some video encoding,etc,and probably would actually fit in well with the console ports as they are coded on a low power 8 core CPU with no SMT.

SMT/HT is more a cheaper way to improve throughput as a substitute for more cores.

TBH,as long as there is a reasonably competitive 4C/8T SKU,that will do me fine at least for my purposes!!

Granted an 8 Core 8 Thread would be a bit better performance than an 6 Core 12 Thread, about 15 or 20%.

But the price of such a chip would have to be fairly low, like $300 or there is no middle ground pricing from AMD.

 

[Skilty]

If AMD release 4C/8T, 8c/8T and 8C/16T I don't see where the 6C/12T would sit from a price and performance perspective, depends on the IPC I guess. Too many SKUs with performance not too far apart. Also with AMDs finances wouldn't you want settle on a single design i.e. Summit Ridge rather Bristol Ridge if your R&D budget is tight? I see a 2C/4T for the low end sub $100 at some point...

2C/4T
4C/4T
4C/8T
6C/12T <<< Pure marketing?
8C/8T <<< Sweet spot for gaming
8C/16T