AMD Zen Discussion Thread

wotzgoingon · 02-02-2017 2:21pm

Good video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVOQ5W3SUxg

Gehad_JoyRider · 02-02-2017 2:22pm

Samurai12 wrote: »

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.

So you think that now AMD are back, they will forget about budget pc builders. how would that make sense, company's need to sell CPUs, not hold on to them.
There has to be a budget line it makes no sense not to have one.

Slutmonkey57b · 07-02-2017 9:41am

I'm not encouraged by the time slips, and the big gap between the initial launch and apu release. Zen was originally due last year, and even up to summer they were claiming late December. Then it was q1, and they'll barely make that with their hand picked halo parts. AMD's whole strategy was supposed to revolve around ditching the cpu and transitioning solely to an apu; failing to get the apu out until the second half of the year, with still very vague timelines, is not at all a good sign.

Hopefully I'm wrong but I'm not getting a fuzzy feeling here.

BloodBath · 07-02-2017 7:56pm

I'd imagine we will see the 2/4 core cpus when the apu line launches as there will be 4/8 and 2/4 apu's. This will obviously be a different manufacturing process so they don't have to cut down an 8/16 processor to make a 2/4 like they would with the current Ryzen cpu's. The budget cpu's will be apu's.

TerrorFirmer · 07-02-2017 7:57pm

BloodBath · 07-02-2017 8:08pm

Yeah that pretty confirms that you will have to wait for the APU's for the budget 2/4 parts although the base 4/4 Ryzen R3 Pro 1100 would probably be around the same price of €100.

I wish AMD used the clock speed for the naming conventions last number for good clear branding but they always have to be awkward. It's quite clear from their branding which products are competing with intels counterparts though. R3, R5 and R7 are obviously competing with i3, i5 and i7 so they should be priced in that neck of the woods.

That top 1800x part is already confirmed to be at least 3.6ghz base and 4ghz boost.

It's also confirmed that single cores overclock as high as 5ghz on air so there's no problem with the architecture going that high. It's just a matter of cooling and silicon lottery.

As soon as these hit the market it will make 0 sense to get an Intel CPU unless you really want marginally better IPC at the cost of losing 2-4 cores.

Icyseanfitz · 07-02-2017 8:47pm

Depending on the price of the top 8core/16thread CPU I might switch over from my 6700k and build herself something around that. All depends on price and IPC performance though

Slutmonkey57b · 07-02-2017 8:59pm

BloodBath wrote: »

I'd imagine we will see the 2/4 core cpus when the apu line launches as there will be 4/8 and 2/4 apu's. This will obviously be a different manufacturing process so they don't have to cut down an 8/16 processor to make a 2/4 like they would with the current Ryzen cpu's. The budget cpu's will be apu's.

Which definitely shows that the apu strategy has either failed and is being mothballed, or AMD can't get it working with any decent ipc. Either way, the fallout from bulldozer is still killing them.

BloodBath · 07-02-2017 9:00pm

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

Depending on the price of the top 8core/16thread CPU I might switch over from my 6700k and build herself something around that. All depends on price and IPC performance though

That top one is gonna be around €500-600. It's pretty much on par with the €1100 i7 6900k.

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Which definitely shows that the apu strategy has either failed and is being mothballed, or AMD can't get it working with any decent ipc. Either way, the fallout from bulldozer is still killing them.

I wouldn't say failed. Maybe they just haven't got the manufacturing sorted on them yet and they aren't the top priority. These APU's are going to be using Vega GPU's as well so maybe that's causing the hold up.

Icyseanfitz · 07-02-2017 10:21pm

Ah I'll have to see proper hands on reviews before I believe its on par with 6900k, I'm hoping for all our sakes it blows Intel out of the water but I don't jump on hype trains

Xenoronin · 08-02-2017 10:42am

I hate the naming... I'm assuming "Pro" supports additional PCI-E lanes?

Cuddlesworth · 08-02-2017 11:35am

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Which definitely shows that the apu strategy has either failed and is being mothballed, or AMD can't get it working with any decent ipc. Either way, the fallout from bulldozer is still killing them.

AMD have had a sizeable IPC increase in their APU's generation to generation but more notably they have had huge efficiency gains. In the low end of the laptop market, they have been killing it. And their APU's are seriously good in that budget range for the price/performance.

On the top end, I know everybody loves their I3's but a FX-9800P is a 4 core chip with a much better onboard gpu which is to me way better then a dual core chip with a crap onboard gpu and better IPC. Day to day on a laptop like that, I prefer more threads over IPC.

A fair number of newer high DPI notebooks chug playing 4K video because the skylake chips can't keep up.

Slutmonkey57b · 08-02-2017 2:26pm

In a laptop, battery life and heat trump almost everything else. People with 4k screens tend to move from one plug socket to the next, but AMD has years of crappy corner cutting laptops (many still on the shelves of the stores) to overcome.

It's telling that they didn't release Bristol ridge laptops and desktops to review sites; if there was good news to shout about for the a 9000 series you can bet they would have done it. Instead, no launches, no information, nothing.

K.O.Kiki · 08-02-2017 3:26pm

You know it's serious when I'm considering walking into a shop & buying a magazine for the benchmarks.

Cuddlesworth · 08-02-2017 4:14pm

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

In a laptop, battery life and heat trump almost everything else. People with 4k screens tend to move from one plug socket to the next, but AMD has years of crappy corner cutting laptops (many still on the shelves of the stores) to overcome.

It's telling that they didn't release Bristol ridge laptops and desktops to review sites; if there was good news to shout about for the a 9000 series you can bet they would have done it. Instead, no launches, no information, nothing.

The market for in depth reviews of what are effectively huge variants of OEM chips is dead. What they review now is the top end Surface, Macbook, X720 spinning phablet and say how pretty it looks.

Its rare to find a review of the model laptop you want, with the chip in it you can afford(they almost always have the most expensive models). The few reviewers I have seen that compare models can at times remark that performance on even the same chips varies greatly due to the differing thermal and power limitations the system has, especially on the netbook style devices. And all of that is expected, because for most use cases the lowest end CPU's work perfectly for what most users want. Very very few people need a 62 watt I7 over a 15 watt core m/y variant or care if a image render is 3 seconds faster on one model over another. They use office applications, web based applications and watch videos/listen to music. And laptops from 8 years ago do that well, laptops with new chips excel at that.

K.O.Kiki · 08-02-2017 6:09pm

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

The market for in depth reviews of what are effectively huge variants of OEM chips is dead. What they review now is the top end Surface, Macbook, X720 spinning phablet and say how pretty it looks.

Its rare to find a review of the model laptop you want, with the chip in it you can afford(they almost always have the most expensive models). The few reviewers I have seen that compare models can at times remark that performance on even the same chips varies greatly due to the differing thermal and power limitations the system has, especially on the netbook style devices. And all of that is expected, because for most use cases the lowest end CPU's work perfectly for what most users want. Very very few people need a 62 watt I7 over a 15 watt core m/y variant or care if a image render is 3 seconds faster on one model over another. They use office applications, web based applications and watch videos/listen to music. And laptops from 8 years ago do that well, laptops with new chips excel at that.

IDK about low-power chips, my laptop's i7-5500U has a weird tendency to stutter during simple multitasking.

Cuddlesworth · 08-02-2017 11:16pm

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

IDK about low-power chips, my laptop's i7-5500U has a weird tendency to stutter during simple multitasking.

You ever checked a tool like latencymon to see if its a dodgy driver locking it up?

Skerries · 09-02-2017 1:42am

possible pricing

will56 · 09-02-2017 9:52am

US pricing indications:
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-lineup-pricing-confirmed-8-cores-low-320/

Slutmonkey57b · 09-02-2017 2:22pm

That's some incredible pre-availability, pre-conducting-any-tests assumptions about performance going on there!

However for all our sakes let's hope it's at least competitive at a lower price.

Cuddlesworth · 09-02-2017 10:29pm

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

That's some incredible pre-availability, pre-conducting-any-tests assumptions about performance going on there!

However for all our sakes let's hope it's at least competitive at a lower price.

Few people have confirmed the source of the pricing. Its expected to be within 10% of that figure for most large scale retailers.

BloodBath · 10-02-2017 5:10pm

That's insanely good. Intel can do what they want now. Drop prices, release higher clocked variants but there's nothing they can do short term to compete with this AMD line up.

Just gotta wait for more benchmarks now to see how much they whup their intel counterparts.

EoinHef · 10-02-2017 7:52pm

No Ryzen drivers for windows 7 from what i read today. Bummer for anyone clinging onto 7.

Slutmonkey57b · 10-02-2017 7:54pm

Bang goes corporate sales if that's true. Microsoft is still forcing people off xp!

wotzgoingon · 10-02-2017 7:55pm

I don't know why people want to stay on 7. Yes it was good but I moved onto 8 then 8.1 and now 10 when they were first released and I never had any problem.

I see the post above me yes corporates may want to stay but general users should just update

EoinHef · 10-02-2017 8:28pm

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Bang goes corporate sales if that's true. Microsoft is still forcing people off xp!

PCWorld,PCGamer and Tech-PowerUp all running the story so id say it is. Im sure confirmation will start popping up elsewhere now

EoinHef · 10-02-2017 8:38pm

wotzgoingon wrote: »

I don't know why people want to stay on 7. Yes it was good but I moved onto 8 then 8.1 and now 10 when they were first released and I never had any problem.

I see the post above me yes corporates may want to stay but general users should just update

At this point moving to 10 is a no brainer,pretty much free too. Also Kaby Lake is windows 10 too,so if corprates want to upgrade to the latest stuff,windows 10 is the only option. So no loss to AMD there really.

Venom · 10-02-2017 9:25pm

EoinHef wrote: »

At this point moving to 10 is a no brainer,pretty much free too. Also Kaby Lake is windows 10 too,so if corprates want to upgrade to the latest stuff,windows 10 is the only option. So no loss to AMD there really.

The big problem with corporate upgrades of windows is not so much just the cost of new hardware which can be alot, but compatibility issues with older software not being supported on the newer OS. This can be a huge problem for a business due to buying a new package, transferring data from the old to new system and then having to train in staff on it.

wotzgoingon · 10-02-2017 9:53pm

When I was in college they upgraded from XP to 7 and loads of programs wouldn't work. I think for some programs we used VM's and not all would work through them either.

EoinHef · 10-02-2017 11:03pm

Venom wrote: »

The big problem with corporate upgrades of windows is not so much just the cost of new hardware which can be alot, but compatibility issues with older software not being supported on the newer OS. This can be a huge problem for a business due to buying a new package, transferring data from the old to new system and then having to train in staff on it.

Aye i get that,what i mean is they would also need to upgrade their OS for Kaby Lake too so Ryzen not having windows 7 drivers wont be a hinderance against kaby lake anyway.

AMD Zen Discussion Thread

Comments