AMD Zen ES leaked benchmarks: performance similar to a Core i5 4670K?!?!

[Demonking]

2 hours ago, FPS-Russia said:

Why is there so much moaning?I have not seen anything new from AMD's CPU gates in such a long time, i just want to see a new CPU from them.

 

4670K performance is still quite a huge leap from FX 8000 series.

Tell that to some people & they know who they are who think it can beat a 4670k 

[Okjoek]

1 minute ago, patrickjp93 said:

When will you people learn?! AMD historically matches Intel's prices when it has competitive products. Athlon Extreme -$1000, Phenom X6 -$1000, FX 9590 -$1000! Even if for some reason it doesn't this one time, Intel will just respond by dropping prices, and you'll be able to get an even better upgrade for the same price!

Then I'll just  get the 4670K...K?!

 

Wasn't saying I was being anti-competitive or anything. Infact I'm really eagar to see the performance per watt. I love that sort of thing and that's a better gauge for determining whether they win or not.

[i_build_nanosuits]

7 minutes ago, wcreek said:

Close enough to an i5 6600K, like many others said, but will it be cheaper or on par in price?

...in a fully multi-threaded DX12 AMD tech demo...yeah.

[handymanshandle]

Just now, i_build_nanosuits said:

...in a fully multi-threaded DX12 AMD tech demo...yeah.

it still could..

[i_build_nanosuits]

8 minutes ago, wcreek said:

it still could..

yeah...but what about the other 67563 games where it would potentially do quite a bit worse?

[handymanshandle]

10 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

yeah...but what about the other 67563 games where it would potentially do quite a bit worse?

Eh wait and see I guess. It would still be cool if it's definitively was on par to a Haswell i5.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Just now, wcreek said:

Eh wait and see I guess. It would still be cool if it's definitively was on par to a Haswell i5.

so long as it's priced well, and the motherboards are also readily available and priced well too

[Curufinwe_wins]

39 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

That's anywhere really.

Except the US really... Lol.

[NumLock21]

On par with 4670k?

Hope its better than that. No, then goodbye amd cpu division. Nice knowing you. 

[Dabombinable]

1 hour ago, patrickjp93 said:

When it launched, there were some compelling cases for it, but they were integer-only workloads.

Not when the FX 8350 was shitloads cheaper and well known for overclocking to 5GHz (and indeed 4.8GHz as an average-with the performance at 5GHz not being much better).

[Vode]

1 hour ago, Dabombinable said:

The FX 9590 competes with nothing BTW........

It competes with a Pentium 4 in the egg frying benchmark. 9590 wins by a hair. 

[DannyRyu]

7 hours ago, leelaa14 said:

I completely agree with you on this, but as I said, the fact they are only using one is worrying, that's all. 

well it is just  a leaked bench mark so. they might have tested more were only seeing one leaked.

Its not like this was Public so.

[Mr.Meerkat]

Hmmm...if the IPC is as good as Haswell then it's fine and all dandy but if not then this is once again the same situation again, more cores and higher clock speeds to compensate for the lower IPC which in turns means that it's going to be horrible in more indie titles and games that uses 1-2 cores/threads. Looks like we're gonna have to wait for more benchmarks...

[NumLock21]

2 hours ago, Okjoek said:

Then I'll just  get the 4670K...K?!

 

Wasn't saying I was being anti-competitive or anything. Infact I'm really eagar to see the performance per watt. I love that sort of thing and that's a better gauge for determining whether they win or not.

They need to win with raw performance not performance per watt.

[Simon771]

I want cinebench scores

[Curufinwe_wins]

1 minute ago, Simon771 said:

I want cinebench scores

That would be too transparent...

[Mr.Meerkat]

6 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

That would be too transparent...

and that would actually tell us how well ZEN CPUs performs plus most people know's what cinebench is and it's easy comparisons to CPUs that already exist  

[Marinatall_Ironside]

2 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

When will you people learn?! AMD historically matches Intel's prices when it has competitive products. Athlon Extreme -$1000, Phenom X6 -$1000, FX 9590 -$1000! Even if for some reason it doesn't this one time, Intel will just respond by dropping prices, and you'll be able to get an even better upgrade for the same price!

Yep, competition baby! If they sell someone a better part for the same price, the best option you have guys is to kneecap your price to stay competitive. Nvidia did this too (remember the 780 price cuts when the infernal, noisy R9 290X launched?), so Intel isn't alone on that one.

Edited August 11, 2016 by JurunceNK
Corrected some history

[Demonking]

Just now, JurunceNK said:

Yep, competition baby! If they sell someone a better part for the same price, the best option you have guys is to kneecap your price to stay competitive. Nvidia did this too (remember the 780 Ti price cuts when the infernal, noisy R9 290X launched?), so Intel isn't alone on that one.

you mean 780 i don't recall a 780ti price cut.

[Marinatall_Ironside]

Just now, Demonking said:

you mean 780 i don't recall a 780ti price cut.

Oh thanks for the correction

[Humbug]

final performance of the consumer product will depend how much further clockspeed is ramped up from this engineering sample.

it will be ramped up of course as always happens but I have no idea by how much.

[Curufinwe_wins]

3 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

and that would actually tell us how well ZEN CPUs performs plus most people know's what cinebench is and it's easy comparisons to CPUs that already exist  

Hence transparent....

[Marinatall_Ironside]

2 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

and that would actually tell us how well ZEN CPUs performs plus most people know's what cinebench is and it's easy comparisons to CPUs that already exist  

Yeah because it's a real-world scenario in terms of 3D rendering usage. Remember CineBench is built around Maxon's Cinema 4D, a 3D program I've used 6 years ago (man that was a long time when I used it on an iMac in high school . Will never use a Mac for that kind of work EVER again, be it willingly or forced. Windows FTW)

[Mr.Meerkat]

1 minute ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Hence transparent....

Yep but ya know, cinebench scores plis...

 

Just now, JurunceNK said:

Yeah because it's a real-world scenario in terms of 3D rendering usage. Remember CineBench is built around Maxon's Cinema 4D, a 3D program I've used 6 years ago (man that was a long time when I used it on an iMac in high school . Will never use a Mac for that kind of work EVER again, be it willingly or forced. Windows FTW)

Well an iMac contains laptop hardware so I'm not surprised how "good" it would have been for rendering

[Marinatall_Ironside]

6 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Yep but ya know, cinebench scores plis...

 

Well an iMac contains laptop hardware so I'm not surprised how "good" it would have been for rendering

Oh you want to know how long it took me to render a project that involves robotic arms and a good amount of textures and a healthy polygon count? Over 48 hours give or take! I will always remember that, as the bane of my existence with an iMac, let alone a Mac Pro (god imagine the performance-per-dollar those trash bins)

Edited August 11, 2016 by JurunceNK