AMD Zen to Bring Greater than 40% IPC Increase, New Reports Suggests

[TechGod]

meh, why bother with laptops. Get a real PC....

or hell, just build a mITX rig, you can carry it around and if you are really clever adn get something like a 295x2 or Fury X2 (yes, these GPUs work perfectly fine in mITX cases aslong as you have clearance for GPU length + radiator) and a 6700k, and really, you get the most bad-ass system possible

One of my best friends bought a 295x2 at the same sale i did. He has it installed in a Corsair 380T alongside a 4790k.... Yeah, the 380T IS on the large side of ITX, but still. Try find a more potent setup that you can effortlessly pick up and move about

Ummmmm. No. This is the stupidest thing I've heard. I need a laptop to use for portability and a PC isn't portable.

[TechGod]

Architecture matters a lot, but going twice as wide, with faster caches, on a first-time use of a barely-tested process? I think 4GHz stock speeds on a quad core would be an astonishing feat. AMD will certainly be aiming for that, of course, but accomplishing a new CPU design, on a vastly new process, bringing it to market, and reaching those types of speeds at the claimed level of performance would probably be the single largest jump in CPU performance in at least a decade.

Of course, they actually have to make that jump to stand a chance of catching Intel's high-end client CPUs.

AMD has some amazing engineers. I'm hoping that they're successful.

[i_build_nanosuits]

It's from excavator! Not bulldozer... Jeez. When will you people stop repeating that?

i'm sure it won't be anywhere near 40% faster per clock than an excavator part.

AMD, intel, nvidia...whenever any of these huge ass companies are taunting numbers in advance out of their asses like that you always have to take them with a pinch of salt.

Amd taunting 40% mean they more likely have a 20% faster part overall, with peaks at +30% perf under best case scenario.

[TechGod]

i'm sure it won't be anywhere near 40% faster per clock than an excavator part.

AMD, intel, nvidia...whenever any of these huge ass companies are taunting numbers in advance out of their asses like that you always have to take them with a pinch of salt.

Amd taunting 40% mean they more likely have a 20% faster part overall, with peaks at +30% perf under best case scenario.

No. I wholly disagree.

[i_build_nanosuits]

No. I wholly disagree.

remember how the FuryX was supposedly 10 to 15% faster than the GTX 980ti according to AMD's own in house benchmarks? what's up with that?

or how bulldozer was supposed to be a much faster part and a true update to the phenom line of CPU and everybody ordered them to realise they were actually even slower than the CPU they just replaced? what's up with that too?

[SurvivorNVL]

remember how the FuryX was supposedly 10 to 15% faster than the GTX 980ti according to AMD's own in house benchmarks? what's up with that?

or how bulldozer was supposed to be a much faster part and a true update to the phenom line of CPU and everybody ordered them to realise they were actually even slower than the CPU they just replaced? what's up with that too?

Overclockers dream on those Fury cards.

[TechGod]

remember how the FuryX was supposedly 10 to 15% faster than the GTX 980ti according to AMD's own in house benchmarks? what's up with that?

or how bulldozer was supposed to be a much faster part and a true update to the phenom line of CPU and everybody ordered them to realise they were actually even slower than the CPU they just replaced? what's up with that too?

Fury X IS faster than the reference Ti. And Zen is completely different to Bulldozer so I think anyone that thinks AMD won't achieve the goal they set don't know anything about tech.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Overclockers dream on those Fury cards.

 yeah soooo true i forgot about that!!

 

Fury X IS faster than the reference Ti. And Zen is completely different to Bulldozer...

and i'm a pink unicorn on a rainbow shitting skittles all over the place.

one thing for sure, Zen is AMD's last and final push for enthusiast CPU market so let's hope people buy them.

[Dabombinable]

meh, why bother with laptops. Get a real PC....

 

or hell, just build a mITX rig, you can carry it around and if you are really clever adn get something like a 295x2 or Fury X2 (yes, these GPUs work perfectly fine in mITX cases aslong as you have clearance for GPU length + radiator) and a 6700k, and really, you get the most bad-ass system possible

 

One of my best friends bought a 295x2 at the same sale i did. He has it installed in a Corsair 380T alongside a 4790k.... Yeah, the 380T IS on the large side of ITX, but still. Try find a more potent setup that you can effortlessly pick up and move about

I've got a GTX 970+4790K with 16GB RAM. I need a better laptop for when I'm not at home. Even if I upgraded this to 8GB RAM+ replaced the ODD with a caddy so I could have a 1TB HDD+240GB SSD in this laptop, I'm still let down by the Phenom II N970 and MR HD5650. They manage to be surprisingly good for there age and can still play the latest games (at minimum) but its not good enough when it takes forever to convert HVEC videos+runs out of its 1GB vRAM.

[Memories4K]

I think anyone that thinks AMD won't achieve the goal they set don't know anything about tech.

 

[Prysin]

@i_build_nanosuits

 

i am willing to believe in the 40% over Excavator, just like i am willing to believe in Nvidia saying Pascal being 10x faster at compute then Maxwell.

after all, 40x/10x terrible = acceptable.

[SurvivorNVL]

Fury X IS faster than the reference Ti. And Zen is completely different to Bulldozer so I think anyone that thinks AMD won't achieve the goal they set don't know anything about tech.

Yes it is faster than a reference Ti.  Then you overclock the Ti, and it wins.  Or you get an aftermarket one for $10-$20 more and it runs cool, quiet, and can OC.  The Fury X can't.  It's good for quiet, unless you get coil whine, which many of the initial batches and even some later had horrible coil whine.  The Fury is, and has been the better option, and now with the Nitro being overclockable by around 100 - 200mhz to where it comes within distance to touch the reference Ti(but not quite), it's definitely far better.  The Fury X is, to myself, and many others - a dead in the water card.(I made a funny!)  The Fury, truly is a Dam Good Value B) and especially if they decrease pricing further.

[TechGod]

Yes it is faster than a reference Ti. Then you overclock the Ti, and it wins. Or you get an aftermarket one for $10-$20 more and it runs cool, quiet, and can OC. The Fury X can't. It's good for quiet, unless you get coil whine, which many of the initial batches and even some later had horrible coil whine. The Fury is, and has been the better option, and now with the Nitro being overclockable by around 100 - 200mhz to where it comes within distance to touch the reference Ti(but not quite), it's definitely far better. The Fury X is, to myself, and many others - a dead in the water card.(I made a funny!) The Fury, truly is a Dam Good Value B) and especially if they decrease pricing further.

We're not looking at overclocking the Ti. Reference vs Reference at stock? Fury X wins.

[DocSwag]

We're not looking at overclocking the Ti. Reference vs Reference at stock? Fury X wins.

Yup true. Ti overclocks better and wins after OC but Fury X wins at stock. Also Nvidia has typically had better optimization for games, if you look at raw compute performance for example AMD cards have pretty much always been ahead of Nvidia ones. With AMD's new GPUOpen iniative Polaris may be better than Pascal. However, Pascal does aim to increase compute by quite a bit (10x maxwell isn't too good, but still ok), so we still don't know yet. Guess we will have to wait 6 months to find out for sure which ones is better!

[TechGod]

Yup true. Ti overclocks better and wins after OC but Fury X wins at stock. Also Nvidia has typically had better optimization for games, if you look at raw compute performance for example AMD cards have pretty much always been ahead of Nvidia ones. With AMD's new GPUOpen iniative Polaris may be better than Pascal. However, Pascal does aim to increase compute by quite a bit (10x maxwell isn't too good, but still ok), so we still don't know yet. Guess we will have to wait 6 months to find out for sure which ones is better!

I truly hope it's Polaris.

[Big-G]

We're not looking at overclocking the Ti. Reference vs Reference at stock? Fury X wins.

What about factory OC'd? Which is bought as-is off the shelf? Custom AIB versions in essence. Those give the Fury X a headache

[patrickjp93]

I truly hope it's Polaris.

I hope it's not. Let Intel lock horns with Nvidia on both fronts. AMD is in no position to be challenging either one long-term, much less both of them. It's like a sick puppy with cancer. Just put it out of its misery already.

[TechGod]

I hope it's not. Let Intel lock horns with Nvidia on both fronts. AMD is in no position to be challenging either one long-term, much less both of them. It's like a sick puppy with cancer. Just put it out of its misery already.

Apple was also a sick puppy with cancer in the 90's. AMD will rebound and make life very difficult for both Intel and Nvidia.

[Big-G]

AMD will rebound and make life very difficult for both Intel and AMD.

Agreed on the AMD will make life difficult for AMD

[TechGod]

Agreed on the AMD will make life difficult for AMD

Fixed;)

[patrickjp93]

Apple was also a sick puppy with cancer in the 90's. AMD will rebound and make life very difficult for both Intel and Nvidia.

Yeah, and that and $5 will buy you a cheap coffee.

[TechGod]

Yeah, and that and $5 will buy you a cheap coffee.

You have a personal bias against AMD. Why should anyone take you seriously when you talk about them?

[Psykomantis00]

This 40% increase is probably still slower than current gen intel cpu's. When AMD is bought out by a Chinese company we will finally see some improvements. 

[Dabombinable]

This 40% increase is probably still slower than current gen intel cpu's. When AMD is bought out by a Chinese company we will finally see some improvements. 

The US government wouldn't allow that you realise? Even though China is what keeps the US afloat ATM.

[patrickjp93]

You have a personal bias against AMD. Why should anyone take you seriously when you talk about them?

I have nothing against AMD. What I have is well-founded doubt that it will ever recover to the point it can be a strong enough force to be the competition consumers want. The leadership isn't there, and neither is the vision. There's only repetition of past endeavors and amateur mistakes being made left and right. And Jim Keller is good, but he's been playing the mobile game for a decade. The same could be said of Raja Koduri. And Nvidia and Intel won't just slouch. The moment AMD actually becomes competitive, they'll leap forward and wipe out AMD's progress in the best case. In the worst case on the CPU side Intel's already much closer to theoretical performance limits than anyone else, and every baby step forward is more and more expensive. On the GPU side, Nvidia could afford to drop prices into the floor to wipe out AMD's financial gains.

 

AMD is too vulnerable no matter how you slice up 2016. I do not see it being viable, decent competition long-term. People should take me seriously because I'm articulate, objective, well-reasoned, and fair. The one downside? I'm blunt and very stubborn until you present evidence to the contrary.