AMD Zen and Vega

[Niobium]

 

 

this new CPU is a big deal that could really shake up the market and drive down the price of high end CPUs. i don't really have much to say about this that has already been said, except that apparently even intel fans are excited for it. since intel has had a monopoly on the CPU market, they have only made marginal improvements on their CPUs in each generation, and now that AMD will be stronger competiton it means that intel will have to actually try.

 

my only concern is that the price was not announced. i hope the upgrade path for AM4 is good too.

[Fozzy Fozborne]

It's such a shame AMD has flat-out lied and deceived so many times in the past. I'm honestly surprised they have any fans left.

 

Does no one remember the Phenom series, the FX series, and... well everything since the Athlon?

 

Not a fanboy, former/present owner of: 939 3500+, AM2 X2 4200+ (now a keychain), X2 5400+ black edition (retired), FM2 7850k (returned).

 

It makes me sad to type this on an Intel 6700k. Maybe if AMD would have released Zen at only their 4th or 5th delay I'd be on a shiny AM4 CPU.

[anus]

Dude I was just about to post this. I haven't been this excited for a new tech release for a while. The Core 2 series was the last, but it's nothing compared to the Jordan game 6 AMD is pulling, which is nothing short of incredible. The CPU industry really needed better competition. Intel's pricing was getting insanely outrageous. Also f*ck Intel because they are dodgy as f*ck and I've stopped buying anything from them.

 

For those who haven't watched the video, AMD's upcoming Ryzen desktop CPUs (Q1 2017) running on the AM4 socket with DDR4 RAM will be outperforming the top Intel offerings at a significantly lower price. So hold off your purchases.

 

Btw, this benchmark by AMD has been replicated and found to be plausible.

 

I wouldn't worry about upgrade path, AMD has always had better upgrade paths than Intel. It's always a smooth transition. At the same time though, with how different the Ryzen chips are to the Bulldozers and Piledriver AM3+ chips, I wouldn't be surprised if an entirely new chipset is needed.

 

The only qualm I have with this is the lack of quad channel memory support. While there isn't a huge gain in performance from the jump to quad channel from dual channel, I still feel it will increase the performance advantage AMD has over Intel at launch and possibly extend its advantage for longer which would give them more time to better the next revision.

 

Also SenseMI is giving me a nerdgasm. f*cking cool as hell.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Warlord.

[yoječ]

I wouldn't worry about upgrade path, AMD has always had better upgrade paths than Intel. It's always a smooth transition. At the same time though, with how different the Ryzen chips are to the Bulldozers and Piledriver AM3+ chips, I wouldn't be surprised if an entirely new chipset is needed.

AM3/AM3+ and AM4 mobos and CPUs are entirely incompatible. AM4 will use all new chipset. To be honest - this is very, VERY good. AMD chipsets have barely changed from the AM2 era and I really feel like it was holding them back significantly, and forgoing the backwards compatibility is a huge leap forward. This allowed for some fundamental changes, for example IIRC a huge portion of the chipset's functionality has already been included in the CPU itself.

 

I wish the very best for AMD, but I will remain sceptical until Ryzen CPUs released and tested. If there's one thing that AMD taught me, it is not to trust prerelease info. I'm very curious how they will turn out. Maybe I'll finally upgrade my Xeon X3440.

 

In any case, I definitely do not expect AMD to outperform Intel in the high-end market. All I want are reasonably priced, power-efficient mid-range CPUs. That would be a good start.

Edited December 18, 2016 by yojc

[Niobium]

i hope AMD makes it reasonably priced too. if they make their zen expensive like intel's CPUs it would be a dick move. it will also be a dumb move, because nobody would buy AMD as everyone is already on intel, and if AMD is just as expensive, what would be the point of switching? they need to get back some control of the market.

[Misumi]

 

Not a fanboy, former/present owner of: 939 3500+, AM2 X2 4200+ (now a keychain), X2 5400+ black edition (retired), FM2 7850k (returned).

 

Lmao. Is your 4200+ really a keychain now? I'd like to see. I still have my AMD 4200+ rig from 2006 sitting in storage.

[Fozzy Fozborne]

 

 

Not a fanboy, former/present owner of: 939 3500+, AM2 X2 4200+ (now a keychain), X2 5400+ black edition (retired), FM2 7850k (returned).

 

Lmao. Is your 4200+ really a keychain now? I'd like to see. I still have my AMD 4200+ rig from 2006 sitting in storage.

 

100%, I drilled a small hole then sanded off the edges and the outside pins.

[spoiler]

[/spoiler]

Edited December 18, 2016 by Fozzy Fozborne

[Khephera]

I'm pretty excited for this. I've watched a live stream video commenting this very conference. I hope the price for the Ryzen CPU (the 8 core version) is somewhere between $500-$700 (or Euro in my case), not higher. There will be 6 and 4 core versions, too. Anyone else noticed that typo "AM4 Platfrom" on the screen?^^

Edited December 21, 2016 by Khephera_87_GER

[Niobium]

ryzen prices have been leaked.

 

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-ryzen-pricing/

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/antonyleather/2017/02/09/amd-ryzen-prices-revealed-massive-blow-to-intel/#647a24126131

 

their cheapest 8 core 16 thread CPU is $317. holy fu*king sh*t i love me some good prices.

 

this is extremely game-changing if true. imo i think it is believable.

Edited February 9, 2017 by Niobium

[SilverRST]

And in meanwhile Intel or leaks claimed to improve the Kaby Lake or Coffee Lake 8000 series by 15%. Kinda more than the lame 5-7% each year.

We need competition and competition is good for us.

[Niobium]

And in meanwhile Intel or leaks claimed to improve the Kaby Lake or Coffee Lake 8000 series by 15%. Kinda more than the lame 5-7% each year.

We need competition and competition is good for us.

i saw this video where the i5 7400 had the exact same performance as the i5 6500.

 

 

i am a bit skeptical about the source of the video, but let's assume it is true. since the i5 7400 and the i5 6500 are the almost same price (at least in Canada and the states), and their performance is the same, i don't believe intel improved kaby lake over skylake (other than adding technologies i don't care about as a gamer).

 

besides, there are ways of overclocking a non k skylake cpu, but not a non k kaby lake. so as a gamer, i think skylake is the better option and they made kaby lake worse

Edited February 10, 2017 by Niobium

[yoječ]

Kaby Lake CPUs were never intended to be substantially different from Skylake CPUs, so the negligible difference in performance was to be expected. It's the same story as with Haswell and Devil's Canyon. Coffee Lake will be reworked more heavily.

[Niobium]

am4 mobo prices leaked

 

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-am4-asus-motherboard-prices-leaked/

[Reformed Squid]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11143/amd-launch-ryzen-52-more-ipc-eight-cores-for-under-330-preorder-today-on-sale-march-2nd

 

get hyped

[Sombra]

If Ryzen does as well as it's predicted with the 1800X coming in marginally (2/3%?) better performance wise than a 6900k at a lower TDP/higher IPC and half the price to the point you could do a full AM4 1800X/16GB DDR4/mobo build for the price of one 6900k Intel are either going to have to slash their prices to compete but I can't see them price matching (maybe $700 or so for the 6900k) or somehow release a new chip quickly that competes - they're toting the 15% performance increase for Coffee Lake but iirc they said that too for Kaby even though that seemingly ended up being higher stock clocks, 10-bit HEVC decoding and some other stuff I can't recall. Either way it'll be nice to have some competition in the desktop market even if I don't plan on upgrading any time soon

[sivispacem]

I'm pretty hesitant about Ryzen doing anything like as well as they say. Similar claims git banded about with Bulldozer and Piledriver and they turned out to be bollocks.

[Sombra]

True but the initial reports and leaked benchmarks seem to be lining up, personally I'd like to see actual real world application comparisons used instead of stuff like Cinebench which imo can differ wildly between runs.

[SilverRST]

If all gets true and no false promises, then I hope Intlel will get REKT! REAL HARD!

I wonder, what if all the benches turns to be true and Intlel loses marketshare, will they decrease their prices?

If Intlel actually decrease their prices, customers will then suspects they have been ripping us off all along.

Edited February 23, 2017 by SilverRST

[Natasha]

I'm waiting to see the real world tests. Benchmarks are all well and good but we don't play benchmarks or photoedit with benchmarks. We need side by side comparisons with real world applications. I don't think I've owned an AMD driven computer since 2004/5 in truth.

[HaRdSTyLe_83]

If all gets true and no false promises, then I hope Intlel will get REKT! REAL HARD!

I wonder, what if all the benches turns to be true and Intlel loses marketshare, will they decrease their prices?

If Intlel actually decrease their prices, customers will then suspects they have been ripping us off all along.

 

does anyone have any doubts that prices are dictated by demand and not by quality of the product?

until now intel didnt had competition for that market. so they inflated the price of the product. I never bought AMD Cpu's or Gpu's not bcuz the product is better or worse but bcuz they always come to late, hope they fix that.

as a Gamer only, i would still probably go with the i7-7700k instead of any of those just so i wouldnt need to switch the mobo, but my i5-6600k will still keep up with games so ill skip this new cpu's

Edited February 23, 2017 by HaRdSTyLe_83

[SilverRST]

 

If all gets true and no false promises, then I hope Intlel will get REKT! REAL HARD!

I wonder, what if all the benches turns to be true and Intlel loses marketshare, will they decrease their prices?

If Intlel actually decrease their prices, customers will then suspects they have been ripping us off all along.

 

does anyone have any doubts that prices are dictated by demand and not by quality of the product?

until now intel didnt had competition for that market. so they inflated the price of the product. I never bought AMD Cpu's or Gpu's not bcuz the product is better or worse but bcuz they always come to late, hope they fix that.

as a Gamer only, i would still probably go with the i7-7700k instead of any of those just so i wouldnt need to switch the mobo, but my i5-6600k will still keep up with games so ill skip this new cpu's

 

We don't know for sure. It took/takes AMD way too long to come up with new CPUs/GPUs that are actually as better or better than Intel.

Customers have lost trust in AMD and if AMD priced their products higher, people will still go for Intel. AMD have to do a lot to retrieve trust in them.

[K^2]

For those who haven't watched the video, AMD's upcoming Ryzen desktop CPUs (Q1 2017) running on the AM4 socket with DDR4 RAM will be outperforming the top Intel offerings at a significantly lower price. So hold off your purchases.

Yeah, so that, as usual, turned out to be quite misleading. Yes, the Ryzen 7 1800X about matches Core i7 6900K at half the price. But that's a fairly narrow niche to compete on. If you are made of money, and simply going for performance, Intel definitely has chips that outperform any of the Ryzens.

 

On a more practical side, in the actual category of under-$500, Ryzen achieves superiority purely by core count. On a single-core comparison, i7 7700K blows even 1800X completely out of the water, never mind the Ryzen 7 1700 that it's priced to compete with. And while modern applications have been getting better at utilizing cores, even saturating 7700K's 8 virtual cores is tough. So most of the performance bottlenecks are going to be due to single-core performance, where 7700K outperforms 1700 by about a quarter.

 

So the bottom line is, if you're trying to throw money at a custom build for maximum power, your best choice is still Intel. Perhaps, with something like 6950K. If you're trying to build a balanced high-end gaming PC on a sane budget, your best choice is still Intel with the completely unbeatable performance of 7700K.

 

The only situation in which you should be reconsidering going with Intel right now and opting for an AMD Ryzen instead is if your primary use is going to be rendering. This is the only common consumer application for which you actually want 16 virtual cores for maximum performance. Everything else is either highly specialized and you probably want to run it on GPU or a cloud anyways, or is going to be handled better by a 7700K.

 

But yes, if you're, say, an animator and expect hours upon hours of rendering, go get yourself a Ryzen. It's a good deal.

 

P.S. Here are some benchmarks.

[HaRdSTyLe_83]

 

On a more practical side, in the actual category of under-$500, Ryzen achieves superiority purely by core count. On a single-core comparison, i7 7700K blows even 1800X completely out of the water, never mind the Ryzen 7 1700 that it's priced to compete with. And while modern applications have been getting better at utilizing cores, even saturating 7700K's 8 virtual cores is tough. So most of the performance bottlenecks are going to be due to single-core performance, where 7700K outperforms 1

 

"pre-order canceled"

 

lol, joking, as always AMD just showed what they wanted you to see, but i guess no one expected that....

[yoječ]

Well, I feel like it's not the AMD who overhyped the release, but the people themselves. To be honest, this really looks like a very competitive CPU. Now I really want to see a 4C/8T variant, that could be a killer.

[Niobium]

apparently the reviews are all over the place...

 

i'm just gonna wait for r5 anyway, as the 1700 is still too expensive

Edited March 2, 2017 by Niobium

[Flachbau]

AMD should have launched some lower priced stuff to compete with Intel models like the Pentiums and such. I know not everybody is into buying stuff like that, but a battle between the Kaby Lake G4650 and whatever AMD provided would have been really interesting. I can see why they didn't do this though, they were more focused on the higher end entries.

[Niobium]

AMD should have launched some lower priced stuff to compete with Intel models like the Pentiums and such. I know not everybody is into buying stuff like that, but a battle between the Kaby Lake G4650 and whatever AMD provided would have been really interesting. I can see why they didn't do this though, they were more focused on the higher end entries.

they are releasing cpus to compete with the i5s and i3s. i would like to see a pentium competitor though, since right now the pentium is the budget king.

[K^2]

Now I really want to see a 4C/8T variant, that could be a killer.

I don't know if they'll have a whole lot of play in the 4C market. The i5 7600K will absolutely slaughter Ryzen architecture at 4 cores. So they'd have to drop well into sub-$200 market with these to be competitive, and that just seems unlikely.

 

What might be absolutely viable, though, is 6C/12T. The R7 dye is two blocks of 4-cores, so it's not trivially split, but given the requirements on the 1700/1800 lines, I'm willing to bet there are a ton of dyes with 1-2 rejected cores. Something like that would comfortably compete with 7600K and maybe even 7700K in multi-threaded applications. That can allow them to remain competitive in the $250-$300 range.

 

.

[DEALUX]

AMD is apparently

to disable Intel features (like disabling turbo boost for all cores) when they compare CPUs. So basically AMD is just as scummy as a company as any other. This is why I only buy stuff based on how well they perform, and not to prop up some company that I think will be good to people. All corporations suck.

[HaRdSTyLe_83]

AMD is apparently

to disable Intel features (like disabling turbo boost for all cores) when they compare CPUs. So basically AMD is just as scummy as a company as any other. This is why I only buy stuff based on how well they perform, and not to prop up some company that I think will be good to people. All corporations suck.

 

 

that sh*t is the biggest clustef*ck ive seen, underclocking intel chips and running them in dual channel so they can advertise they're own chip to be as good..

the chips are good, but that move to make them look so mutch better is bitting them in the ass.

 

the markting department should just focus on the price and not fake results to hype the performance

Edited March 3, 2017 by HaRdSTyLe_83