• 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 understand the point of the AMD reps among the bulldozer launch.

It was just a total shambles.
Click to expand...

A lot of it probably came from marketing being disconnected from reality. They probably had design goals that were fed to marketing and probably not updated when it was apparent there was a massive clock miss and other GloFo **** ups. Just my speculation, mind
 
flopper said:
Zen will be costly.
it offers same performance delta as Intel and why would a company sell their cpu for less than that then?
I am however glad to see AMD back in the top performance again.
Time to go Zen.........
Click to expand...

Yup she did not mince her words when she said "High end enthusiast desktop".

I'm more hopeful for lesser, cheaper Zen CPUs to bring down the price of PC gaming. Since Intel went nuts with prices it's been really hard to build a decent affordable quad core PC with a RX 480 for example.
 
Looking at this I just know that AMD are going to be asking Broadwell-e prices which will mean at or around £900 for the 8c/16t. :(

That's me out.

A 6 core Broadwell-e can be had for £400-£550 so I'll have to think hard on what to do once we also see what 6 core units AMD offer as Vega is also due at some point.

The way Lisa Su said "We are back" translated to "no more cheap components, if Intel ask that so do we".
 
While i expect these to be expensive if their numbers are true, they've got a large trust deficit to conquer and do we trust that zen will continue to evolve at a pace with intel or get left behind again? With that in mind they'll have to price compete to some degree with intel. Though I dont imagine it will be a staggering difference.

That aside, its super exciting to see some options open up and some competition hit the market. I hope this pushes a nice drive from both companies on the next 5 years to compete with their chips!
 
Last edited:
nashathedog said:
Looking at this I just know that AMD are going to be asking Broadwell-e prices which will mean at or around £900 for the 8c/16t. :(

That's me out.

A 6 core Broadwell-e can be had for £400-£550 so I'll have to think hard on what to do once we also see what 6 core units AMD offer as Vega is also due at some point.

The way Lisa Su said "We are back" translated to "no more cheap components, if Intel ask that so do we".
Click to expand...

I don't think they'll be cheap like some are hoping, but I sincerely hope not to see £900 for the 8 core version. I was hoping more in the <£450 range. I'd like to see the number begin with a 3, actually.
 
nashathedog said:
Looking at this I just know that AMD are going to be asking Broadwell-e prices which will mean at or around £900 for the 8c/16t. :(

That's me out.

A 6 core Broadwell-e can be had for £400-£550 so I'll have to think hard on what to do once we also see what 6 core units AMD offer as Vega is also due at some point.

The way Lisa Su said "We are back" translated to "no more cheap components, if Intel ask that so do we".
Click to expand...

They ain't going to be anything like £900, why? because they will not sell any with prices like that.
 
Why will it be 900?! Thats mental thinking, can't see that happening!!

I was under the entry level Desktop part will be 8c/16t. I would expect it to be priced competitively.

The server chip with 32 cores will be another beast altogether.
 
humbug said:
They ain't going to be anything like £900, why? because they will not sell any with prices like that.
Click to expand...

And yet they priced the FX9590 the way they did


But no one really knows what these chips will perform at.
I don't expect it'll be a case of buying a 4 core Intel or a 6 core AMD at the same price points, I think if Intel have a performance parity part, it'll just be cheaper than the Intel alternative.

Who knows, it all depends on how Zen performs.
 
Martini1991 said:
Well the FX9590 was crap, but they still priced it stupidly.
So if anything that would suggest they will price up Zen if it's good.
Click to expand...

Will they be more expensive than AMD's current FX series? yes of course they will, do AMD deserve more money for better products, IMO they certainly do.

My point is consumers dictate AMD's pricing, not AMD, it does not make the blindest bit of difference what AMD want for it, it will be priced where they can sell it in high numbers, that is not close to Intel's pricing structure.

The only question is this, how much? all i know is this, assuming what we know so far comes true i'm not paying much more than £200 for the 8 thread, much more than £300 for the 12 thread.

That's ^^^^ me, now depending on where the masses feel AMD are worth parting with their hard earned cash, that is where they will be priced.
 
d_brennen said:
I've been following optimistically but refuse to believe it until the cold hard numbers hit
Click to expand...

Indeed. It sounds good so far but talk is cheap (doubly so, coming from AMD).
One thing that's putting me off is the use of "cheaper" (asmedia etc.) controllers on the motherboards but I will reserve judgement until the benchmarks hit.
 
ALXAndy said:
I'm more hopeful for lesser, cheaper Zen CPUs to bring down the price of PC gaming. Since Intel went nuts with prices it's been really hard to build a decent affordable quad core PC with a RX 480 for example.
Click to expand...
I still dont quite get this.

A CPU will last you 5+ years nowadays. A brand new 6600k runs £215. Is that really a lot of money?

People complaining that Intel CPU's are so expensive and overpriced, especially on a board where people regularly upgrade to £300-500+ GPU's every 1-2 years, just seems a bit silly to me.

An 8GB RX480 will cost more than the CPU does and wont last you nearly as long in terms of remaining competitive, performance-wise. This makes the 480 the bad value part in this situation.

I feel like so long as you're not going for one of the 6+ core enthusiast CPU's, which come with their own drawbacks for gaming(lower clock speeds), the value level of a good CPU is very high.

Obviously if AMD can come in and offer a slightly inferior product at £30-50 less or whatever, that's cool. I'm all for it. Options are good and budget builders will benefit a bit. That doesn't make the more expensive option some outrageous value prospect, though.
 
An i5 6600K at 215 pound, to me isn't "expensive" as such, but it's not progression in terms of price/performance over the years, or overall performance available at that the 215 price point.

We're 5 years on from when I bought a Sandybridge i5 2500k at 150 pound.

Assuming that an i5 2500K and i5 6600K reach the exact same clocks, that's only a ~20% gain in most areas (I know there's some newer instruction sets) but it's costing more money and it's 5 years on.

At 220 back in 2011 it was possible to buy a 2600K, and that'll trade blows with a 6600K application depending, assuming the same clocks.

The problem is, there's absolutely nothing better to buy at 215 pound than an i5 6600K brand new, and so on throughout Intels lineup really.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom