Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

AMD Zen Discussion Thread

  • 18-08-2016 4:12pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭Samurai12


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQS8s7TOXsE&feature=youtu.be
    If this video is somewhat true then Zen could be a good contender for PC Gaming CPUs. What are your thoughts on Zen?
    These are mine:
    We all know that in Ireland Intel CPUs really are not budget friendly and AMD's current cpus are too old and are lacking in quite a number of things. But Zen might be what finally gives budget gamers hope again. Because sadly buying a €100 FX-6350 and a lackluster motherboard just isn't cutting it anymore. But with Intel, the prices are just too damn high. I have had both Intel and AMD cpus, and I can say that there are certain noticeable differences between both but that all depends on the use case. I see all my friends trying to change to PC and naively they look at all these American Budget PC Builds but when they try to recreate it hear, they realise just how much more expensive it is. Sadly, budget builds in Ireland are basically non existent when it comes to Intel. Yes i know they can be done with intel pentiums or i3 but at that price you may as well go AMD which doesn't exactly result in a much better build. So I would like to see Zen finally change this jus like how the RX 480/470 is making pc gaming on a budget much more appealing.

    I know Zen probably won't be as good as AMD is making it out to be but as long as it does much better than current AMD CPUs at a similar price then I will be more than happy. I had an X99 build but sold it months ago and i am now holding for Zen before i build a new pc. I know AMD keep holding it back but I am willing to wait, if they can achieve what I am looking for.
    Tagged:


«134567131

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 36,161 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    AMDs own promo material is a pretty poor source as they'll cherrypick results(as do the blue and green teams).

    Some good analysis here from Linus: (Jump to 4:43)


    If it turns out to be a great perf/$ chip great, they'll have a good year maybe 18mo then intel will have spun up manufacturing on all the stuff they've been holding back because they can currently.


  • Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭Samurai12


    ED E wrote: »
    AMDs own promo material is a pretty poor source as they'll cherrypick results(as do the blue and green teams).

    Some good analysis here from Linus: (Jump to 4:43)


    If it turns out to be a great perf/$ chip great, they'll have a good year maybe 18mo then intel will have spun up manufacturing on all the stuff they've been holding back because they can currently.
    Yeah i saw that livestream. Even if intel improves their technology on the lower end. At least everyone still benefits from it. Well except AMD of course
    Because its been years and things like hyperthreading still has not trickled down to the lower end stuff


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,178 ✭✭✭Serephucus


    All depends on price. Potentially exciting times in the CPU market ahead though.

    (finally)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,930 ✭✭✭✭TerrorFirmer


    I'm not really sure I agree with all your assertions. Intel aren't the only thing cheaper in the US; whether you were buying an i5, an FX9590, a GTX1070, an RX480, an Xbox One or Playstation 4 - all these things are cheaper in the US.

    I don't know how you could say Intel budget builds are non-existant. That is where the i3 comes in. You say 'you might as well go AMD at that point' but that doesn't make sense either. Skylake or Haswell i3 is as fast as the FX in most games, faster in some, is generally more reliable and and has a rock solid upgrade path that will be good for years to come. Going FX gets you a sub par processor now, that is unreliable performance wise, and is a dead end platform.

    Also, of course HT hasn't filtered down to Pentium processors, otherwise they'd be i3 processors. Intel don't need to improve their technology in this end. A Skylake G4400 for example at €60 is exceptional performance wise for everything except games, and even at that some games it runs pretty okay. It's not exactly reasonable to except high-end gaming performance from a €60 processor. It does what it's designed to do. The Intel i3 is a €120 CPU that offers an excellent upgrade platform and solid performance. Seems reasonable to me for a budget build?

    AMD have 'budget' processors in the €60-100 range and despite being quad cores, four physical cores, they're absolute garbage. Intel has nothing that really demands improvement - AMD is the one that's desperately playing catchup, hence Zen.

    To properly challenge Intel, Zen needs to be exceptional - not just 'Hey, sorry, we're four years late but here's Intel performance from us at similar prices!'. It needs to be an excellent all-rounder that can offer a viable alternative to the i-line at a lower price. It doesn't necessarily even need to be as fast, just offer amazing and reliable price per dollar performance. The FX can't do that because IPC is just too bad and the processor is wildly unreliable in games, at no price point does the FX really become attractive unless you found one for pennies second hand.

    Hopefully it will turn out to be decent because it's good for consumers to have two healthy competitors. But I don't get the 'it will give budget gamers hope', the i3 is an excellent processor for budget gamers and somehow I can't see AMD coming out with a sub 99 processor that beats the i3.


  • Registered Users Posts: 97 ✭✭thegreenbean


    The problem with Zen for me is, it's going to just about match haswell/broadwell cpu's. Which is a good thing for budget builders but it's going to be fast outdated by intel's next part. Chances are it will blow it out of the water. I want a monster AMD cpu to challenge Intel's X99 series but it won't happen. I hope AMD are serious about the enthusiast market in the future


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭Samurai12


    I'm not really sure I agree with all your assertions. Intel aren't the only thing cheaper in the US; whether you were buying an i5, an FX9590, a GTX1070, an RX480, an Xbox One or Playstation 4 - all these things are cheaper in the US.
    I never said that only intel things are cheaper in the US. I meant that with all parts being cheaper in the US, some people see budget builds and try to recreate them but realise the parts are mich more expensive to buy in Ireland. I didn't single out Intel alone as the only thing that is cheaper in the US.


  • Registered Users Posts: 36,161 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    The problem with Zen for me is, it's going to just about match haswell/broadwell cpu's. Which is a good thing for budget builders but it's going to be fast outdated by intel's next part. Chances are it will blow it out of the water. I want a monster AMD cpu to challenge Intel's X99 series but it won't happen. I hope AMD are serious about the enthusiast market in the future

    Depends on how much effective corporate espionage Intel had going on. Next generations fabs were built months ago so if Intel bet on Zen being meh we'll see a normal tic/toc(?) but if they've anticipated a real contender then we'll hopefully see more than the normal 5% IPC improvements.


  • Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭Samurai12


    ED E wrote: »
    Depends on how much effective corporate espionage Intel had going on. Next generations fabs were built months ago so if Intel bet on Zen being meh we'll see a normal tic/toc(?) but if they've anticipated a real contender then we'll hopefully see more than the normal 5% IPC improvements.
    Intel have killed tic toc so beginning with skylake they are doing Process-Architecture-Optimization now so we wouldn't even see anything new from them until 2018 and by then we don't know what AMD might have done


  • Registered Users Posts: 36,161 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    Ooops, of course. Do we have figures as to how much Intel could slash pricing for Cannonlake as a retort? They obviously dont want to cannibalize sales of enthusiast and enterprise parts too much but dropping the mainstream pricing by a large mark would hurt any Zen gains.


  • Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭Samurai12


    AMD say that the pricing of their new Zen CPU's should be similar to the pricing of their current CPUs. Considering an i5 6600k is about €250 and an fx 8350 is about €155. If AMDs Zen cpu can match the i5 6600k at the price of an fx 8350 then Intel would have to reduce the price of the i5 6600k by 36% which is no small drop.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,930 ✭✭✭✭TerrorFirmer


    Samurai12 wrote: »
    I never said that only intel things are cheaper in the US. I meant that with all parts being cheaper in the US, some people see budget builds and try to recreate them but realise the parts are mich more expensive to buy in Ireland. I didn't single out Intel alone as the only thing that is cheaper in the US.

    No, but you said Intel is not budget friendly in Ireland and budget builds are non-existant in Ireland. Neither of which is really true at all. It doesn't matter if you're creating a budget build, a mid-range build, enthusiast build or ultra high-end rig, it will always be cheaper in the US, so there's no point in singling out the 'budget' market.
    Considering an i5 6600k is about €250 and an fx 8350 is about €155.

    That's a strange comparison. The i5-6500 or 6600 non-k is light years ahead of the FX-8350 and is around €190 for the former or €210 for the latter. It's the i3-6100, i5-6500 and i7-6700 or similar segments that AMD need to target hard, not enthusiast K series CPUs.

    I still don't get why you think the budget market is non-existant. An i3-6100 is €120. An RX460 is €120. The only cheaper CPU's are a) intel pentiums which are not designed for high-end gaming and never were/or will be or b) AMD budget quads, which are terrible for games. It's not realistic to expect CPU's in the 50-100 range to excel at all the latest games. It wouldn't make sense for AMD or Intel to release such a CPU.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,178 ✭✭✭Serephucus


    The problem with Zen for me is, it's going to just about match haswell/broadwell cpu's. Which is a good thing for budget builders but it's going to be fast outdated by intel's next part. Chances are it will blow it out of the water. I want a monster AMD cpu to challenge Intel's X99 series but it won't happen. I hope AMD are serious about the enthusiast market in the future

    You're forgetting scalability here.

    By the looks of things, there'll be a 32C/64T part, at the highest end. Also an 8C/16T part on the desktop. If performance is on par with Broadwell/Skylake, then it'll see Intel slash prices on not only their 1151 (I think that's what Skylake is?) stuff, but the 2011-3 chips too.


  • Registered Users Posts: 97 ✭✭thegreenbean


    Serephucus wrote: »
    You're forgetting scalability here.

    By the looks of things, there'll be a 32C/64T part, at the highest end. Also an 8C/16T part on the desktop. If performance is on par with Broadwell/Skylake, then it'll see Intel slash prices on not only their 1151 (I think that's what Skylake is?) stuff, but the 2011-3 chips too.

    Hehe, 32 cores :eek:
    PC-Per has a nice review from Ryan. It's looking ok for now. Intel need a good kick in the ass so it's going to be exciting win or fail
    link


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,739 ✭✭✭satguy


    Paul's Hardware has just posted a video..

    AMD Zen - A First Look



    Looks Good..


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,178 ✭✭✭Serephucus


    Hehe, 32 cores :eek:
    PC-Per has a nice review from Ryan. It's looking ok for now. Intel need a good kick in the ass so it's going to be exciting win or fail
    link

    Exactly. At the very least, it'll be a kick in the sack for Intel. Something they have been in dire need of for years.


  • Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭Samurai12


    No, but you said Intel is not budget friendly in Ireland and budget builds are non-existant in Ireland. Neither of which is really true at all. It doesn't matter if you're creating a budget build, a mid-range build, enthusiast build or ultra high-end rig, it will always be cheaper in the US, so there's no point in singling out the 'budget' market.



    That's a strange comparison. The i5-6500 or 6600 non-k is light years ahead of the FX-8350 and is around €190 for the former or €210 for the latter. It's the i3-6100, i5-6500 and i7-6700 or similar segments that AMD need to target hard, not enthusiast K series CPUs.

    I still don't get why you think the budget market is non-existant. An i3-6100 is €120. An RX460 is €120. The only cheaper CPU's are a) intel pentiums which are not designed for high-end gaming and never were/or will be or b) AMD budget quads, which are terrible for games. It's not realistic to expect CPU's in the 50-100 range to excel at all the latest games. It wouldn't make sense for AMD or Intel to release such a CPU.
    I am not trying to compare the FX-8350 with the Core i5 6600k. I am saying that AMD's Zen CPU that will be similar in price to the FX-8350 is said to be on par with the i5 6600k. Which is why I used the FX-8350 price as a reference.

    I said that I think that the budget market is basically non existent when it comes to Intel. My first build was a budget build with a Radeon 6850 and an FX-6100 so I definitely know that budget builds are possible. I also didn't single out budget builds as the only ones that are cheaper in the US. I just used them as an example.


  • Registered Users Posts: 36,161 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    The OP is a school leaver so to be clear what he calls budget and what a FT salary earner calls budget might be quite different.


  • Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭Samurai12


    ED E wrote: »
    The OP is a school leaver so to be clear what he calls budget and what a FT salary earner calls budget might be quite different.
    Haha yeah I should have probably clarified that. By budget I meant like €500 - €600. My first pc was within that price range but luckily I got a job about 2 years back and was able to save up to build a nice X99 build but I sold that a couple of months ago and somehow broke even.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,930 ✭✭✭✭TerrorFirmer


    The OP is a school leaver so to be clear what he calls budget and what a FT salary earner calls budget might be quite different.

    I don't think that's true, a budget build is a budget build, and we all understand what it means really, it's one of the most requested builds in the B&U forum. To me a budget build is universally recognised as sub €600, which would get you a Skylake i3, rX460, and SSD based system with a solid case and power supply. That's pretty bullet proof.

    You could go even cheaper but the price to performance ratio falls off a cliff with the likes of the G4400 on Intel's side and the 860K on AMD's part - even though the G4400 is a way better purchase for broad performance and upgrade potential.

    At stock speed the 6600K is no faster than the regular variants like i5-6500 and i5-6600, which are the €190-210 price range. You can't compare an FX-8350 to a 6600K with any sort of standardization, it's not a valid comparison. A more accurate comparison would be the FX8350 v. i5-6600 non-k or i5-6500.
    I said that I think that the budget market is basically non existent when it comes to Intel.

    But why? Is a Skylake i3-6100 not an exceptional budget gaming CPU @ €120? What are the AMD alternatives? There are none....the FX8350 is €160 and is unreliable performance wise and a dead end platform.

    If anything, the budget market is healthy when it comes to Intel and totally non-existent when it comes to AMD.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,979 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    But why? Is a Skylake i3-6100 not an exceptional budget gaming CPU @ €120? What are the AMD alternatives? There are none....the FX8350 is €160 and is unreliable performance wise and a dead end platform.

    If anything, the budget market is healthy when it comes to Intel and totally non-existent when it comes to AMD.

    Fx6300 is still quite a good cpu and would more be the equivalent. The new skylake I3 performs better in cpu heavy games though.

    I would like to see Zen do well, but I have a feeling that it will fall slightly short both in IPC and clock speed compared to current Intel CPU's. It might end up where AMD just try to aim for high volume low price, similar to their pricing strategy for the 4xx series.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,930 ✭✭✭✭TerrorFirmer


    It's OK in games that are primarily GPU heavy but in CPU heavy titles it falls down, so I don't think it would make sense to recommend any FX processor over an i3 in any scenario in a new build (unless you were solely rendering or editing to take advantage of all six cores, of course).

    I agree completely that Zen needs to offer solid reliable performance, not necessarily on-par with Intel, but with a more attractive performance per euro. We're at a situation now where it's your average graphics card bottlenecks your i5 and not vice versa, so plenty of scope for a lower performing, cheaper CPU that still keeps pace with mainstream cards reliably across all titles.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,689 ✭✭✭✭K.O.Kiki


    I was actually pricing up a build for my dad's friend, and since he doesn't play games anymore (but wants to have a very good Photoshop machine) I recommended him an i5 mATX build.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,930 ✭✭✭✭TerrorFirmer


    Definitely if it's within your budget, it makes sense to go i5. The longevity of Intel processors is incredible. My parents are still using a Q6600 with an SSD, it's not really much different than my own PC for the sort of things they use it for. If I sold the whole machine now it wouldn't even cover the cost of an i3 processor!


  • Registered Users Posts: 22,929 ✭✭✭✭ShadowHearth


    I don't think that's true, a budget build is a budget build, and we all understand what it means really, it's one of the most requested builds in the B&U forum. To me a budget build is universally recognised as sub €600, which would get you a Skylake i3, rX460, and SSD based system with a solid case and power supply. That's pretty bullet proof.

    You could go even cheaper but the price to performance ratio falls off a cliff with the likes of the G4400 on Intel's side and the 860K on AMD's part - even though the G4400 is a way better purchase for broad performance and upgrade potential.

    At stock speed the 6600K is no faster than the regular variants like i5-6500 and i5-6600, which are the €190-210 price range. You can't compare an FX-8350 to a 6600K with any sort of standardization, it's not a valid comparison. A more accurate comparison would be the FX8350 v. i5-6600 non-k or i5-6500.



    But why? Is a Skylake i3-6100 not an exceptional budget gaming CPU @ €120? What are the AMD alternatives? There are none....the FX8350 is €160 and is unreliable performance wise and a dead end platform.

    If anything, the budget market is healthy when it comes to Intel and totally non-existent when it comes to AMD.

    Okay, I am no expert, but i think what he ment was:

    If you get same performance as i5 6600k for the price of Fx8350 ( which is cheaper), then new zens will definitely be a power that Intel will need to deal with.
    These days fanboysism is still around, but not as strong as used to be. Gamers these days mostly go for best bang for the money. And if zen will give same performance for lower price then gamers will buy it. At very least it will be a good kick to Intel to be competitive and drop prices.

    As for my own point of view:
    I want amd to do something similar what they did with rx480. I don't want to see something stupidly fast and stupidly expensive, just because they are too dogs and I can charge what they want ( nvidia 1070 and 1080 situation).
    Do a very solid cpu that us great bang for the money. Solid performance for decent money. Makes us 90% of average ePenis holders happy and the rest of market that can drop a lot of money on a build can have their Intel with a premium price tag.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,930 ✭✭✭✭TerrorFirmer


    Well yes I did make that same point, that AMD don't need to be as fast as Intel they just need to offer solid reliable performance at a lower price point. But the thing is, say they introduce a new Zen CPU at €150 that's sort of i5-6400 performance level - all Intel have to do is drop prices and match them. AMD really have an uphill battle.

    Also you can't really say '6600K performance' because there is no standard performance. It would be more accurate to use i5-6500 or i5-6600 non-k which are the same performance at stock. €50 of the 6600K's cost is the overclocking ability. Unless of course Zen CPU's turn out to be excellent overclockers, then of course we could compare directly with 6600k but for now at stock speeds we should be comparing to non-K cpus.

    I think it's good for us because it means prices will drop on Intel parts, but I'm just not convinced AMD can do enough to get back a solid foothold. If Zen performs well, Intel will just drop prices on skylake to compete, and then in a year or two will release another killer CPU line that will be much faster, again, most likely.

    I agree Nvidia pricing is crazy but Intel pricing is really not bad at all at the moment. i3 is €120, i5 is €180, those are not bad prices considering they are way faster and far more future-proof than AM3+, which is still €100 for Fx6300 and €160 for Fx8350. I don't quite understand how people are acting like Intel are price gouging.

    More competition is good for everyone but Intel offer good value for money even now, they more or less always have since Core2Duo came out in 2006.


  • Registered Users Posts: 22,929 ✭✭✭✭ShadowHearth


    I think we all know what we mean when we compare it to 6600k and not with non K cpu. We want an overclocker like K series, but cheaper. As we presume now zen will have overclocking model and thats the one most people pay attention now. I personally compare to 6600k, maybe you want to compare it to other cpu. At the moment is just everyone's personal opinion and guessing.
    As for prices: we used to pay that money, because we don't know any better. And the reason we pay that much not because Intel giving us a good deal, it's because Intel has no competition and can charge what they want. I bet you if in last few years there would have been competitive side to cpu world, we would talk about cpu prices being normal not 120 and 150, but 80 and 120 for example.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,397 ✭✭✭✭Digital Solitude


    Highly doubt i5s would be much lower to be fair, they trounce 8350s despite being only €30 dearer. If Intel could match the price or even go below what an 8350 costs they'd make a total laughing stock of AMD.

    FX CPUs are close to the bottom of what AMD can afford I would imagine seeing as they're desperate for a piece of the market share back, and i3s and i5s are pretty close to them in price.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,930 ✭✭✭✭TerrorFirmer


    As for prices: we used to pay that money, because we don't know any better. And the reason we pay that much not because Intel giving us a good deal, it's because Intel has no competition and can charge what they want. I bet you if in last few years there would have been competitive side to cpu world, we would talk about cpu prices being normal not 120 and 150, but 80 and 120 for example.

    I don't think this is true. Intel could get away with raising the prices on i3, i5 and i7 because they have no competition at the moment, and they destroy the FX line despite only being a little bit more expensive as Digital as outlined above.

    Intel could pull an 'Nvidia' and start charging more - people would still buy, because the FX line is so sub-standard at this point.

    An FX8350 is only €20 cheaper than an i5-6400. For that €20 saving you get a way worse performer, a dead end socket, and higher power consumption.

    Can we really claim Intel are overcharging people?

    If anything they've keep pricing competitive to further drive people away from AMD.

    CPU prices as they are now are relatively quite normal compared to how they've always been over the past decade.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,689 ✭✭✭✭K.O.Kiki




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,689 ✭✭✭✭K.O.Kiki




Advertisement