AMD Zen Initially only Coming With 8-Core Dies-8 Core and 6 Core Zen CPUs to be the First to Hit the Market

[Mr.Meerkat]

4 minutes ago, ZetZet said:

that doesn't make any sense.

 

 

you mean AMD could defeat the laws of physics to compete with Intel? WHY HAVEN'T THEY DONE THAT BEFORE

What makes then not be able to do that? maybe the CPU is just a giant resistor...

[ZetZet]

2 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

What makes then not be able to do that? maybe the CPU is just a giant resistor...

yeah so the energy would still have to go somewhere. unless AMD adds an incandescent light-bulb to their mobo and just passes everything through the cpu and lights the bulb. not much processing power that way I would imagine.

[sof006]

I'm excited for AMD's new processors. If they are good I will switch to Zen to go along with the Fury X I plan on getting (Not interested in Pascal or Polaris) 

[ZetZet]

2 minutes ago, sof006 said:

I'm excited for AMD's new processors. If they are good I will switch to Zen to go along with the Fury X I plan on getting (Not interested in Pascal or Polaris) 

you have 980ti

[Mr.Meerkat]

Just now, ZetZet said:

yeah so the energy would still have to go somewhere. unless AMD adds an incandescent light-bulb to their mobo and just passes everything through the cpu and lights the bulb. not much processing power that way I would imagine.

it's a REGENERATIVE CPU! so when ever it's underload, instead of consuming electricity,  it generates electricity  

2 minutes ago, sof006 said:

I'm excited for AMD's new processors. If they are good I will switch to Zen to go along with the Fury X I plan on getting (Not interested in Pascal or Polaris) 

ehhh wat...980ti and plans on switching to a fury x (I have no problems with that) but that's not a upgrade...but it's not a downgrade either so..meh...

[sof006]

Just now, ZetZet said:

you have 980ti

So? I want a Fury X. AMD has proven that DirectX 12 (and other new API's) favour their hardware. Leaked benchmarks of Nvidias new cards seem to suggest they are only mildly better than my 980Ti.

[ZetZet]

2 minutes ago, sof006 said:

AMD has proven that DirectX 12 (and other new API's) favour their hardware.

no they haven't.

2 minutes ago, sof006 said:

So? I want a Fury X. AMD has proven that DirectX 12 (and other new API's) favour their hardware. Leaked benchmarks of Nvidias new cards seem to suggest they are only mildly better than my 980Ti.

yes lower end 1080 will be mildly better than 980ti, that's expected. 

[sof006]

1 minute ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

it's a REGENERATIVE CPU! so when ever it's underload, instead of consuming electricity,  it generates electricity  

ehhh wat...980ti and plans on switching to a fury x (I have no problems with that) but that's not a upgrade...but it's not a downgrade either so..meh...

No its not, its on par with the 980 TI and in pretty much all current DX12 titles the Fury X wins.

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, sof006 said:

No its not, its on par with the 980 TI and in pretty much all current DX12 titles the Fury X wins.

It's on par with a heavily overclocked 980ti while running at stock speeds. So it's better if there is even a tiny bit of overclocking headroom.

[DocSwag]

35 minutes ago, ZetZet said:

yes, it still won't match it since you can overclock 5930k...

You obviously didn't read what I wrote at all. Just because two CPUs have different TDPs doesn't the one with a higher one can overclock more than the other.

 

They might have the same OC headroom, but one just comes slower out of the box. How does this not make sense?

[ZetZet]

1 minute ago, DocSwag said:

They might have the same OC headroom, but one just comes slower out of the box. How does this not make sense?

it kinda does and doesn't at the same time. power delivery has to be designed to handle the higher tdp, by undershooting and underclocking you would just cause problems. And we aren't talking about the power saving underclocked zens, but the full blown powerful ones.

[79wjd]

@ZetZet @DocSwag 

Let's stop discussing this since no one has even the slightest clue how zen will play out. Bookmark this and come back in a few months and brag about how much smarter you are then everyone else.

[DocSwag]

1 minute ago, ZetZet said:

it kinda does and doesn't at the same time. power delivery has to be designed to handle the higher tdp, by undershooting and underclocking you would just cause problems. And we aren't talking about the power saving underclocked zens, but the full blown powerful ones.

I see what you are saying. That makes sense. Of course, motherboard manufacturers do need to make more phases in their VRMs, but that's pretty doable. Recent rumors do say though that the AM4 socket supports up to 140 watts of power, while LGA 2011 (I believe) supports up to 190 watts or so. It is true that could make a difference if that rumor is correct.

[Mr.Meerkat]

1 minute ago, sof006 said:

So? I want a Fury X. AMD has proven that DirectX 12 (and other new API's) favour their hardware. Leaked benchmarks of Nvidias new cards seem to suggest they are only mildly better than my 980Ti.

apart from they won't be the flagship cards...like AMD, polaris 10 and 11 is only meant to be for the mainstream cards (rumored) with vega as their flagship so why can't the gtx 1080 or whatever it's called be a more mainstream card and not a flagship killer? Look at how when the 980 and 970 first released didn't make any new speed records, the 970 was comparable to a 780 with the 980 being a tad faster/equal to the 780ti, what make that a non-existent situation? 

 

5 minutes ago, sof006 said:

No its not, its on par with the 980 TI and in pretty much all current DX12 titles the Fury X wins.

I'm actually going to take Nvidia's bait on how their drivers aren't optimised for DX12 but I'm going to say AMD cards would be better for DX12 but drivers were the thing that allowed Nvidia be the king of DX11 so what makes it impossible for them to do the same thing again?

[DocSwag]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

@ZetZet @DocSwag 

Let's stop discussing this since no one has even the slightest clue how zen will play out. Bookmark this and come back in a few months and brag about how much smarter you are then everyone else.

Ok. Fine with me. We can come back once Zen details are leaked and brag to each other how one of us is right and the other is wrong 

[sof006]

3 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

apart from they won't be the flagship cards...like AMD, polaris 10 and 11 is only meant to be for the mainstream cards (rumored) with vega as their flagship so why can't the gtx 1080 or whatever it's called be a more mainstream card and not a flagship killer? Look at how when the 980 and 970 first released didn't make any new speed records, the 970 was comparable to a 780 with the 980 being a tad faster/equal to the 780ti, what make that a non-existent situation? 

 

I'm actually going to take Nvidia's bait on how their drivers aren't optimised for DX12 but I'm going to say AMD cards would be better for DX12 but drivers were the thing that allowed Nvidia be the king of DX11 so what makes it impossible for them to do the same thing again?

Nvidia has had plenty time now to "optimize" for DX12 but its plainly obvious that the driver isn't coming. You cannot optimize. Its simply hardware support, you either support it in the hardware or you don't. Thats not to say they don't support DX12 because they do... its simply AMD does it better because their graphics cards are better orientated towards asynchronous workloads and Nvidias cards are better suited towards doings things one at a time. Nvidias cards all perform worse under DX12 workloads because the hardware support isn't there. 

 

Drivers can only do so much. DX12 gets rid of the need for heavy driver optimization, Nvidia can continue to try and optimize for DX12 titles but in the long run this will hurt them as AMD cards will continue to have the upper hand as they won't need to do anything as their cards will already perform great in pretty much all DX12 titles. This has been proven in numerous games that have been released recently.

[vanished]

I assume they've pulled off the impossible and will simply be bringing insane, 5960X-grade CPUs to the mainstream then.  Surely to god they wouldn't be foolish enough to release an update to what they already have: far too many cores too weak to do anything useful.  If that's the case, RIP!

[Mr.Meerkat]

8 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

Ok. Fine with me. We can come back once Zen details are leaked and brag to each other how one of us is right and the other is wrong 

I will do that as well but I just can't see why people have to be so stubborn and only think a company can achieve something by looking at their history...AMD's history hasn't be great but this doesn't mean that their future products are going to be equally bad...

 

Oh well, I want AMD to do well as I'm more AMD sided than Nvidia/Intel as I don't know why but I always side with the underdogs (unless it's CS then Astralis (don't like their logo ...but I'm only there for Dup Dup and xyp9x )...like when Airbus didn't have a very big market share while Boeing was dominant with like 80%...Airbus is now equal to Boeing with both having like 49% market share(Airbus still FTW!), why can't AMD achieve the same thing as Airbus has?

 

1 minute ago, sof006 said:

Nvidia has had plenty time now to "optimize" for DX12 but its plainly obvious that the driver isn't coming. You cannot optimize. Its simply hardware support, you either support it in the hardware or you don't. Thats not to say they don't support DX12 because they do... its simply AMD does it better because their graphics cards are better orientated towards asynchronous workloads and Nvidias cards are better suited towards doings things one at a time. Nvidias cards all perform worse under DX12 workloads because the hardware support isn't there. 

 

Drivers can only do so much. DX12 gets rid of the need for heavy driver optimization, Nvidia can continue to try and optimize for DX12 titles but in the long run this will hurt them as AMD cards will continue to have the upper hand as they won't need to do anything as their cards will already perform great in pretty much all DX12 titles. This has been proven in numerous games that have been released recently.

You may not know this but I'm a AMD fanboy and when DX12 benchies first came, I would constantly say how due to AMD designing their cards around mantle, their cards would be better for DX12 as they are both low api and both are pretty similar to each other so AMD would have a easier time to get their cards to preform better in DX12. It's more the fact that you are being a tad ignorant...what makes Nvidia unable to support asynchronus workloads better? This is like the same situation we are arguing here with intel and AMD, Nvidia could have made massive changes in less than a year, they have the money for the R&D for it and the workforce...

[sof006]

1 minute ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

I will do that as well but I just can't see why people have to be so stubborn and only think a company can achieve something by looking at their history...AMD's history hasn't be great but this doesn't mean that their future products are going to be equally bad...

 

Oh well, I want AMD to do well as I'm more AMD sided than Nvidia/Intel as I don't know why but I always side with the underdogs (unless it's CS then Astralis (don't like their logo ...but I'm only there for Dup Dup and xyp9x )...like when Airbus didn't have a very big market share while Boeing was dominant with like 80%...Airbus is now equal to Boeing with both having like 49% market share(Airbus still FTW!), why can't AMD achieve the same thing as Airbus has?

 

You may not know this but I'm a AMD fanboy and when DX12 benchies first came, I would constantly say how due to AMD designing their cards around mantle, their cards would be better for DX12 as they are both low api and both are pretty similar to each other so AMD would have a easier time to get their cards to preform better in DX12. It's more the fact that you are being a tad ignorant...what makes Nvidia unable to support asynchronus workloads better? This is like the same situation we are arguing here with intel and AMD, Nvidia could have made massive changes in less than a year, they have the money for the R&D for it and the workforce...

Because asynchronous compute is a hardware feature. You cannot add a hardware feature with software. 

 

Nvidia supports DX12 up to a certain point (stops before async compute)

 

AMD supports DX12 with pretty much all features, bar maybe one or two things. AMD knew they'd have the high ground when it came to DX12 as they were building their cards around their own in house tech Mantle. This causes Microsoft to create DX12, which totally favours AMD hardware vs Nvidia. 

 

Nvidia could end up turning around and end up support async compute with Pascal... but then again. They might not. Nvidia has been incredibly quiet when it comes to DX12 support, now thats either a good thing or a bad thing. AMD on the other hand is talking about LiquidVR, Vulkan and DX12 and the benchmarks are proving that all current generation AMD cards benefit from this. Nvidias cards are doing the polar opposite.

 

 

Oh, by the way. Nvidias cards seem to still perform worse under DX12 even when async compute is disabled. Look here http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/223567-amd-clobbers-nvidia-in-updated-ashes-of-the-singularity-directx-12-benchmark

[Mr.Meerkat]

1 minute ago, sof006 said:

Because asynchronous compute is a hardware feature. You cannot add a hardware feature with software. 

 

Nvidia supports DX12 up to a certain point (stops before async compute)

 

AMD supports DX12 with pretty much all features, bar maybe one or two things. AMD knew they'd have the high ground when it came to DX12 as they were building their cards around their own in house tech Mantle. This causes Microsoft to create DX12, which totally favours AMD hardware vs Nvidia. 

 

Nvidia could end up turning around and end up support async compute with Pascal... but then again. They might not. Nvidia has been incredibly quiet when it comes to DX12 support, now thats either a good thing or a bad thing. AMD on the other hand is talking about LiquidVR, Vulkan and DX12 and the benchmarks are proving that all current generation AMD cards benefit from this. Nvidias cards are doing the polar opposite.

 

 

Oh, by the way. Nvidias cards seem to still perform worse under DX12 even when async compute is disabled. Look here http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/223567-amd-clobbers-nvidia-in-updated-ashes-of-the-singularity-directx-12-benchmark

One game...please stop basing all of your expectations of Nvidia and AMD on 2 games...hitman and ashes are only 2 examples of DX12. Also, there's nothing preventing Nvidia adding chips to pascal for better async compute...hence why I said:

10 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

what makes Nvidia unable to support asynchronus workloads better?

Although all of their cards before pascal may be worse at DX12 compared to AMD equivalents but they can easily bring it around.

[corsairian]

9 hours ago, Aytex said:

If they offer Zen for 300 USD but its as powerful as around a 6700k, it would be quite the deal

though the 5820k isn't too far in price from the 6700

Especially on sale. Fry's has a 5820k right now for $325 US

[sof006]

Just now, Mr.Meerkat said:

One game...please stop basing all of your expectations of Nvidia and AMD on 2 games...hitman and ashes are only 2 examples of DX12. Also, there's nothing preventing Nvidia adding chips to pascal for better async compute...hence why I said:

Although all of their cards before pascal may be worse at DX12 compared to AMD equivalents but they can easily bring it around.

Quantum Break is another DX12 title that performs better on AMD... Now Quantum Break on PC is pretty broken so on both AMD and Nvidia the game runs horribly, but it does run a lot better on AMD than Nvidia. Also a tech site states that the vast majority of developers are siding with AMD when it comes to new DX12 titles being released, this further pushes the fact that developers are going to be using async compute.

 

I doubt Nvidia will be able to add async to pascal (if they haven't added it at the begging) if they've already finished building the chips. They'd need to start from the begging. You can't just "add async compute". Its built into the chip itself.

[patrickjp93]

1 hour ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

That's true but maybe AMD has broken away from the usual trend of TDP=similar to what the actual power consumption is. I don't see why their 8-core zen CPU can't be clocked at 4GHz while having a 95watt TDP, just because you're/we're not used to seeing something like that doesn't mean it's not possible. Why can't their 14nm CPUs be extremely efficient, so efficient that it's more efficient than skylake CPUs? 

Because Intel isn't the best at this game for no reason. Performance and efficiency are in many ways negatively correlated from a hardware perspective.

[79wjd]

8 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Because Intel isn't the best at this game for no reason. Performance and efficiency are in many ways negatively correlated from a hardware perspective.

Deep pockets make bribery far more effective

[Clyne]

Most general information there is:

14nm

40-50% increase in IPC

around 60-150W TDP range, but more like 95-125W TDP

New motherboards to go alone with the new CPU

New motherboards will have PCIE gen 3.0, if it doesn't then that's a failure...

But idc, i got the performance for computer parts from 2012 or so.

Runs all of my games fine. I get around 60FPS in The Crew, GTA 5(High settings because limited by VRAM), CSGO, and Dirt Rally.