AMD Zen.. .. NO LONGER Excited.. bad news!!

[looncraz]

There's still this small issue right now of overclocking..  AMD needs to hit 4.7ghz consistently on most chips..

(we don't know how difficult this will be)

Ryzen won't need to exceed 4Ghz with overclocking to be competitive.  8-cores and SMT make up for a lot of frequency when you have high IPC.  That's why the 6900k can command its premium and maintain good sales.  6900k can only rarely exceed 4.3Ghz without a massive voltage push.

Ryzen looks to be only slightly worse at overclocking than the 6900k but with better multi-threaded scaling, that'll likely become a wash.

The quad core and six core Ryzen CPUs should have a little easier time overclocking.  The 1600X, for example, is a mix of cut-down dice and almost cherry-picked dice... where one or two cores has a fault or can't clock well enough. With stock 3.6/4Ghz clocks, that's looking good.

The quad cores should do even a little better.

I don't expect 4.7Ghz to be the norm on any of them, though.

[tp4tissue]

There's still this small issue right now of overclocking..  AMD needs to hit 4.7ghz consistently on most chips..

(we don't know how difficult this will be)

Ryzen won't need to exceed 4Ghz with overclocking to be competitive.  8-cores and SMT make up for a lot of frequency when you have high IPC.  That's why the 6900k can command its premium and maintain good sales.  6900k can only rarely exceed 4.3Ghz without a massive voltage push.

Ryzen looks to be only slightly worse at overclocking than the 6900k but with better multi-threaded scaling, that'll likely become a wash.

The quad core and six core Ryzen CPUs should have a little easier time overclocking.  The 1600X, for example, is a mix of cut-down dice and almost cherry-picked dice... where one or two cores has a fault or can't clock well enough. With stock 3.6/4Ghz clocks, that's looking good.

The quad cores should do even a little better.

I don't expect 4.7Ghz to be the norm on any of them, though.

It can beat the 6900k , that's fine n'all..

But if it can't match 4.7ghz on MOST chips,   Intel will still have a good 10-20% lead on single thread.

AMD needs to be within 10% of Intel to be competitive..

Otherwise,  if they end up playing with PRICE only,   Intel would still win.

[looncraz]

It can beat the 6900k , that's fine n'all..

But if it can't match 4.7ghz on MOST chips,   Intel will still have a good 10-20% lead on single thread.

AMD needs to be within 10% of Intel to be competitive..

Otherwise,  if they end up playing with PRICE only,   Intel would still win.

Most people don't buy CPUs that are at the high-end.  AMD is aiming for the bulk of the market while apparently managing to topple the 8-core king.

Broadwell IPC at 4Ghz is more than most people have or need - even gamers.  AMD has, it seems, accomplished that... with eight cores.

Lower core count CPUs will have more overclocking headroom, but single threaded performance is becoming increasingly less important.  Even the FX-8350 is starting become usable in games.  Six cores is the sweet-spot for gaming now - and AMD can deliver a 4Ghz six-core CPU at bargain prices on a competent platform.  That's a win.

Internet browsers aren't even single threaded any more.  Firefox, which was one of the worst, currently has 112 threads running in two process on my system.  One window, 11 tabs.  If a plugin is used yet another process, with even more threads, is created.

I have 77 processes running on my system right now - only 6 of them have 1 thread.

[tp4tissue]

It can beat the 6900k , that's fine n'all..

But if it can't match 4.7ghz on MOST chips,   Intel will still have a good 10-20% lead on single thread.

AMD needs to be within 10% of Intel to be competitive..

Otherwise,  if they end up playing with PRICE only,   Intel would still win.

Most people don't buy CPUs that are at the high-end.  AMD is aiming for the bulk of the market while apparently managing to topple the 8-core king.

Broadwell IPC at 4Ghz is more than most people have or need - even gamers.  AMD has, it seems, accomplished that... with eight cores.

Lower core count CPUs will have more overclocking headroom, but single threaded performance is becoming increasingly less important.  Even the FX-8350 is starting become usable in games.  Six cores is the sweet-spot for gaming now - and AMD can deliver a 4Ghz six-core CPU at bargain prices on a competent platform.  That's a win.

Internet browsers aren't even single threaded any more.  Firefox, which was one of the worst, currently has 112 threads running in two process on my system.  One window, 11 tabs.  If a plugin is used yet another process, with even more threads, is created.

I have 77 processes running on my system right now - only 6 of them have 1 thread.

Well, multi-thread is important in Some consumer applications..

But, NOT-Really, because almost none of these utilize a constant-lengthy load, it's mostly sporadic..



Now, Games will continue to be dominated by Single Core performance, because no matter what,  It all has to composite via 1 thread..   This process will almost always determine the maximum final output..   Multicore will help certain games which thread physics and spreadsheet elements,   But, it ends there, if the final compositing is single core bound.



I don't know how intel will play this out,  But I don't see why they can't crush all amd purchases by price adjusting..


At the end of the day,  a lead is a lead..

[looncraz]

Well, multi-thread is important in Some consumer applications..

But, NOT-Really, because almost none of these utilize a constant-lengthy load, it's mostly sporadic..



Now, Games will continue to be dominated by Single Core performance, because no matter what,  It all has to composite via 1 thread..   This process will almost always determine the maximum final output..   Multicore will help certain games which thread physics and spreadsheet elements,   But, it ends there, if the final compositing is single core bound.



I don't know how intel will play this out,  But I don't see why they can't crush all amd purchases by price adjusting..


At the end of the day,  a lead is a lead..

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-02/cpu-skalierung-kerne-spiele-test/#diagramm-battlefield-1-dx11-multiplayer-fps

The higher-core count CPUs are most frequently leading the pack when it comes to gaming than ever before.  And that's despite only hitting ~4Ghz.

And a lead is worthless if you're paying 30%+ more for 10% more performance in one confined usage scenario.  Unless you have more money than sense (which, I guess, is technically my case as I splurged for the 1800X).

[tp4tissue]

Well, multi-thread is important in Some consumer applications..

But, NOT-Really, because almost none of these utilize a constant-lengthy load, it's mostly sporadic..



Now, Games will continue to be dominated by Single Core performance, because no matter what,  It all has to composite via 1 thread..   This process will almost always determine the maximum final output..   Multicore will help certain games which thread physics and spreadsheet elements,   But, it ends there, if the final compositing is single core bound.



I don't know how intel will play this out,  But I don't see why they can't crush all amd purchases by price adjusting..


At the end of the day,  a lead is a lead..

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-02/cpu-skalierung-kerne-spiele-test/#diagramm-battlefield-1-dx11-multiplayer-fps

The higher-core count CPUs are most frequently leading the pack when it comes to gaming than ever before.  And that's despite only hitting ~4Ghz.

And a lead is worthless if you're paying 30%+ more for 10% more performance in one confined usage scenario.  Unless you have more money than sense (which, I guess, is technically my case as I splurged for the 1800X).

A lead is worthless if you charge more..  Which is why Intel will be FORCED to price adjust..

But, AFTER the price adjust,  what will AMD do..

They're still playing second fiddle..



You're looking at the game as it is today..


But you SHOULD look at what's TO COME.



For example..  Intel Drops 6900k to $500 or even $450, because it doesn't actually cost anywhere near $1000 to make.. The size of the die determines price.. and they're about the same size.

THen drop the x99 to $200-250

Now we have 8 core Parity..


So, further down the line,  Drop 7700k to $200-250..   


Sell a new Intel 6 or 8 core against the 1700/1700x AMD @ $300-350



Now, what's AMD to do..   they go down another price tier ?   What is so compelling about AMD exactly..

[tp4tissue]

With reasonable certainty, that within 8-12 months, AMD will go back to 2-3 Dollars per share, within 1-1.5 year up to 4-6 dollars.. 


It's inconceivable that INTEL spend billions per year on R&D for 10 years , and have nothing up their sleaves..


(but the key here is,  INTEL is still In The Lead),   which means, it doesn't have to show-hand,  only reel in the Oppression a bit..

HAHAHHA



Don't mistake my posts for Intel-Fanboism,


I hope INTEL DIAF..    but I don't see that happening..   Unless the Zen can go to 5ghz+ within a short Refresh @ the fab..  (without 1.8volts and Liquid Nitrogen)

[looncraz]

A lead is worthless if you charge more..  Which is why Intel will be FORCED to price adjust..

Intel has only rarely responded to competition by reducing prices on existing products. They will release a new product with a more agreeable price, but they will continue to charge a premium.

Large companies are judged based on a few metrics.  Market competitiveness isn't one of them.  Product margin, revenue, and profit are.

If Intel can still sell its overpriced CPUs, which they can, they will keep the prices high because that doesn't hurt product margin or profit, though it may reduce revenue in that segment... but they can make up for that with lower-tier products, to hide the damage.

That is what Intel has always done, I don't expect them to change.  If the price drops on the 6900k, it will only be by $200 or so.  Intel will not acknowledge a competitor's claim to superiority.

But, AFTER the price adjust,  what will AMD do..

They're still playing second fiddle..

Not second fiddle, the reactionary party.  Right now, Intel is the reactionary party - because AMD has challenged their product marketability.  We are all waiting for Intel to react.  So many seem to think they will drop prices to match AMD... but they've never done that.  Pentium 4 carried a premium over the faster-tiered Athlons.

Athlon 64 3200+ was ~$200... as was the Pentium 4 530 (3Ghz).  The Athlon would win in 2/3rds of the benchmarks by 15% or more, but Intel still charged the same for less performance.  They did this because they knew they could sell more just fine = based purely on their name. That hasn't changed, except this time Intel HEDT platform has more to offer.  Much more connectivity, many more PCI-e lanes, and so on that attracts a certain crowd that wouldn't buy AMD if it were twice as fast at half the cost.

Now, what's AMD to do..   they go down another price tier ?   What is so compelling about AMD exactly..

AMD has more products coming out - FOUR Zen versions are planned, with one already only a year away.

Intel has more, of course, but they didn't expect AMD to catch up as much as they have (seriously, who did? I knew the architecture quite well and my highest-end estimate last year was 49% total performance uplift over Excavator... my lowest was an even 40%).  It takes years to make changes to architectures, We've been hearing about Coffee Lake for years now, and Intel has already disclosed that it is just another bump like Kaby Lake.

Sure, that's enough to keep current Ryzen at bay, but AMD will be hot on its trail with Zen version 2.  Intel will release more affordable Coffee Lake SKUs, most likely, in order to counter the looming AMD threat, but they will maintain the bulk of their high pricing structure.

After that, Intel has 10nm Cannon Lake.  This will be a data-center first product in 2018.  Zen version 3 should arrive fairly close to Cannon Lake's desktop appearance.  There's no telling how that match-up will fair out, but Coffee and Cannon Lake designs have been finalized for some time - Intel can't do much extra to them at this point... they have to let the chips fall where they may.  Intel has yet to break ground on 7nm... AMD is already working on 7nm products with Global Foundries using IBM's 7nm tech... which is derived from an earlier partnership before Global Foundries was separated from AMD.

AMD is in the superior position here, which is unexpected, they have three moves planned and ready, Intel has two and has been forced to re-envision the future after that.

It will be very interesting to see how this all works out in the end.  I don't expect AMD to be willing to play the bargain card if they hold the upper hand.  They didn't last time this happened.

[looncraz]

With reasonable certainty, that within 8-12 months, AMD will go back to 2-3 Dollars per share, within 1-1.5 year up to 4-6 dollars.. 

It's inconceivable that INTEL spend billions per year on R&D for 10 years , and have nothing up their sleaves..

(but the key here is,  INTEL is still In The Lead),   which means, it doesn't have to show-hand,  only reel in the Oppression a bit..

HAHAHHA

Don't mistake my posts for Intel-Fanboism,

I hope INTEL DIAF..    but I don't see that happening..   Unless the Zen can go to 5ghz+ within a short Refresh @ the fab..  (without 1.8volts and Liquid Nitrogen)

Intel hasn't been spending their money developing new architectures to compete with AMD, though.  They've been spending it all over the place.

And AMD only spends their money on designs, the process tech development was paid for by Samsung and Global Foundries.

Together, the amount of money invested in Zen DWARFS Intel's CPU investments. By billions.

Design was the cheapest part.  Four years of running AMD and paying for the engineering team.  AMD reused all of their existing IP.

Believe it or not, it has been LONG known that AMD has superior ALUs to Intel.  Think about it - AMD only used two ALUs in the construction cores, they had no choice but to make them as good as they could.  Zen's FPU is actually only some 20% better than Excavator's.  It just doesn't have the CMT penalty... and has one FPU per integer core.

AMD didn't do anything amazing on any singular part of the design, they just took their existing parts and put them together in a smarter way - and better than Intel's way of common ports on a unified scheduler.  They had no choice - they wanted this to be a product that came out in a reasonable time frame.

They reused Excavator's HDL (high density library), this is clearly visible from the die shots.  The decoders are a rip right from Bulldozer and everything else is just an evolution of existing AMD tech.  AMD wet their beaks on 14nm LPP using Polaris - but 14nm LPP is actually a mature process, having products millions of chips at multiple foundries.

About the only thing genuinely new in Ryzen are the caches and the uop cache.

Some Ryzen CPUs will probably already hit 5Ghz on a few cores, but not all eight.  Maybe not even on four.  I know someone has already achieved 6GHz on one core, so there's more hope coming.  Zen ver2 will have higher IPC and most likely clock higher.  That combination should lead to a 20% or so improvement in performance, but maybe only 15%.  So, at least for the next 24 months, Intel and AMD will be locked in their current relative positions, with only a few months leeway when Coffee Lake comes out before Zen ver2 does.

[tp4tissue]

It takes about a year to build a data center,  and another year of tweaking to get it to not bug-out..


AMD has at maximum , that 2 years to Compel a switch..


The consumer side is just for show.... If they can't land a deal in big data,  it's all going to fall back down.


That 95watt and 65 watt looks good..  But, it's not enough of a power save for a rebuild,  and there isn't an off the shelf board partner for them yet.

[Elrick]

Overall Zen should force intel to open the gate,  no more k-series bull ****..


the 7700k @ ~250ishh sounds plausible..



IMHO,  if intel just respond INSTANTLY , say,  TOMORROW,   they can kill off ALL momentum for AMD.. before it even arrives..


IDK, why they don't do that..   ATTACK MODE..

Having another competitor helps them to steal designs from others simply because Intel has always done that in the past.   Intel never truly innovates in anything but it knows how to apply other designs into their own hardware then later fight in court (if need be) for years until an outcome occurs.  Because certain companies become huge doesn't mean they are any smarter in implementing any real/unique designs into production.  In fact if AMD never existed we will most probably still be using P4 hardware and paying close to $1000USD per chip.

In the corporate world it's always good to have others around you, to help stem the tide of any anti-competitive organizations and groups hell bent on attacking your current status or position.  If you are the ONLY one dominating the field or industry, then you are subject to never ending attacks from the public and self absorbed parasites wanting to diminish your power within the marketplace.

[nubbinator]

Fingers crossed the X300 boards come out pretty quick.  I would love to do a Ryzen/Vega mITX build so I can actually support a company I like.

[Leslieann]

There's still this small issue right now of overclocking..  AMD needs to hit 4.7ghz consistently on most chips..

IMHO,  if intel just respond INSTANTLY , say,  TOMORROW,   they can kill off ALL momentum for AMD.. before it even arrives..

IDK, why they don't do that..   ATTACK MODE..

No, they don't need to hit that overclock, overclocking is a selling point to enthusiasts, the average person doesn't care.

Intel doesn't care, because they know, the people who want that level of performance, most will still buy Intel. Companies will also still buy Intel. There is an old saying that still rings true, "No one ever got fired for buying Intel"... Unless it was during the Rambus days, even then it was rare. Intel will probably act almost oblivious for 2 or 3 years and only if AMD builds momentum.  Why respond and cut your throat unless you need to when chopping prices will take years to return to what they want.

Intel always plays the long con. They will take a small hit now (lose a small segment) to reap the rewards later (maintain high prices).

Most people don't buy CPUs that are at the high-end.  AMD is aiming for the bulk of the market while apparently managing to topple the 8-core king.

This.
The average gamer doesn't buy an I7, they buy an I5 or AMD and then a nice video card. Getting an Intel Extreme chip for the price of a lower end I7 though... that might entice them and as they age, the price will probably drop (AMD tends to do this). By which point, the performance of an overclocked I7 for the price of an I5? Gamers will eat that up even if it doesn't overclock at all.

It's inconceivable that INTEL spend billions per year on R&D for 10 years , and have nothing up their sleaves..

They probably do, but don't expect Intel to really reveal it just because AMD appears to have caught up. They will want to make sure AMD can hold the course before breaking out the big guns and then they still have to ramp up production. Just because you have the technology doesn't mean you have the facility capable of producing it in large amounts. This is actually a place both companies have struggled especially as Moore's Law comes to an end.

That said, Intel may not have as much up their sleeve as you think, they've been focused on low power lately, trying to stave off ARM.

Also, in case you didn't know, AMD and Intel have a trade deal where they share their work.  Anything Intel has, AMD also has, minus the fabrication facility.

It takes about a year to build a data center,  and another year of tweaking to get it to not bug-out..

AMD has at maximum , that 2 years to Compel a switch..

This is precisely why Intel won't be terrified enough of AMD to lower prices right away, and also why AMD targeted workstations and gamers. AMD could take a decent chunk of the gaming market and Intel will just shrug it off or turn a different direction. When AMD finally caught them in Floating Point (grunt), Intel started pushing 3d, an area AMD wasn't necessarily weak, but not necessarily their focus.

None of this is new, many of us have seen this cycle a few times now.

[tp4tissue]

OKOKOK..


So many new rumors.. No way to cover them all..


But IT SEEEEEEEEMs   like AMD is really making a comeback.. 



Still waiting on overclocking results..   but intel PRICE ADJUST imminent

[tjcaustin]

OKOKOK..


So many new rumors.. No way to cover them all..


But IT SEEEEEEEEMs   like AMD is really making a comeback.. 



Still waiting on overclocking results..   but intel PRICE ADJUST imminent

Intel has already dropped some prices - http://hothardware.com/news/intel-reacting-to-amd-ryzen-apparently-cutting-prices-on-core-i7

[Findecanor]

About the only thing genuinely new in Ryzen are the caches and the uop cache.

Embrace the glory that is the right Alt key with an international keymap or spell it out as it should be pronounced. Please!

Or else I will beat you over the head with a ten ecks speed CDROM player ... :-þ

BTW. I would also like to encourage you to post in other parts of the forum, so that you don't look so much like an astroturfer ...

Intel has already dropped some prices - http://hothardware.com/news/intel-reacting-to-amd-ryzen-apparently-cutting-prices-on-core-i7

That is just Microcenter. It is too early to see a trend.
I have seen that news items everywhere the past couple days, and I'm a bit tired of it already. We don't have Microcenter over here. Wake me up when Intel slashes their prices to distributors more than 10% (which is how much Intel prices have risen since summer).

[tp4tissue]

OKOKOK..


So many new rumors.. No way to cover them all..


But IT SEEEEEEEEMs   like AMD is really making a comeback.. 



Still waiting on overclocking results..   but intel PRICE ADJUST imminent

Intel has already dropped some prices - http://hothardware.com/news/intel-reacting-to-amd-ryzen-apparently-cutting-prices-on-core-i7

Yea, microcenter's usually ahead on prices.. but it's ONLY microcenter so far.

[xtrafrood]

OKOKOK..


So many new rumors.. No way to cover them all..


But IT SEEEEEEEEMs   like AMD is really making a comeback.. 



Still waiting on overclocking results..   but intel PRICE ADJUST imminent

Intel has already dropped some prices - http://hothardware.com/news/intel-reacting-to-amd-ryzen-apparently-cutting-prices-on-core-i7

Yea, microcenter's usually ahead on prices.. but it's ONLY microcenter so far.

Random price cuts. Meanwhile no price cuts for i3. If you're going to randomly cut the prices of CPUs you might as well cut ALL THE PRICES of the CPUs. Gee whiz guys

[tp4tissue]

Random price cuts. Meanwhile no price cuts for i3. If you're going to randomly cut the prices of CPUs you might as well cut ALL THE PRICES of the CPUs. Gee whiz guys

Well i3s are not big sellers for microcenter..


If people go to microcenter to buy cpus,  they're gonna be the online crowd that go with the 6700k 7700k



What we're hoping here is Budget boards coming out which do decent OC on UNLOCKED i3s..


Back in the day,   Pentium 4 days..   We had $60 motherboards + $80 cpus that could overclock and play all the latest games a 85% the framerate of the Top end cpu ..


That might come back..

[Fire Brand]

Fingers crossed the X300 boards come out pretty quick.  I would love to do a Ryzen/Vega mITX build so I can actually support a company I like.

Same I'm hoping for the ITX boards to release soonish, most of the current boards shown are god aweful RGB trash hope Gigabyte or someone does just a normal board

[xtrafrood]

Random price cuts. Meanwhile no price cuts for i3. If you're going to randomly cut the prices of CPUs you might as well cut ALL THE PRICES of the CPUs. Gee whiz guys

Well i3s are not big sellers for microcenter..


If people go to microcenter to buy cpus,  they're gonna be the online crowd that go with the 6700k 7700k



What we're hoping here is Budget boards coming out which do decent OC on UNLOCKED i3s..


Back in the day,   Pentium 4 days..   We had $60 motherboards + $80 cpus that could overclock and play all the latest games a 85% the framerate of the Top end cpu ..


That might come back..

During those Pentium 4 days I was paying $0 for Pentium 2 or 3 CPUs and $0 for complimentary motherboards so I definitely would not know the prices off the top of my head. I guess people were reluctant to shuck PCs on to Ebay back then. The bubble popped and people hated computers? idk. I do recall that AMD was the king of heavy lifting back then, though.

[tp4tissue]

During those Pentium 4 days I was paying $0 for Pentium 2 or 3 CPUs and $0 for complimentary motherboards so I definitely would not know the prices off the top of my head. I guess people were reluctant to shuck PCs on to Ebay back then. The bubble popped and people hated computers? idk. I do recall that AMD was the king of heavy lifting back then, though.

Pentium 3 is conroe..  so it's like a really low clocked core2duo.. so the 1ghz version was pretty comparable to the p4s of the time.

[tp4tissue]

Sigh.......  Somewhat bad news guys..



only ~4.1ghz.. overclocked so far..

Tp4's worst fear realized..

And Apparently Tp4 predicted the performance gap EXACTLY.. I was right all along.. that looncraz got my hopes up, all for nothing.. sigh......

Damn you looncraz.. hahahahaha


This is really bad....   even if it could concievably get to 4.5 the next cycle,  that's late... intel has so much time to respond..

Sigh......

fffffffffff..  now we gotta keep buying more bull**** intel motherboards



Ugh... want to cry.. just crawl under my bed and die.. jesus.. 

[Halverson]

Sigh.......  Somewhat bad news guys..



only ~4.1ghz.. overclocked so far..


This is really bad....   even if it could concievably get to 4.5 the next cycle,  that's late... intel has so much time to respond..

Sigh......

Time to eat popcorn and cry

[tp4tissue]

Time to eat popcorn and cry

Here's what I'm hoping.. AMD Fine Wine..


SOMEHOW.... their software team has to pull out another 10-15% from software optimization..

the Overclockers, have to eek out another 300-400mhz..

AND The PRICE has to come down to $300 for the 1800x

[tp4tissue]

Shares already down 7% today.. 

//headdesk
//headdesk

[xtrafrood]

Aw, the real show is yet to come

[tp4tissue]

Aw, the real show is yet to come

idk..  i don't see how it's not game over..    we need a OPAC oil Prince to magic a cash infusion with AMD..


They need a huge software team to get some more optimizations on their architecture by working with the pro-app people.



This was a bad move positioning this CPU for Gaming / young people crowd..


They really should've made it all about prosumers..




The only true standout performance this CPU has is Streaming performance via Twitch/Youtube/ etc..


But the majority of gamers Prioritize PLAYING the damn game vs streaming it..


So we're looking at  Sandybridge level performance  in terms of gaming  WITHOUT streaming..



Is sandybridge good enough ?,  YES IT IS..  but if I wanted Sandybridge, I'd just go buy a used sandybridge setup for under $300

[happylacquer]

iBut the majority of gamers Prioritize PLAYING the damn game vs streaming it..


So we're looking at  Sandybridge level performance  in terms of gaming  WITHOUT streaming..



Is sandybridge good enough ?,  YES IT IS..  but if I wanted Sandybridge, I'd just go buy a used sandybridge setup for under $300

I would actually say the majority wants to be able to stream effortlessly and not impact performance!

[tp4tissue]

iBut the majority of gamers Prioritize PLAYING the damn game vs streaming it..


So we're looking at  Sandybridge level performance  in terms of gaming  WITHOUT streaming..



Is sandybridge good enough ?,  YES IT IS..  but if I wanted Sandybridge, I'd just go buy a used sandybridge setup for under $300

I would actually say the majority wants to be able to stream effortlessly and not impact performance!

It's a use-scenario sure.

But not a common one...



So here's the comparison..

THe problem for AMD is that, this Streaming ability,   EVEN on INtel's 4 core,  they're NOT actually penalized all that much..'


Especially since now NVIDIA has that GPU streaming support which takes some load off the CPU.

Gamers    vs   Gamers who stream..


$1000 pc..

You get 500 fps on CSGO via the Intel 7700k build.

You get 300 fps on CSGO via the AMD 1800x build.


In streaming,  the 7700k will drop to 200-400 average with streaming..

the AMD 1800x will likely maintain 300fps..  But 300 is as fast as it can go..

[xtrafrood]

Aw, the real show is yet to come

idk..  i don't see how it's not game over..    we need a OPAC oil Prince to magic a cash infusion with AMD..


They need a huge software team to get some more optimizations on their architecture by working with the pro-app people.



This was a bad move positioning this CPU for Gaming / young people crowd..


They really should've made it all about prosumers..




The only true standout performance this CPU has is Streaming performance via Twitch/Youtube/ etc..


But the majority of gamers Prioritize PLAYING the damn game vs streaming it..


So we're looking at  Sandybridge level performance  in terms of gaming  WITHOUT streaming..



Is sandybridge good enough ?,  YES IT IS..  but if I wanted Sandybridge, I'd just go buy a used sandybridge setup for under $300

AMD hasn't released all the goods is all I'm saying. We've only seen the x99 competition so far iirc, and from what I've seen it totally fits my use case but I understand where you're coming from

[tp4tissue]

AMD hasn't released all the goods is all I'm saying. We've only seen the x99 competition so far iirc, and from what I've seen it totally fits my use case but I understand where you're coming from

I'm doubtful the 4core 6core zen will clock that much higher.  the chip doesn't seem to be heat bound according to the reviews.  it just tops out at 4.1ghz period.. sigh.......

AMD fine wine (software optimization team) is the only thing in the near term to make an impact for the early buyers..

[tp4tissue]

I'm just so disappointed...

looncraz.. if you're reading this... h8n' you so hard right now.. hahahahahahahha

[xtrafrood]

AMD hasn't released all the goods is all I'm saying. We've only seen the x99 competition so far iirc, and from what I've seen it totally fits my use case but I understand where you're coming from

I'm doubtful the 4core 6core zen will clock that much higher.  the chip doesn't seem to be heat bound according to the reviews.  it just tops out at 4.1ghz period.. sigh.......

AMD fine wine (software optimization team) is the only thing in the near term to make an impact for the early buyers..

Also, from what Wendel (Level1techs) said, the virtualization support is not all there just yet. Dayum shame too. No point in virtualization if there is no support for GPU passthrough. Maybe firmware updates will provide an answer to everyone's prayers or concerns :shrug:

edit - on the other hand though, there's no need to delid Ryzen CPUs so that's a plus I guess

[tp4tissue]

AMD hasn't released all the goods is all I'm saying. We've only seen the x99 competition so far iirc, and from what I've seen it totally fits my use case but I understand where you're coming from

I'm doubtful the 4core 6core zen will clock that much higher.  the chip doesn't seem to be heat bound according to the reviews.  it just tops out at 4.1ghz period.. sigh.......

AMD fine wine (software optimization team) is the only thing in the near term to make an impact for the early buyers..

Also, from what Wendel (Level1techs) said, the virtualization support is not all there just yet. Dayum shame too. No point in virtualization if there is no support for GPU passthrough. Maybe firmware updates will provide an answer to everyone's prayers or concerns :shrug:

edit - on the other hand though, there's no need to delid Ryzen CPUs so that's a plus I guess

hahaha.. they got the delid tool now, so it's not so hard anymore.

You can even build a delid tool yourself out of some wood if you need to..


What I'm very worried about , is that Intel will respond swiftly and just ending ANY chance for pickup..  Maybe that's not to their best interest facing anti-trust..


But.........  at 4.1ghz,  there is a big enough Gap such that Intel can adjust prices by $50 such that all of 0 people actually buy Zen.


I just don't see the 1800x maintaining the $500 asking price.

[digi]

AMD IS FOR N00BS TP!!

[Elrick]

AMD IS FOR N00BS TP!!

INTEL is for FELCHERS, get use to that fact  .

[digi]

AMD IS FOR N00BS TP!!

INTEL is for FELCHERS, get use to that fact  .

AMD N00B detected, amber alert! amber alert!!

I LOVE Felchers!

[tp4tissue]

AMD IS FOR N00BS TP!!

INTEL is for FELCHERS, get use to that fact  .

AMD N00B detected, amber alert! amber alert!!

I LOVE Felchers!

had to google it..  yuk.

[nubbinator]

I'm still excited for the R5 Ryzen chips.  I have a 3570k, so it won't be a huge upgrade for gaming, but it will be for video encoding and I have a mess of DVDs I need to digitize.  Of course, if I could find am mITX mobo for my 3570K, I would probably hold off for a little bit.

[tp4tissue]

I'm still excited for the R5 Ryzen chips.  I have a 3570k, so it won't be a huge upgrade for gaming, but it will be for video encoding and I have a mess of DVDs I need to digitize.  Of course, if I could find am mITX mobo for my 3570K, I would probably hold off for a little bit.

See,  i don't like that argument for Zen..

GREAT CPU FOR ENCODING..    IMHO it's Better, but not $200 better than a 7700k...

If you do this stuff for a living, you'd already be on dual cpu..


If you do this stuff for fun.. an 8 core zen WILL NOT dramatically speed up encoding vs a 7700k..  EITHER WAY, if you had bulk encoding batches,  it'd run overnight..


So in that way,   it's like having 100Mbit internet vs 200Mbit internet,   yea 200Mbit is faster,  but NOT BY ENOUGH, such that it'd really make a difference in your actual UTILITY of the product..


From the benches so far, Zen is absolutely a no go.. ..  this is exactly like Faildozer..  especially @ $500 w/ NO OVERCLOCKING headroom.

[nubbinator]

The 1700 is a ****ing beast chip for the money for real world work tp.  It sucks a little at gaming, but, then again, I play at 1440p where I'm GPU bound and if I want to capture, encode, and stream my play, the AMD CPU will spank the Intel chip.

Completely disagree with your analysis. The 1800x is a no go, but the 1700 looks like a ****ing beast and the R5 chips may slap around the i5 chips.

Also note that this is before any Windows patches for the new architecture, before and game patches for the architecture, and before new BIOS has rolled out.  I'd be willing to bet that in 3-6 months time we see a nice boost from the launch performance.

[tp4tissue]

The 1700 is a ****ing beast chip for the money for real world work tp.  It sucks a little at gaming, but, then again, I play at 1440p where I'm GPU bound and if I want to capture, encode, and stream my play, the AMD CPU will spank the Intel chip.

Completely disagree with your analysis. The 1800x is a no go, but the 1700 looks like a ****ing beast and the R5 chips may slap around the i5 chips.

Also note that this is before any Windows patches for the new architecture, before and game patches for the architecture, and before new BIOS has rolled out.  I'd be willing to bet that in 3-6 months time we see a nice boost from the launch performance.

In the end, the gamer kids will gravitate towards the chip which benches with higher frame rate.. 

I think it's behind a little too much to count on AMD Fine-Wine to move chips for gamers..


They need to make a fast push into Server space as soon as possible where parallelism truly matters.

Consumers, and even Prosumers jsut don't need much multi-core.. because the multi-core that they can actually afford isn't much faster than quad core..


An encoding run usually takes 2 to 4 hours depending on complexity..   So now you got 1800x, which can do it in 1 to 2 hours..

That's faster, but not compellingly so,  because the average consumer / prosumer would've just let it run overnight or while they went out and had dinner..

So, in the end, the 7700k still serves better, because it has the Edge in gaming, and is Fast enough for encoding to be done in a reasonable time-frame.



Because Gaming has to be done NOW,   Encoding can always WAIT...  when you encode, whether it takes 2 hours or 4 hours,  that simply doesn't matter..

It's like if you're pirating a bluray movie,  if it took 2 hours great, if it took 4 hours , fine, you'd just download 2 movies overnight, watch it tomorrow, no big deal..

[Findecanor]

I find that the Ryzen is almost precisely what was expected.
If you had kept attention to what has been published before the release, you would not have been surprised!

It was already well known that most games are optimized for fewer cores/threads at higher clock.
That is why there is often relatively small difference in gaming performance between the Intel i3, i5 and i7 - with different number of cores/threads but all clocked high. For this reason most gaming media recommends that gamers spend their money on the i5 over the i7.

In total, a Ryzen 7 1700 still has more total computing power than an i7 7700K just that gamers don't take advantage of it as well.
There have been those that have measured the core usage of Ryzen and 6700K at the same games and found that several cores on the Ryzen are hardly used at all.

Anyway, single-core performance per clock is comparable to Haswell but each core uses less silicon than Skylake.
While the performance per clock is not market-leading the performance per watt is pretty good.
The chips have not overclocked very easily, but that may change.

[Leslieann]

I find that the Ryzen is almost precisely what was expected.

The chips have not overclocked very easily, but that may change.

It's pretty much what I expected as well, and that's actually good, for the exact reasons you stated.
If you need a high end video workstation, by all means, Intel, but most consumers will do just as well, or better using Ryzen. If I was buying today, Ryzen would be top of my list.


Regarding overclocking, it's fairly common for first gen chips to not overclock well. Also as an architecture ages and the manufacturer ramps up speeds, it's common to get less and less as they near end of life. So while Intel has the upper hand at the very top, as AMD's processor matures, Intel will begin showing signs of aging with people getting less and less overclocks from them. This isn't always true, some processors have overclocked poorly their entire life while others were fantastic from day one, but in general that is how things tend to progress.


-------------------------------------------------


As far as Intel crushing AMD with something new, while I was initially worried about it, I'm not any longer. Intel may be pushing a minor update, and they did lower prices at some stores, there is even rumors of a hyperthread I5, I'll believe that when I see it and if it does, it just proves they have been handicapping their chips. Why would they do this now? Because they know AMD just hit them pretty good.  It's not a knockout blow, we all can probably agree to that, Intel still holds the top tier, and Intel still has server sales and will more than likely screw AMD by offering insane deals to OEMs (like they have in the past).

More importantly though is that Intel just released Kaby Lake, they aren't going to scrap Kaby Lake right after it dropped, there is too much invested. OEMS, Intel, and motherboard makers put a lot of effort into Kaby Lake and it takes a while to bring stuff to market. Intel can't release Kaby Lake then scrap it without destroying other companies as well. And while Intel may have something up it's sleeve, it still has to ramp up production and get motherboard makers and OEMs on board and that takes time, no amount of money can fix that.

[digi]

That's faster, but not compellingly so,  because the average consumer / prosumer would've just let it run overnight or while they went out and had dinner at Popeyes..

FTFY 

[tp4tissue]

It's pretty much what I expected as well,

Ryzen seems very competitive for servers if yields are up and up.


But for the consumer.. if clockspeed doesn't get to 4.5-4.8 on the refresh..  Intel will still dominate the consumer space.

[Leslieann]

Ryzen seems very competitive for servers if yields are up and up.

But for the consumer.. if clockspeed doesn't get to 4.5-4.8 on the refresh..  Intel will still dominate the consumer space.

For servers, server centers tend to be MUCH more reserved, you need the infrastructure and a LOT of testing. Google isn't going to buy 5000 of these right out of the gate without serious testing. Saving money on efficiency if great, but not if a bug keep crashing the system. No one ever got fired buying Intel was an old saying and it still rings true. If you think best bang for the buck wins in the corporate environment, you obviously haven't dealt with enough sales reps, CIO's or heads of purchasing. You also apparently haven't heard of Intel's strong arm tactics where they pushed HP and Dell to not even carry AMD processors in exchange for kickbacks.

As for consumers...
AMD buyers (especially higher end ones)  tend to be all about bang for the buck, they aren't going to pay 40% more for a 2% increase (and neither should you!). You can throw mhz numbers around all day, no one cares except a small community who overclocks or those who actually REALLY need that last 2% and then some. If you doubt this, go look at how many gamers are using I5 and AMD processors as opposed to I7 processors.

[tp4tissue]

Ryzen seems very competitive for servers if yields are up and up.

But for the consumer.. if clockspeed doesn't get to 4.5-4.8 on the refresh..  Intel will still dominate the consumer space.

For servers, server centers tend to be MUCH more reserved, you need the infrastructure and a LOT of testing. Google isn't going to buy 5000 of these right out of the gate without serious testing. Saving money on efficiency if great, but not if a bug keep crashing the system. No one ever got fired buying Intel was an old saying and it still rings true. If you think best bang for the buck wins in the corporate environment, you obviously haven't dealt with enough sales reps, CIO's or heads of purchasing. You also apparently haven't heard of Intel's strong arm tactics where they pushed HP and Dell to not even carry AMD processors in exchange for kickbacks.

As for consumers...
AMD buyers (especially higher end ones)  tend to be all about bang for the buck, they aren't going to pay 40% more for a 2% increase (and neither should you!). You can throw mhz numbers around all day, no one cares except a small community who overclocks or those who actually REALLY need that last 2% and then some. If you doubt this, go look at how many gamers are using I5 and AMD processors as opposed to I7 processors.

They are not people.. they do not exist as you and I exist.

[Findecanor]

Hmm.. Steam's Hardware and Software Survey does not say how many are on i5 vs i7, but 22% of Windows users run AMD.