[Rumour] New AMD Zen ES Base/Boost Clock Frequencies Leaked

[Energycore]

Just now, patrickjp93 said:

I mean, nothing is going to be able to compete with Liquid Pro/Ultra. There's a limit to what you can do without direct soldering.

It seems like a solution to this problem isn't as easy as it first was made out to be. Hmm.

[MageTank]

57 minutes ago, Energycore said:

I'll change my request for some actual good TIM instead.

Intel's TIM isn't chosen for it's thermal performance, it's chosen because of its longevity. Dow Corning TC5026 is extremely durable, and durability is what you want when selling products intended to last several years. Last thing you want is paste that performs good for about a year, then turns into garbage that needs to be replaced. 

[Energycore]

1 minute ago, MageTank said:

Intel's TIM isn't chosen for it's thermal performance, it's chosen because of its longevity. Dow Corning TC5026 is extremely durable, and durability is what you want when selling products intended to last several years. Last thing you want is paste that performs good for about a year, then turns into garbage that needs to be replaced. 

Hmm indeed.

[Zeeee]

On 10/24/2016 at 11:39 AM, DildorTheDecent said:

Yet everybody is cool with the likes of the 6700K sitting at 91W TDP

 

BUT FOR AMD IT IS ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE!1!!!11!!!!1111!

 

lol. 

at what 4.4ghz? whats this zen at 3.1ghz lmaaaaooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo LAUGHABLE i knew amd would dissapoint again, watch its gonna crush the dreams of amd peasants around the world itll be hilarious to watch

[Dabombinable]

2 hours ago, Zeeee said:

at what 4.4ghz? whats this zen at 3.1ghz lmaaaaooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo LAUGHABLE i knew amd would dissapoint again, watch its gonna crush the dreams of amd peasants around the world itll be hilarious to watch

My 4790K at 4.4GHz has a TDP of 88W...and only runs warm to hot because of the FIVR which allows it idle with significantly lower power consumption than anything before or since Haswell was released (excluding Broadwell, Haswell's die shrink) and far more precise automated voltage control.

[HKZeroFive]

3 hours ago, Zeeee said:

at what 4.4ghz? whats this zen at 3.1ghz lmaaaaooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo LAUGHABLE i knew amd would dissapoint again, watch its gonna crush the dreams of amd peasants around the world itll be hilarious to watch

Lay off the fanboying.

[Prysin]

1 hour ago, Dabombinable said:

My 4790K at 4.4GHz has a TDP of 88W...and only runs warm to hot because of the FIVR which allows it idle with significantly lower power consumption than anything before or since Haswell was released (excluding Broadwell, Haswell's die shrink) and far more precise automated voltage control.

if you want to see low idle power. Go look at Excavator/Bristol ridge. that shit is unreal when it hits the lower c-states.

[Dabombinable]

32 minutes ago, Prysin said:

if you want to see low idle power. Go look at Excavator/Bristol ridge. that shit is unreal when it hits the lower c-states.

0.11W unreal?

[Prysin]

2 hours ago, Dabombinable said:

0.11W unreal?

ive seen it go closer to 0.05w for brief periods (5-10 sec max) on my 845

[Citadelen]

8 hours ago, Zeeee said:

-snip- or -sigh- both work...

 

It's an eight-core CPU with SMT and a TDP of 95W which runs at 3.15-3.3GHz, what did you honestly expect? The 4-core is 2.9-3.1GHz at 65W. AMD doesn't have the money to develop separate CPU architectures, hence Zen scales from fanless laptops to the data centre. It seems to have levelled out in the middle of them with all the different use applications.

[raphidy]

It's like they sell xeon cpus in the mainstream, low clocks, more coars. Wonder if they will lock the clock or they will allow overclocking as they look clock limited anyways. If I was in the looking for AMD cpu, I would wait for the next revision. Hardware wise, it is always better to wait for V2.

[JJS76]

I hoped that Zen was going to be powerful enough to shake up the prices on Intel chips, but it looks like AMD is only a minuscule hemorrhoid on Intel's posterior. 

 

Maybe be they might bump up the clock speed a little more before release. ?

[SpaceGhostC2C]

56 minutes ago, JJS76 said:

Maybe be they might bump up the clock speed a little more before release. ?

You are talking like there is one CPU whose clock is to be determined. I see no reason to expect less than a full lineup, like both AMD and Intel currently have. Hence, there will be many TDPs and many clock speeds. This "leak" just have two models, only one of which is a quad core, and a 65W one. Interesting, but too little to say anything about what the first Zen lineup ito hit the market will look like.

[Mr.Meerkat]

On 10/24/2016 at 3:23 PM, Prysin said:

they call it clusters/module.

 

Basically, all AMDs products are MODULAR, thus they can mix and match any of their IP into a single product. Thus 4 cores is a "cluster" or package or whatever.

 

They got GPU modules (contains 1 ACE, 64 shaders, X ROPs, X TMUs each), memory modules, IO modules and now, much like bulldozer, they are looking to expand this system so that the minimum package is 4 ZEN cores.

Wait, does that mean no more dual core or 6-core CPUs from AMD? Riparino pepperarino 

[JJS76]

35 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

You are talking like there is one CPU whose clock is to be determined. I see no reason to expect less than a full lineup, like both AMD and Intel currently have. Hence, there will be many TDPs and many clock speeds. This "leak" just have two models, only one of which is a quad core, and a 65W one. Interesting, but too little to say anything about what the first Zen lineup ito hit the market will look like.

True. Just need to wait and hope.

[vitor_cut]

47 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Wait, does that mean no more dual core or 6-core CPUs from AMD? Riparino pepperarino 

dual core i dont know probably no. 6 core they might be able to shut down part of the cluster with firmware, and i think they will have a 6c/12t sku, and if they can make it arround the price of the mainstream i7 ( 4c/8t) will be awsomwe and force Intel to give us 6 core in the mainstream earlyer

[Mr.Meerkat]

2 minutes ago, vitor_cut said:

dual core i dont know probably no. 6 core they might be able to shut down part of the cluster with firmware, and i think they will have a 6c/12t sku, and if they can make it arround the price of the mainstream i7 ( 4c/8t) will be awsomwe and force Intel to give us 6 core in the mainstream earlyer

Well at a point, a 5820K was cheaper than a 6700K if we didn't include the price of the motherboard  

[vitor_cut]

43 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Well at a point, a 5820K was cheaper than a 6700K if we didn't include the price of the motherboard  

thats the thing!  

the platform cost ,a 5820K( 400 ish $) in a mid range Z170 would be awsome, Not only for gaming but for a budget rendering machine, i would buy it!!!

 

[DildorTheDecent]

12 hours ago, Zeeee said:

at what 4.4ghz? whats this zen at 3.1ghz lmaaaaooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo LAUGHABLE i knew amd would dissapoint again, watch its gonna crush the dreams of amd peasants around the world itll be hilarious to watch

xddddddd good meme. 

[Prysin]

1 hour ago, vitor_cut said:

dual core i dont know probably no. 6 core they might be able to shut down part of the cluster with firmware, and i think they will have a 6c/12t sku, and if they can make it arround the price of the mainstream i7 ( 4c/8t) will be awsomwe and force Intel to give us 6 core in the mainstream earlyer

no it wont, and no they wont.

 

No, AMD wont price ANY ZEN SKU retardedly cheap to "beat intel".

If AMD prices their 6C/12T SKU at consumer i7 levels, then intel will just drop their prices for the consumer i7. Thus forcing AMD to take FURTHER LOSSES TRYING TO COMPETE IN PRICE.

[Edgar R. Zakarian]

On 10/24/2016 at 2:10 PM, patrickjp93 said:

She's saying that based on the Blender test AMD showcased which anyone with more than half a brain knew was rigged from the word go.

Was this all fake then?

 

 

[MageTank]

2 hours ago, Prysin said:

no it wont, and no they wont.

 

No, AMD wont price ANY ZEN SKU retardedly cheap to "beat intel".

If AMD prices their 6C/12T SKU at consumer i7 levels, then intel will just drop their prices for the consumer i7. Thus forcing AMD to take FURTHER LOSSES TRYING TO COMPETE IN PRICE.

That is only true if AMD manages to match the performance of Intel's CPU's. If Intel still has a performance lead, their prices are likely to remain the same. The last rumor I saw, predicted Haswell IPC. Haswell IPC is about 5-8% lower than Skylake depending on who you ask. 

 

AMD has a ton of room to make profit on that 8c/16t SKU with how expensive Intel equivalent SKU's are. The 6900k and 5960X are still $1000 a piece in the US. AMD Could sell theirs for $600-$700 a piece, and easily sell a ton of them for their lifting power alone. If these chips OC decently, then it's likely to match the clock speeds of Intel SKU's, which would help bridge that gap completely. After all, people still use Sandy Bridge chips for gaming, and have no complaints. Price:performance is going to be AMD's ally for making Zen work, and I am sure they know this already. As long as Intel still has a superior product in terms of raw performance, they won't worry about lowering prices. 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

9 minutes ago, MageTank said:

That is only true if AMD manages to match the performance of Intel's CPU's. If Intel still has a performance lead, their prices are likely to remain the same.

No, it's true regardless: if they don't match the top intel performance (which even AMD says won't happen), then they won't match intel's prices, but they will still price according to performance. We can except some drop at the given performance point based on increased competition, but we shouldn't expect ridiculous price to performance ratios.

 

12 minutes ago, MageTank said:

As long as Intel still has a superior product in terms of raw performance, they won't worry about lowering prices. 

This is also not true: it doesn't matter who has the best CPU, prices are set to maximize profits. Intel offers many CPUs, and they will have to adjust the prices of those CPUs to different extent, depending on how sensitive their respective demand is to both AMD and intel's own competition: there are very few customers who will buy a specific CPU no matter what, the vast majority will only buy a particular "top" CPU if the next tier ones are sufficiently expensive. You can already see this in intel's lineup: 1151 i7s can't be too expensive or everyone will buy i5s, but they can't be too cheap or no one will go 2011-3 - and certainly they can't release 6- and 8-core 1151 chips if they intend to keep extra margin on the X99 platform. All CPUs in the market are imperfect substitutes of each other to different degrees, and none of them can be priced in a vacuum. 

[MageTank]

7 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

No, it's true regardless: if they don't match the top intel performance (which even AMD says won't happen), then they won't match intel's prices, but they will still price according to performance. We can except some drop at the given performance point based on increased competition, but we shouldn't expect ridiculous price to performance ratios.

 

This is also not true: it doesn't matter who has the best CPU, prices are set to maximize profits. Intel offers many CPUs, and they will have to adjust the prices of those CPUs to different extent, depending on how sensitive their respective demand is to both AMD and intel's own competition: there are very few customers who will buy a specific CPU no matter what, the vast majority will only buy a particular "top" CPU if the next tier ones are sufficiently expensive. You can already see this in intel's lineup: 1151 i7s can't be too expensive or everyone will buy i5s, but they can't be too cheap or no one will go 2011-3 - and certainly they can't release 6- and 8-core 1151 chips if they intend to keep extra margin on the X99 platform. All CPUs in the market are imperfect substitutes of each other to different degrees, and none of them can be priced in a vacuum. 

History begs to differ. When the FX lineup from AMD was brand new, before everyone focused entirely on IPC and the core modulation aspect, prices of Intel CPU's remained exactly the same, with Intel launching their 4c/8t i7's at around $330-$350 USD, and their 4c/4t i5's at $220-$240. One could argue that AMD's performance was still not there, but they still sold a decent amount during that time, with their prices being very competitive (and in some cases, higher) than Intel's. Even going back as far as Nehalem, the the majority of consumer i7's were priced around $285. This was around the time the Phenom II X4 940 launched, which launched at $275. A $10 difference in price, yet the Nehalem i7's were noticeably faster. 

 

Intel is fully aware of their performance advantage, and they have the branding to get away with selling a performance premium, even if price:performance is not in their favor on the high end. With AMD's recent reputation for lackluster CPU's, even if they price lower, the consumer will be hesitant to buy. The benchmarking enthusiasts will certainly look the other way in favor of higher scores, regardless of the price premium. With the general consumer going mobile, it all hinges on how great Zen will perform in a mobile setting at this point (an area where AMD has the APU advantage). As far as general consumer desktop market goes, AMD will always be seen as the "cheaper option" until they can somehow match Intel's performance, or exceed it. Intel won't have to budge much, if any, to retain their reputation and market share among consumers.

[patrickjp93]

3 hours ago, Edgar R. Zakarian said:

Was this all fake then?

 

 

Not all of it. Games that use more cores, even with a Fury X, are still GPU-bottlenecked. The Blender test was definitely rigged though, not a doubt in my mind.