cpu Will AMD Zen will cause CPU price drop?

[ShadySocks]

Do you expect the release of AMD Zen cause price drops for CPUs similar to the price drops for GPUs? (First thread sorry )

[APasz]

Depends whether or not the chips are actually as good as AMD are claiming.

[TacticlTwinkie]

It depends on how good it is and if it is priced competitively. If it kicks ass for the money, and I really hope it does, then hopefully Intel cpu's will have a price cut. Whether or not you want to get an AMD cpu, if Zen does well then we all win. It will either get Intel to price more aggressively or to make their upcoming generations even better.

[SCHISCHKA]

we can only hope it brings down the top end prices and causes intel to stop overclocking locks

[Mira Yurizaki]

Yes, but nothing drastic. Like for instance, I seriously doubt Intel will slash the price of the i7-5960X just because the highest-end Zen supposedly gets there and is to be priced less.

[ARikozuM]

Did the 2016 Corvette drop in price when the 2017 Mustang came out? It did not.

 

Any price drop that does occur is likely due to crowd control rather than fear.

[Drak3]

21 minutes ago, APasz said:

Depends whether or not the chips are actually as good as AMD are claiming.

Well, FX, A series, and RX were all as good as AMD claimed. It was rumor mills and news outlets with nothing to report that hyped them beyond belief.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

Well, FX, A series, and RX were all as good as AMD claimed. It was rumor mills, LTT members, and news outlets with nothing to report that hyped them beyond belief.

Corrected for... reasons.

[Dabombinable]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Well, FX, A series, and RX were all as good as AMD claimed. It was rumor mills and news outlets with nothing to report that hyped them beyond belief.

The FX series....never were good as claimed (and initially were far worse than preceding Phenom II). And the A* series...remain pathetic outside of higher end A8 and A10 SKU.

[Drak3]

Just now, Dabombinable said:

The FX series....never were good as claimed. And the A* series...remain pathetic outside of higher end A8 and A10 SKU.

The FX series was exactly as good as claimed. The claims were taken out of context and exaggerated when reported by outlets like WCCF.

Also, the A Series is strictly a budget lineup in all markets that it operates in. Expecting stellar performance of them is foolish.

[Dabombinable]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

The FX series was exactly as good as claimed. The claims were taken out of context and exaggerated when reported by outlets like WCCF.

Also, the A Series is strictly a budget lineup in all markets that it operates in. Expecting stellar performance of them is foolish.

Right...AMD claimed that it was worse than previous Phenom II. And the A series may be a budget line up...if its not for example an A4 in a $1K plus 15.5" notebook (I've seen that recently-and the A4 was weaker in all areas except the IMC than the A8 4555M inside my laptop). But when the clock speed of the GPU+CPU are throttled heavily with both under load (if Turbocore isn't negatively affecting performance) or the single module (very few have dual modules, meaning that due to the lone FPU a lot of the time it runs like a single core) of the A6 and A4  which also have far far weaker GPU (think in the realms of the Intel HD4000 graphics, and weaker)

[Dabombinable]

12 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

The FX series was exactly as good as claimed. The claims were taken out of context and exaggerated when reported by outlets like WCCF.

Also, the A Series is strictly a budget lineup in all markets that it operates in. Expecting stellar performance of them is foolish.

Also, this is the start of just how bad the FX series initially was-as it is its taken almost 6 years for it to even come close to what it should have launched at (with the major architectural improvements being limited to the A series and its derivative Athlons).

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/5

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Dabombinable said:

Right...AMD claimed that it was worse than previous Phenom II. And the A series may be a budget line up...if its not for example an A4 in a $1K plus 15.5" notebook (I've seen that recently-and the A4 was weaker in all areas except the IMC than the A8 4555M inside my laptop). But when the clock speed of the GPU+CPU are throttled heavily with both under load (if Turbocore isn't negatively affecting performance) or the single module (very few have dual modules, meaning that due to the lone FPU a lot of the time it runs like a single core) of the A6 and A4  which also have far far weaker GPU (think in the realms of the Intel HD4000 graphics, and weaker)

AMD didn't claim that FX had better IPC than the Phenom II's. They claimed that it had better overall performance, which FX did.

 

Also, an A4 in a $1K notebook doesn't mean AMD is claiming it performs better than it does, it means that a notebook maker is either really stupid or really good at selling snake oil.

The A4 and A6 aren't even serious contenders outside of the bare bottom of the entry level market, and half of the products they are in, they don't belong in.

[SLAYR]

1 hour ago, ShadySocks said:

Do you expect the release of AMD Zen cause price drops for CPUs similar to the price drops for GPUs? (First thread sorry )

There have been price drops on the fx series lately. At Microcenter in the US you can get a fx 8320, and a board for $85, or a 8350, a wraith cooler, and motherboard for $135. (excluding tax)

 

If you expect Intel to get cheaper forget about it, they don't drop the price at all.

38 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

And the A series may be a budget line up...if its not for example an A4 in a $1K plus 15.5" notebook

Not AMD's fault though. They don't make the laptops they just make the chips. 

 

Apus especially the a4/a6 or the super low end "e" series are in general for just word processing, web browsing and other light tasks, only the a8s and a10s do they ever market for competitive games like cago, lol, dota 2 which aren't intense games.

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, SLAYR said:

If you expect Intel to get cheaper forget about it, they don't drop the price at all.

I think Intel will be generous and knock off $5.

[Gordon Bennett]

 

8 hours ago, ShadySocks said:

Do you expect the release of AMD Zen cause price drops for CPUs similar to the price drops for GPUs? (First thread sorry )

 

Oh yes, it will happen! The tech details of the Zen line-up have already leaked, (not yet verified by AMD) and so have the benchmarks. Zen will launch with a line-up of 4 CPUs.

 

1. Top 'o the range $500 - SR7 - 3.2Ghz (3.5 Ghz boost) 8 core 16 thread - Unlocked & able to achieve at least 4.Ghz+ on air cooling - 95W TDP at base - Jan launch

2. Locked SR7 - $349 - 3.Ghz (3.2Ghz boost) - 95W TDP max - Jan launch

3. SR5 (get it, like the I5) - $249 - Clock unknown - 65W TDP - March launch

4 SR3 (see) - $149 - Clock Unknown - 65 W TDP - March launch

 

All will support DDR4/PCIe X16 Gen 3/USB 3.1 and based on Samsung 14nm Finfet fabrication process. Pricing has been extrapolated from leaked Chinese launch prices.

 

Benchmarks leaked show a Haswell E level of performance from the SR7s, which are 50% cheaper, but never less than 75% as powerful, and that was from an 'underclocked' engineering sample (@ 2.5Ghz/2.8Ghz boost). So they look like being equal to Haswell, at 50% of the price!

 

Only a fool (or someone in desperate need of a PC) would purchase an Intel CPU right now, the price drop will have to be massive, or Intel will lose market share faster than Trump can insult people!

 

AMD launch event 13th December demonstrating the CPU's in live gameplay streaming from:

 

http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/new-horizon

Edited November 30, 2016 by wkdpaul
cleaned up

[Drak3]

6 hours ago, Gordon Bennett said:

Oh yes, it will happen! The tech details of the Zen line-up have already leaked, (not yet verified by AMD) and so have the benchmarks. Zen will launch with a line-up of 4 CPUs.

 

1. Top 'o the range $500 - SR7 - 3.2Ghz (3.5 Ghz boost) 8 core 16 thread - Unlocked & able to achieve at least 4.Ghz+ on air cooling - 95W TDP at base - Jan launch

2. Locked SR7 - $349 - 3.Ghz (3.2Ghz boost) - 95W TDP max - Jan launch

3. SR5 (get it, like the I5) - $249 - Clock unknown - 65W TDP - March launch

4 SR3 (see) - $149 - Clock Unknown - 65 W TDP - March launch

 

All will support DDR4/PCIe X16 Gen 3/USB 3.1 = Pricing extrapolated from leaked Chinese launch prices

 

Benchmarks leaked show a Haswell E level of performance from the SR7s, which are 50% cheaper, but never less than 75% as powerful, and that was from an 'underclocked' engineering sample!  

 

Only a fool (or someone in desperate need of a PC) would purchase an Intel CPU right now, the price drop will have to be massive, or Intel will lose market share faster than Trump can insult people!

You're awfully hopeful. Allow me to crush that.

 

AMD has ALOT of work ahead of them to restore their shattered reputation in the enthusiast, mainstream, commercial, and industrial markets. That won't happen until we're into the middle to the end of the Zen life cycle. Once AMD has restored their reputation as a serious competitor, then Intel will see them as a threat and act accordingly.

[Gordon Bennett]

5 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Allow me to crush that

Whilst I wait for you to do that, you might want to look at the benchmarks, before you post another pile...

 

http://www.eteknix.com/amd-zen-matches-intel-10-core-xeon/

[Drak3]

Just now, Gordon Bennett said:

Waiting....

Zen is not a direct threat to Intel. We're talking about performance rivaling what is Intel's "been there, done that." Don't get me wrong, It's still a highly viable chip for most people, but for those doing research on a current 4c/8t, they're probably going to go Intel because it does perform better at the same clocks.

AMD also no longer has a reputation outside of the budget market. While people like me are going to buy Zen if it delivers what AMD promises, we're a small minority. It'll take a generation or two before AMD has built up enough reputation that more people consider AMD over Intel in other markets. Until that happens, Intel won't feel the need to lower prices, so they won't. Intel didn't even lower the prices of their old products when they released new products.

[Gordon Bennett]

11 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Zen is not a direct threat to Intel.

Clearly, you don't understand benchmarks!

 

Also, the OP asked a question. I can't see how your post answers it, apart from rambling onto:

11 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

but for those doing research on a current 4c/8t, they're probably going to go Intel

"Probably" you say. How misinformed can one person really be?

 

Err no, research institutions especially those in the public sector (which make up most science research) are price conscious. So your 'I reckon' post is clearly, misinformed.

 

Again, in case you can't follow links, AMD Zen matches Intel Xeon server CPU, at a fraction of the cost:

 

http://www.eteknix.com/amd-zen-matches-intel-10-core-xeon/

 

Please, if you are just going to post hate, and can't answer the O/Ps question, don't you think it might be a lot better to troll along? Again:

 

1. Top 'o the range $500 - SR7 - 3.2Ghz (3.5 Ghz boost) 8 core 16 thread - Unlocked & able to achieve at least 4.Ghz+ on air cooling - 95W TDP at base - Jan launch

2. Locked SR7 - $349 - 3.Ghz (3.2Ghz boost) - 95W TDP max - Jan launch

3. SR5 (get it, like the I5) - $249 - Clock unknown - 65W TDP - March launch

4 SR3 (see) - $149 - Clock Unknown - 65 W TDP - March launch

[APasz]

1 minute ago, Gordon Bennett said:

~snip~

Yo dude, please, the adults are talking here. 1, Benchmarks of an engineering chip almost never end up being the final result. 2. As far as I can tell, NONE of these are verified by AMD them-selves. 3, What are you going on about research institutions? The public are the ones actually, you know, buying them. 4, Intel has had the CPU market by the neck for the last, what decade now. AMD has lost what reputation they had. It will take time for them to rebuild.

Intel is just so massive right now that AMD isn't a threat.

[Shadow_Storm56]

Zen can do what it wants..... I highly doubt were gunna see somone building a massive gaming rig rocking a Zen, simply because Intel is just better quality and tech, also they have such a good reputation. But who knows?  at this point it is all speculation until you can run some real benchmarkS and not just go by leaked stuff that may just be fake or on a benchmark optimised for Zen.  So what am I saying? Speculation is fun and cheaper cpus is fun but until you have the cpu on a test bench, you have nothing. I expect zen will be crap but it could be great! but Intel won't lower their prices to respond because they  won't see it as a threat until it is actually better than Intel. 

[Gordon Bennett]

8 minutes ago, APasz said:

Yo dude, please, the adults are talking here.

8 minutes ago, APasz said:

Yo dude, please, the adults are talking here

Being over 18 doesn't make you intelligent or knowledgable, clearly!

8 minutes ago, APasz said:

Benchmarks of an engineering chip almost never end up being the final result"

Yes, they get faster!

8 minutes ago, APasz said:

 What are you going on about research institutions?

 Yeah, lots of people have literacy issues, and reading an entire thread can be draining I know, but please try, then take it up with the burke who posted that!

 

8 minutes ago, APasz said:

Intel is just so massive right now that AMD isn't a threat.

1. Top 'o the range $500 - SR7 - 3.2Ghz (3.5 Ghz boost) 8 core 16 thread - Unlocked & able to achieve at least 4.Ghz+ on air cooling - 95W TDP at base - Jan launch

2. Locked SR7 - $349 - 3.Ghz (3.2Ghz boost) - 95W TDP max - Jan launch

3. SR5 (get it, like the I5) - $249 - Clock unknown - 65W TDP - March launch

4 SR3 (see) - $149 - Clock Unknown - 65 W TDP - March launch

 

&

 

AMD Zen matches Intel Xeon server CPU, at a fraction of the cost:

 

http://www.eteknix.com/amd-zen-matches-intel-10-core-xeon/

[Dabombinable]

9 minutes ago, APasz said:

Yo dude, please, the adults are talking here. 1, Benchmarks of an engineering chip almost never end up being the final result. 2. As far as I can tell, NONE of these are verified by AMD them-selves. 3, What are you going on about research institutions? The public are the ones actually, you know, buying them. 4, Intel has had the CPU market by the neck for the last, what decade now. AMD has lost what reputation they had. It will take time for them to rebuild.

Intel is just so massive right now that AMD isn't a threat.

To think that at one point, Intel panicked due to how well AMD was doing (read, Intel had nothing to compete at the high end, at all-Coppermine overall while good was inferior to AMD's offerings at the time) and decided that trying to sell Pentium III running at 1133MHz that were unstable AF was a really good idea.

[APasz]

1 minute ago, Gordon Bennett said:

~snip~

How about over 17 years learning everything there is to know about computers.

You've obviously never worked in the industry.

You're the one that said research institution, I was wondering where you got that from?

And again, as far as I've seen none of you're listing here is verified by AMD, meaning it has to be hosted on an AMD website and not be a engineering sample chip otherwise it's mere speculation.