Jump to content


Photo

AMD Zen


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Fantomax

Fantomax

    Guard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts

Posted 14 December 2016 - 12:52 AM

As we know, AMD Zen just got it's live-stream yesterday. This bad boy will be hitting the market (expected) at Q1 2017. The performance is quite reasonable too.

 

So what do you think? Is AMD Zen worth to wait and use?

Will AMD Zen budget processors be price under $150 (like Intel i3-6100)?

 

Express your thoughts!


  • 0

#2 hishutup

hishutup

    Daedric Prince

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,576 posts

Posted 14 December 2016 - 01:00 AM

I hope it's good, I like to see competition because Intel has been really lazy.
In relation to older bethsoft games, let's see how single core performance is.

If I working again, I'd build a system just for sh*ts and giggles, but yeah...

#3 TechAngel85

TechAngel85

    Akatosh

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,967 posts

Posted 14 December 2016 - 10:33 AM

Intel hasn't had to come out with anything ground-breaking and has opted to stay within the "more horsepower using less energy" development approach for years. In my opinion, this is because AMD hasn't really even been a competitor like they used to be. Intel, in that regard, has become comfortable being on the top for several years. AMD is just now catching up to the current state of Intel processors, which is kinda sad seeing how long it took. I'm confident that Intel will remain in the top spot. I've read that they already have plans for a 7nm chip down the line which will not be made of silicon due to the limits of the material being within sight.

 

Personally, I'm not seeing anything special with the Zen model that Intel can't already produce and keep up with. I'll reserve any further judgements until the Zen hits the testers and we start to see benchmark results.



#4 Gyro

Gyro

    Commander

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 227 posts

Posted 14 December 2016 - 11:25 AM

It's good to try and keep Intel prices down, at least.

 

If we're lucky, a competitive AMD might force Intel to expand chip sizes for power, since the time to get transistor shrinks ready is getting longer and longer.  Hell, actual competition might get some folks to actually innovate and find other ways to squeeze more speed out of the transistor sizes that we'll have for the foreseeable future.  7nm looks to be at least 6 years away, so we'll likely be at 10nm for a long time.


  • 0

#5 Greg

Greg

    High King

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,467 posts

Posted 14 December 2016 - 09:18 PM

I hope you're right that this might prod Intel into making a new leap in the next generation, but I imagine this depends on whether AMD is finally creeping close to Intel's performance. Intel has been conservative since AMD was so far behind.



#6 Fantomax

Fantomax

    Guard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts

Posted 15 December 2016 - 12:04 AM

I really hope that AMD Zen SR3 (Summit Ridge) will be priced starting at $100+ (cheapest version) as the current i3-6100 (the current superstar for budget PCs) was in that price range too.


  • 0

#7 Mator

Mator

    Jarl

  • Mod Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 513 posts

Posted 15 December 2016 - 05:31 PM

 

I'm cautiously optimistic.  If AMD can deliver I'll probably be making an AMD build for my next PC.


  • 0

#8 Fantomax

Fantomax

    Guard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts

Posted 16 December 2016 - 11:48 PM

AMD will still miss budget segment though... as cheapest Zen will be starting at $200


  • 0

#9 SparrowPrince

SparrowPrince

    High King

  • Mod Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,190 posts

Posted 17 December 2016 - 12:15 AM

Time to crack the image out again:

aRPw3xM_700b.jpg

As a previous AMD fan, they just lost me recently. Competition is good, but I doubt this will change anything in terms of marketshare. Their biggest sell was to the budget market, and it looks like they lost that with those starting prices if true.
  • 1

#10 Fantomax

Fantomax

    Guard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts

Posted 17 December 2016 - 12:47 AM

Time to crack the image out again:

aRPw3xM_700b.jpg

As a previous AMD fan, they just lost me recently. Competition is good, but I doubt this will change anything in terms of marketshare. Their biggest sell was to the budget market, and it looks like they lost that with those starting prices if true.

 

LOL TRUE! AMD just don't realize that more cores doesn't mean better overall performance.


  • 0

#11 Mator

Mator

    Jarl

  • Mod Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 513 posts

Posted 17 December 2016 - 12:49 AM

Oh boy... that is unfortunate if true.


  • 0

#12 paradoxbound

paradoxbound

    Guard

  • Contributors
  • PipPip
  • 123 posts

Posted 30 December 2016 - 09:42 PM

I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of the 8 core chip. For AMD similar to Intel's approach will use their enthusiast processors as a testing ground for the 8,16 and 32 core server chips. There may be a 6 core Ryzen processor that clocks around 3.8 and maybe a 4 core that clocks around 4ghz. My guess is that AMD will release their quad core processors as APUs in the Raven Ridge family. There are some good margins to be made there. Especially if they can release a decent 14nm quad core APU that supports 32GB of RAM and USB 3.1. Since Apple stuck with AMD graphics for the new Macbook Pros, I would say it is a least a possiblility. AMD could be in a good position to take a chunk of Intel's laptop market. What ever happens AMD back in the game is good for everyone's business except Intel and Nvidia.


  • 0

#13 Mator

Mator

    Jarl

  • Mod Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 513 posts

Posted 11 January 2017 - 01:00 AM


  • 0

#14 Spock

Spock

    Jarl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 556 posts

Posted 21 January 2017 - 10:13 AM

Zen is really good for the CPU marked because competition is good. I have hopes that it will lower the ludacrious prices of the HEDT segment.

Only the releases will tell what budget options zen will bring. But I would definitely wait for two months before buying hardware atm.

Many people think Intel will have problems getting more single threaded performance because all the low hanging fruits are in the basket already. I personally hope for a well clocking desktop edram chip, possibly HEDT.

More cores definately mean more performance for many important tasks, just not for games.
  • 0

#15 TechAngel85

TechAngel85

    Akatosh

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,967 posts

Posted 21 January 2017 - 10:37 AM

More cores definately mean more performance for many important tasks, just not for games.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. In terms of performance for gaming (which is what the vast majority of us care about around here), I just don't see it being a huge winner or leap ahead. They're basically just catching up to Intel. The only thing Ryzen might have going for it is the performance/value ratios. If they hit the market at a cheaper price point than Intel offers, then that is the only thing I see sending gamers back to AMD (for the CPU, Nvidia still holds the market for video cards). So far, I have not been impressed with what I've seen. It's just marginally better and isn't anything that would coax me over to the AMD side.

 

For those that do a lot of audio/video/encoding type work, Ryzen might be more of gem. But for gamers, I'm just not seeing anything impressive right now.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users