If Zen fails?

[Pandora]

but it's now there highest

k then i have their second highest teir consumer cpu.

[Dabombinable]

Zen won't fail.... At least for me. If the rumors are true(big cores, more cores, and HT) then that will be the perfect CPU for me, since I primarily do things that require multiple cores rather than IPC(its important too, but not as much). Sadly though, I might have to skip on Zen unless if they have an Opteron equivalent, since I am really wanting a dual CPU setup(just spensive though). I also want an APU too, but that's only for screwing around(I wonder if they will make a beast APU, if they do then its time to dissemble my Xbox360).

Depending on the cost, X99 might be just as good an option considering AMD has projected Zen's performance to be close to that of Haswell.

[TravisTea]

the rights amd has to use intels x86-x64 architecture. it wont transfer if amd is bought out. that means no more amd cpu's. it would be cool if intel let them keep that licence. 

 

What if Valve bought 51% of AMD's stock and partnered with them? Valve's resources pooled with AMD's could make a hell of a team.

[QueenDemetria]

Depending on the cost, X99 might be just as good an option considering AMD has projected Zen's performance to be close to that of Haswell.

That's where I'm waiting for the core count, because if there is a 16 core chip then I'll be interested. If not, then dual Opterons here I come

[Pandora]

What if Valve bought 51% of AMD's stock and partnered with them? Valve's resources pooled with AMD's could make a hell of a team.

intel nearly revoked the rights when amd turned its fabs over to global foundry. i doubt intel would alow that. but my god the dream team would be amazing.

[Prysin]

Depending on the cost, X99 might be just as good an option considering AMD has projected Zen's performance to be close to that of Haswell.

zen will probs be cheaper then X99.... so my bet is that it will be a tossup

[Dabombinable]

That's where I'm waiting for the core count, because if there is a 16 core chip then I'll be interested. If not, then dual Opterons here I come

16 cores 32 threads? No matter which company you buy them from they'll be expensive. I thought you meant 8 cores 16 threads (aka, X99 i7 and apparently high end Zen).

[QueenDemetria]

16 cores 32 threads? No matter which company you buy them from they'll be expensive. I thought you meant 8 cores 16 threads (aka, X99 i7 and apparently high end Zen).

Yeah it will be expensive, but worth it . I just need cores, I've found through my research that virtual threads are basically worthless with VM's, which is what I primarily do(then add rendering, heavy web browsing, and gaming on top of that). Right now I have my eyes set on a pair of these: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113304

[Emanuel_M]

Yeah it will be expensive, but worth it . I just need cores, I've found through my research that virtual threads are basically worthless with VM's, which is what I primarily do(then add rendering, heavy web browsing, and gaming on top of that). Right now I have my eyes set on a pair of these: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113304

lol I guess but the stuff you will be doing won't even be good, even if you get 2 of them. The high cores and slow speed, that really is a server processor, really meant for file transferring. On the socket g34 is only on server motherboards, so it really isn't worth it, they are 400-500+. If you want to do it then fine, just my opinion.

[Dabombinable]

Yeah it will be expensive, but worth it . I just need cores, I've found through my research that virtual threads are basically worthless with VM's, which is what I primarily do(then add rendering, heavy web browsing, and gaming on top of that). Right now I have my eyes set on a pair of these: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113304

So you want the 8 module version of the FX series. Okay.....

 

Edit: Also, that clock speed is very low which makes it even worse being AMD's version of CMT

[Emanuel_M]

So you want the 8 module version of the FX series. Okay.....

like the MoBo for the socket g34 is super expensive, and is more enterprise, not consumer. Will she need a 4 socket monotherboard? Let me join her file sharing website. But like I said that CPU is really for file transferring.

[SlowMixit]

Wonder if VIA would buy AMD if ZEN would be flop, since VIA allready has x86 lisence and if they bought AMD they still would have their x86 and x86-64 lisence.

 

I dont think Intel would revoke really any lisence since they would get giant Anti-Thrust lawsuit against them in europe because they would have monopoly on x86 market.

[SurvivorNVL]

The hopeful scenario if Zen fails and AMD ends up dissolving in time, is for ATI to be gobbled up by Intel, and nVidia snatching up the x86_64 license.  Prices won't change for the most part, nor would PC gaming die.  We'd just change hands and brands for our primary systems.  Being able to buy an all Intel or all nVidia for our builds.  Should be interesting if that ever happens.

[QueenDemetria]

lol I guess but the stuff you will be doing won't even be good, even if you get 2 of them. The high cores and slow speed, that really is a server processor, really meant for file transferring. On the socket g34 is only on server motherboards, so it really isn't worth it, they are 400-500+. If you want to do it then fine, just my opinion.

File transferring... lol. The stuff I do does benefit from the more cores. I tried an i5 4670k earlier this year, but for my stuff the FX 8320 just pooped on it, even at stock clocks(and when using a 4770K, the virtual threads didn't give much performance over the 4670k). The 2.6GHz will hold the rendering back, but if I allocate 8-12 of the 24 cores and use Cuda(which I currently do), it will have no problem cranking out video and 3D models. For VM's, the 2.6Ghz will be fine, cause I'm currently running a VM on a 2.6Ghz Athlon 620(and its a very usable speed), but the problem with that CPU is that it only has 4 cores . And for gaming, yeah its probably one of the worst CPU's you could use, but in the past month you could count the amount of hours I've played on one hand, and thats more than usual, so gaming isn't a priority for me(especially since I'm using a 9500gt currently, hue hue hue). 

 

So you want the 8 module version of the FX series. Okay.....

 

Edit: Also, that clock speed is very low which makes it even worse being AMD's version of CMT

Currently have an FX 8 core, and it works great when you use all of the cores Gamers really give this CPU a bad name(rightfully so, as that's who its marketed for), but for "work" related things they aren't bad(even Facemans big post notes that this stuff is the only good thing FX can do, this says a lot). They will be fine, I mean sure they are server chips, but that's basically the types of tasks I run on my computers.

[themaniac]

The hopeful scenario if Zen fails and AMD ends up dissolving in time, is for ATI to be gobbled up by Intel, and nVidia snatching up the x86_64 license.  Prices won't change for the most part, nor would PC gaming die.  We'd just change hands and brands for our primary systems.  Being able to buy an all Intel or all nVidia for our builds.  Should be interesting if that ever happens.

^^^^^^^^^ this but most likely amd will be bought by someone like samsung or google or apple

[Emanuel_M]

File transferring... lol. The stuff I do does benefit from the more cores. I tried an i5 4670k earlier this year, but for my stuff the FX 8320 just pooped on it, even at stock clocks(and when using a 4770K, the virtual threads didn't give much performance over the 4670k). The 2.6GHz will hold the rendering back, but if I allocate 8-12 of the 24 cores and use Cuda(which I currently do), it will have no problem cranking out video and 3D models. For VM's, the 2.6Ghz will be fine, cause I'm currently running a VM on a 2.6Ghz Athlon 620(and its a very usable speed), but the problem with that CPU is that it only has 4 cores . And for gaming, yeah its probably one of the worst CPU's you could use, but in the past month you could count the amount of hours I've played on one hand, and thats more than usual, so gaming isn't a priority for me(especially since I'm using a 9500gt currently, hue hue hue). 

 

Currently have an FX 8 core, and it works great when you use all of the cores Gamers really give this CPU a bad name(rightfully so, as that's who its marketed for), but for "work" related things they aren't bad(even Facemans big post notes that this stuff is the only good thing FX can do, this says a lot). They will be fine, I mean sure they are server chips, but that's basically the types of tasks I run on my computers.

no the socket g34 is really for file servers.

[SlowMixit]

^^^^^^^^^ this but most likely amd will be bought by someone like samsung or google or apple

 

Apple, now that would be fun to see. They would make their own CPU's and GPU's, research budget Apple has would make them stay on top of the game.

[SurvivorNVL]

^^^^^^^^^ this but most likely amd will be bought by someone like samsung or google or apple

Samsung wouldn't be allowed to buy AMD.  It'd likely have to be an American company to buyout AMD if anyone were to.  It would have to be Microsoft or Apple in all likeliness.  Microsoft is the best answer of those two, and the best overall would be IBM, but IBM has no interest in the consumer space.  And I don't think IBM would buy AMD given them working with Nvidia and NVLink for their supercomputers.

[themaniac]

Samsung wouldn't be allowed to buy AMD.  It'd likely have to be an American company to buyout AMD if anyone were to.  It would have to be Microsoft or Apple in all likeliness.  Microsoft is the best answer of those two, and the best overall would be IBM, but IBM has no interest in the consumer space.  And I don't think IBM would buy AMD given them working with Nvidia and NVLink for their supercomputers.

why cant samsung buy amd? 

[Emanuel_M]

Samsung wouldn't be allowed to buy AMD.  It'd likely have to be an American company to buyout AMD if anyone were to.  It would have to be Microsoft or Apple in all likeliness.  Microsoft is the best answer of those two, and the best overall would be IBM, but IBM has no interest in the consumer space.  And I don't think IBM would buy AMD given them working with Nvidia and NVLink for their supercomputers.

they will take AMD but won't take some licenses that they have. Simple as that, not even worth buying.

[Emanuel_M]

why cant samsung buy amd?

becuase some archetectures they share with Intel, that Intel says they can't let other companies have.

[Dabombinable]

File transferring... lol. The stuff I do does benefit from the more cores. I tried an i5 4670k earlier this year, but for my stuff the FX 8320 just pooped on it, even at stock clocks(and when using a 4770K, the virtual threads didn't give much performance over the 4670k). The 2.6GHz will hold the rendering back, but if I allocate 8-12 of the 24 cores and use Cuda(which I currently do), it will have no problem cranking out video and 3D models. For VM's, the 2.6Ghz will be fine, cause I'm currently running a VM on a 2.6Ghz Athlon 620(and its a very usable speed), but the problem with that CPU is that it only has 4 cores . And for gaming, yeah its probably one of the worst CPU's you could use, but in the past month you could count the amount of hours I've played on one hand, and thats more than usual, so gaming isn't a priority for me(especially since I'm using a 9500gt currently, hue hue hue). 

 

Currently have an FX 8 core, and it works great when you use all of the cores Gamers really give this CPU a bad name(rightfully so, as that's who its marketed for), but for "work" related things they aren't bad(even Facemans big post notes that this stuff is the only good thing FX can do, this says a lot). They will be fine, I mean sure they are server chips, but that's basically the types of tasks I run on my computers.

It may have a lot of threads, however at only 2.6Ghz they are extremely slow in any task. You'd want at least 1 module per VM. At least.

[SurvivorNVL]

why cant samsung buy amd? 

The FTC would not let AMD be bought by a foreign corporation.  So, the most likely situation would have to be Microsoft, Apple, or with great hope - IBM, or they would dissolve and ATI would hopefully be absorbed by Intel, while the x86_64 is absorbed by Nvidia.

[themaniac]

The FTC would not let AMD be bought by a foreign corporation.  So, the most likely situation would have to be Microsoft, Apple, or with great hope - IBM, or they would dissolve and ATI would hopefully be absorbed by Intel, while the x86_64 is absorbed by Nvidia.

ok but what about google

[SurvivorNVL]

ok but what about google

They've never expressed much interest, nor do I think they themselves would go out of the way to purchase them, even if that is one of the last industries they've yet to conquer.  Most likely  Microsoft or Apple, but Google can't be ruled out.