Zen is faster than Broadwell-E clock for clock

[That Norwegian Guy]

Hopefully it will OC to at least 4Ghz and push prices down to sane levels.

 

I'm not budging from my 3570K until I can get a 6- or 8-core with this kind of IPC for current i5 pricing. Don't give a shit if it takes me 10 years or I win the lottery, it's the principle. The gouging must stop.

[Prysin]

Just now, That Norwegian Guy said:

Hopefully it will OC to at least 4Ghz and push prices down to sane levels.

 

I'm not budging from my 3570K until I can get a 6- or 8-core with this kind of IPC for current i5 pricing. Don't give a shit if it takes me 10 years or I win the lottery, it's the principle. The gouging must stop.

Not happening. If AMDs offerings are on par with Intels offerings they will cost within 10-50$ of what Intels products cost.

There is no evidence or monetary reason for AMD to offer a cheaper solution. Heck, given that this is a SoC, thus more complicated then a "normal Intel CPU" which has the SB on the mobo, we can expect even higher CPU prices, but slightly lower motherboard prices, as the complexity of the motherboard should be a bit lower.

[ybriK]

Please let this be real, my 2700K is still King. Heck I could probably pair this up with a 1080/RX 490 and still be good to go but I want to upgrade soon for some actual improvements in performance.

[raphidy]

1 hour ago, samcool55 said:

Are you sure? If a zen chip is for example 300Mhz slower but 200 dollars cheaper you really wouldn't get one?

 

Clockspeed isn't everything, if it has a nice price tag i don't care if it's from AMD or Intel.

 

 

I have two 2670 (70$ each) and a 2500k. Looking to replace the 2500k. I've game on the xenons and they can't starcraft properly so I don't want something similar. Might buy used 5820k instead.

 

I game at 1440p so slower clockspeed might be okay. We'll see.

[samcool55]

2 hours ago, raphidy said:

I have two 2670 (70$ each) and a 2500k. Looking to replace the 2500k. I've game on the xenons and they can't starcraft properly so I don't want something similar. Might buy used 5820k instead.

 

I game at 1440p so slower clockspeed might be okay. We'll see.

Starcraft 2 needs few cores and high clock speeds so i'm not suprised the game isn't happy with xeons.

The 2500k is the best cpu you have to play starcraft, especially with an overclock.

 

Resolution doesn't matter, when i was waiting for my rx 480 i could play SCII medium-high out on my overclocked 4670k and an overclocked 9800GT at 1080p.

The 5820k will only help because it has a little higher core speed and a better IPC, but SCII doesn't know how to handle 12T properly so i don't know if it will help a lot...

I would get something like a 6600k and oc the sh*t out of it, that would make SCII happy. They have an higher IPC and it's clocked higher by default.

 

I have to say SCII is quite an exception to most games so what's ideal for SCII isn't exactly ideal for all games.

 

[Mr.Meerkat]

1 hour ago, Prysin said:

Not happening. If AMDs offerings are on par with Intels offerings they will cost within 10-50$ of what Intels products cost.

There is no evidence or monetary reason for AMD to offer a cheaper solution. Heck, given that this is a SoC, thus more complicated then a "normal Intel CPU" which has the SB on the mobo, we can expect even higher CPU prices, but slightly lower motherboard prices, as the complexity of the motherboard should be a bit lower.

But they really need to try and price their CPUs a bit...not a bit but quite a bit lower than intel offerings as at this moment, they need sell as many while receiving a decent profit from each CPU sold. They have a big debt to pay pretty soon and with Polaris being good but not quite the killer isn't helping them at the moment.

[Prysin]

35 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

But they really need to try and price their CPUs a bit...not a bit but quite a bit lower than intel offerings as at this moment, they need sell as many while receiving a decent profit from each CPU sold. They have a big debt to pay pretty soon and with Polaris being good but not quite the killer isn't helping them at the moment.

If the product is competitive even to intels current offerings, then they can price it how the fuck they want. The only reason they would have to drop prices by any notable amount, is if the product is clearly inferior.

 

Performance

IS

KING

 

Doesnt matter how you achieve it, if your product performs, you can price it how you want.

[Mr.Meerkat]

10 minutes ago, Prysin said:

If the product is competitive even to intels current offerings, then they can price it how the fuck they want. The only reason they would have to drop prices by any notable amount, is if the product is clearly inferior.

 

Performance

IS

KING

 

Doesnt matter how you achieve it, if your product performs, you can price it how you want.

(No offence, not to you) but Nvidia and Intel has ermmm...more loyal attackers I mean followers (not using that word) so to be honest, even if AMD did release a better product that costs less, Intel and Nvidia would still have the upper hand (although there are probably more neutral people than fanboys so it probably doesn't matter ).  

[PCGuy_5960]

Ok, cool... So when are we going to see consumer LGA socketed CPUs by AMD? 

[PCGuy_5960]

And if that's the true performance Zen will offer, then prepare for an $800+ price tag.... 

[SLAYR]

1 hour ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Ok, cool... So when are we going to see consumer LGA socketed CPUs by AMD? 

Yeah they have lga opterons, but with the whole pga vs lga I would prefer pga, since it is easier to repair cpu pins, then motherboard pins.

 

Really the only reason for amd to go lga is because then they would be more like Intel, even though it makes no difference in the slightest.

[Prysin]

1 hour ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Ok, cool... So when are we going to see consumer LGA socketed CPUs by AMD? 

never.

LGA is the death of overclocking. Point in case, go look up every clock speed record and you realize AMD holds 6/10 using PGA chips.

[Prysin]

2 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Has AMD ever put a consumer CPU at that price tag?  The highest I've seen was a few hundred more for a 9590.  Opterons are what go for 800ish+.

all their previous top end CPUs has been 1000+ USD
Athlon 2, Phenom II x6 "T" and FX 9590.

 

New opterons go for a couple of thousands.

[Dabombinable]

6 hours ago, xgn said:

The intel cpu is quadcore. You cannot compare octa core vs quad. There are reasons why you would use quadcore over octa core.

Yes you can, when its 4 CMT modules vs 4 classic cores.

 

 

 

People need to stop referring to the CMT lines as having cores-they don't. All ARM based CPU and SOC have cores, all x86/AMD 64/Intel 64 CPU have cores, those based on CMT do not.

[DocSwag]

8 hours ago, samcool55 said:

Maybe it's information AMD will tell us during HotChips, they have already told is they will give us more information then.

It's next week btw, not too far away.

Thanks for the info I didn't know they would give us more info next week. Awesome, I hope we maybe learn something about tdp amd stuff as well as more benchmarks. I'd also be satisfied with more architectural details. 

[Matthewv1998]

I want to wait and see how the apus will perform, since they will hopefully be less costly then an eight core chip, and polairis onboard gpu which I am really interested in 

[dalekphalm]

 

8 hours ago, iDeFecZx said:

But also aren't Broadwell E on an older architecture? Meaning that Skylake is still faster AND we have Kabylake releasing soon too? 

Broadwell is the Second Newest Intel architecture (Skylake is the newest). But seriously, there's a few % difference in IPC between Broadwell and Skylake:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/9

As you can see, Broadwell and Skylake are neck and neck in these benchmarks.

 

Also, hey look at that, Anand also used 3.0 GHz as the clockrate for IPC benchmarks

8 hours ago, rockon5622 said:

Ya, thermals are important. Im happy to see amd made something that has a chance to compete. But, if they want to succeed, they should follow the path of the r9 480x and have the best value product. I want to know if this thing is being compared to a 6900k will it cost as much? Are all 8 cores able to be used at 3 ghz? If this comes in at 300ish range it would be very interesting

Even if this CPU only hits 3 GHz, it'll be more expensive then $300 (But I'd be ridiculously shocked if it didn't clock at least 3.5 base-4 boost). This CPU will likely be $650-$800.

 

I could see the 6c/12t Zen CPU being priced at the $350-$400 mark, with the 4c/8t chip being somewhere around $250.

 

That's my prediction. We'll see how it lines up.

6 hours ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

But they really need to try and price their CPUs a bit...not a bit but quite a bit lower than intel offerings as at this moment, they need sell as many while receiving a decent profit from each CPU sold. They have a big debt to pay pretty soon and with Polaris being good but not quite the killer isn't helping them at the moment.

Yes I agree. They need to undercut a little bit. But not the insane stupid amounts people are suggesting (Seriously, a 8c/16t for $300 that performs like a $1000 Intel CPU?)

3 hours ago, valdyrgramr said:

Has AMD ever put a consumer CPU at that price tag?  The highest I've seen was a few hundred more for a 9590.  Opterons are what go for 800ish+.

You must not have been around much during the Athlon days. The original "FX" CPU's from AMD were all priced around or even above $1000. This trend continued for quite a few years. It really wasn't until the Phenom II Bulldozer+ days that AMD stopped selling $1000+ chips (mostly because they couldn't create a CPU that good anymore).

[Okjoek]

So much negativity here. We should all hope Zen exceeds expectations. After all why would you not want competition in a capitalist society?

[dalekphalm]

35 minutes ago, Okjoek said:

So much negativity here. We should all hope Zen exceeds expectations. After all why would you not want competition in a capitalist society?

Yeah honestly if Zen tanks, this is bad for the consumer. Even if you're a huge Intel Fanboy and will still buy i7's, etc, having a competitive AMD only helps you.

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, valdyrgramr said:

I was, just wasn't paying attention to the price.

Well not many people ever bought those old FX chips, I'd imagine. They were fast, sure, but nothing you couldn't achieve by just OCing the crap out of a cheaper Athlon 64 chip or what have you.

[TheRandomness]

12 hours ago, zMeul said:

no, you are missing the point

because if you downclock, you get lower IPC and that is getting in the range of previous generation of Intel CPUs, like Haswell-E, for example - and that is what AMD needs to hide

 

also, Kabilake is just around the corner and will probably see an earlier release than ZEN - that's another IPC increase over Broadwell-E

 

so ... who's AMD kidding!?

So you're saying they should run the 6900k at full turbo speed and the Zen CPU at stock. Definitely fair.

[Okjoek]

One other thing. Since as the chips keep getting smaller I've been told it will get harder and harder to milk more efficiency out of it. This combined with the idea that we're not far from hitting a cap with what's achievable with Silicon (from what I'm told) I can imagine that unless there's some sort of breakthrough in what CPUs are made of that getting a 14-7nm CPU is about as far as many people will need to go for a long time. 

 

That said, It is sounding to be a long-term investment what my next CPU will be. I hope I can make the right choice when the time does come. Holding out as long as possible and my i5 3450 has been a freaking pleasure to rely on for the past 4 years. It's actually kind of weird that after all this time I'm still not in a huge rush to upgrade, I mean my CPU was a sort of "entry level" to quad cores when I got it. Unless I'm running a server, I honestly don't think it matters who I chose because the performance level is just growing so slowly. It sure is a good time to be a low-end user like me. I can't wait to see what Zen prices look like at entry level 4-6 core stuff.

 

 

[ApolloFury]

17 hours ago, iDeFecZx said:

So for the AMD CPU to be as fast, the Intel one need to be handicapped?

How is it handicapped? Both are running at the same clock speed. Overclocking them is a different story.

[Jumper118]

I get the feels zen is going to have a low stock clock,  but don't worry cos in 5 years we will have the 5ghz skew. The fx8150 was only 3.5ghz and that evolved all the way to the 4.7ghz fx9590

 

Also the 10 core zen that I have does 5.3ghz on phase so that is faster than most 6950x's

[Lays]

18 hours ago, Nena360 said:

Cinebench gets many updates?

Cinebench is very dependent on background processes, OS, priority of cinebench, RAM and things like that.  So that could very well play a part in the gap you saw