• 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) ***

Martini1991 said:
I don't even know why it matters, who cares about number gens,
Click to expand...



Martini1991 said:
Intel could class them as part of their 6th Generation offerings. It's meaningless.

I don't even know what data sheet you're on about
Click to expand...

In its self it doesn't, DragonQ suggested Broadwell-E IPC was lower than Skylake, as far as i could tell Broadwell-E is Skylake under another name

Same 14nm, Same DDR4, same cited 6th Generation
Its not 5th Generation (Devils Canyon) with that ^^^ you say its not Skylake, its Broadwell-E, i asked you if you were being pedantic simply because they have different names, you said they are different CPU's.

It just doesn't strike me as something Intel would do, run 2 different CPU cores in the same generation, especially with the later more expensive one being lower performance.

It's not uncommon for them to use the same CPU cores for different model CPUs in the same genaration, thats actually pretty normal, what is not normal is to have 2 different core architectures running in the same generation, 6th Gen A and 6th B?

They are just the same cores, Skylake. Broadwell-E is a name given to set them apart from the cheaper i7 6### series.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
In its self it doesn't, DragonQ suggested Broadwell-E IPC was lower than Skylake, as far as i could tell Broadwell-E is Skylake under another name

Same 14nm, Same DDR4, same cited 6th Generation
Its not 5th Generation (Devils Canyon) with that ^^^ you say its not Skylake, its Broadwell-E, i asked you if you were being pedantic simply because they have different names, you said they are different CPU's.

It just doesn't strike me as something Intel would do, run 2 different CPU cores in the same generation, especially with the later more expensive one being lower performance.
Click to expand...

Devils Canyon isn't 5th generation, it's 4th.

Why wouldn't Intel do that? It makes perfect sense.

They're not the same cores, one is Broadwell-E, one is Skylake. It's not hard!
 
Last edited:
Martini1991 said:
Devils Canyon isn't 5th generation, it's 4th.

Why wouldn't Intel do that? It makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...

Makes sense given its a rev:2 Haswell...

Because its expensive, and you would want your best performing chip to be the more expensive ones, it also saves costs given that you can still bin them if they have several dead cores..
Unless they couldn't get the Skylake core into fatter chips, i guess.

Anyway... lets get this back on topic.
 
humbug said:
Makes sense given its a rev:2 Haswell...

Because its expensive, and you would want your best performing chip to be the more expensive ones, it also saves costs given that you can still bin them if they have several dead cores..
Unless they couldn't get the Skylake core into fatter chips, i guess.

Anyway... lets get this back on topic.
Click to expand...

Broadwell-E isn't slower though, the cheapest one sold is a hex core, as opposed the 4 core Skylake (There's obviously some cases where it's literally 4 threads and under versus 4 threads and under where the Skylake will be faster, and the IPC improvements best the improvements in the X99 platform)
What Intel are doing makes complete sense.

Unless you think SB-E was Ivy cores, it's the exact same thing.
 
Last edited:
One thing to mention is that if the highest end Zen part performs and overclocks anything like a 6900K then I doubt you'll be looking at a £300 price tag, it's not so long ago AMD were trying to sell FX9590 for £800...
 
mmj_uk said:
One thing to mention is that if the highest end Zen part performs and overclocks anything like a 6900K then I doubt you'll be looking at a £300 price tag, it's not so long ago AMD were trying to sell FX9590 for £800...
Click to expand...

It's easier to start high and bring the price down to find the sweet spot then it risk the negative publicity of raising prices because you messed up and sold it too cheap to begin with like AMD did with the 5870. If AMD has a competitive product and performs like an Intel Extreme chip you can expect £600+ prices upon release.
 
Telecaster said:
On Intel Ark all the 6+ core stuff, including the most recent lot, are under the High End Desk Top Processors tab, Skylake is under 6th gen i7 processors, it's fairly straight forward...
Click to expand...

I think he's just trolling. Even the OCUK product page clearly says Skylake or Broadwell for the respective CPU's, not exactly rocket science.
 
I'm excited and cant wait. However are they giving us a clue on pricing by comparing it to the 6900k CPU? Because that would be a little disappointing as I don't think I'm in that price bracket.

I'm looking more for a 8 core 6700k Zen alternative.
 
Bw-e is 5th gen but the confusion is intel's fault really for the nomenclature.

I may be up for swapping to zen from x99. I'd have to add windows 10 licence to the cost now though so might not be worth it.
 
It's probably been said a million times in this thread already, but I really hope Zen delivers, and that AMD claw back some OEM and server market share, that's where the coin is. If that happens and the threat from ARM based servers surfaces, Intel could be under some actual pressure for a change.

Might lead to an interesting tech race and/or price war, and we the consumer shall reap the rewards :)

Or they might just go full Apple and attempt to cut the legs off the competition in a courtroom using desperately vague patents... I wouldn't put it past them tbh. They do love their money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom