• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD's Zen Rumored for January 17th Launch; 8 Cores With 16 Threads for $300

Definitely looking forward to this one, but I'm restraining my excitement until we see some real unbiased benchmarks. Hoping AMD can pull this one out of their hat. AMD has disappointed so many times that it's just tough to get more fired up than that until we see it proved out. I would love to finally have a true reason to upgrade, and to go back to AMD.
 
I still hold my reservations until we see some independent benchmarks. Still though, it sounds like a decent platform and promising since its ditching Bulldozer so we should expect to see some decent performance out of it. Its just how much will we get...
 
Frick said:
IPC won't be. Maybe Haswell.
Click to expand...
I'm expecting IPC between ivy and haswell. And I'd definitely get some AMD cpus if they can manage it. Getting ahead of haswell in one generation would be exceptional, something which i find hard to believe.
 
They would release after Xmas. Who skips the holiday season? Oh wait amd a day late and dollar short as usual. Oh well hopefully it's super competitive and slams 6900k prices into the ground.
 
I am fine with Haswell IPC level.

If they can keep that it on that level, I might not need to source an ES Haswell-E 10 core ships and instead go for Zen 8/16 instead for my secondary rendering / media rig.

I wish it was LGA though. Oh well.
 
Some leaked screenshoot
2dd9f132_xd1zzfxfkbyx.png


Unlocked 8core ~ 500$
 
Ubersonic said:
Not a chance, they know from the FX-9590 that people will not pay Intel prices for an AMD CPU.

300 sounds about right for this.
Click to expand...

An invidious comparison as FX 9590 was a binned stock OC'd 8350.
This is a whole new Arch.
 
cdawall said:
They would release after Xmas. Who skips the holiday season? Oh wait amd a day late and dollar short as usual. Oh well hopefully it's super competitive and slams 6900k prices into the ground.
Click to expand...

You do know that Intel is supposed to announce it's new stuff at CES, no? So AMD being a week and a half later is hardly going to matter if the launch date is true.
 
TheLostSwede said:
You do know that Intel is supposed to announce it's new stuff at CES, no? So AMD being a week and a half later is hardly going to matter if the launch date is true.
Click to expand...

It's more of a frustration to me if they released before Xmas than that means more money for me before Xmas. Has nothing to do with how tech is timed.
 
Ungari said:
An invidious comparison
Click to expand...

Nah it's a fine comparison, AMD's current bosses now know that people won't pay Intel prices for an AMD chip. The new flagship will be priced against a 4c8t i7 not any of Intel's enthusiast models because AMD have learnt that lesson from the FX-9590 debacle, they know that even if they manage to beat Intel's offerings the consumer base will still expect them to be cheaper (and they know also that Intel is profiteering from their lack of competition and can/will drop prices when Zen arrives).

Even when the Athlon XP/64 had their balls in the Pentium IV's mouth consumers were still buying the more expensive/inferior Intel CPU's by a stupidly scary ratio.
 
Easo said:
Please be success, please be success.
Click to expand...
Hear, hear. We need AMD to succeed.
I do think that these leaks are being orchestrated by AMD so that people will hold off on end of the year purchases.
 
prtskg said:
I'm expecting IPC between ivy and haswell. And I'd definitely get some AMD cpus if they can manage it. Getting ahead of haswell in one generation would be exceptional, something which i find hard to believe.
Click to expand...
I like these posts ala: "think it will be haswell, but maybe ivy, definietly not skylake, but Kably will smoke this"... between all those "generations" there is 10-15% performance difference (corse count = the same; frequency got little up, but overclock little down) - if amd lands in the lower part (of this narrow gap) = win, if higher part = win... because intel sucks (well not really - intel is stronger than ever - it just thinks it client sucks and will buy any "next generation" or at least think and talk like about new generation - even when performance increase is way below price increase)
 
Ungari said:
An invidious comparison as FX 9590 was a binned stock OC'd 8350.
This is a whole new Arch.
Click to expand...

Had difficulty holding 5.0GHzunder water, My 8350 holds 5.1 on Air.
 
If the performance was actually at Intel's level, the pricing would be too. See the pre-Core 2 era when AMD had $1000 CPUs too and even had a growing server presence.

Hopefully they can at least hit Sandy Bridge performance per clock per thread in general.
 
swaaye said:
If the performance was actually at Intel's level, the pricing would be too. See the pre-Core 2 era when AMD had $1000 CPUs too.
Click to expand...

Different era
 
TheLostSwede said:
Unlikely, but let's see. If you'd read the source better, you would also have seen that it's high-end overclockable part(s) is expected to sell at over $500 and launching in Q1 (March?). The $250-300 part is said to compete with the i7-6850K, admittedly at half the price though.

If they can pull this off, Intel is going to have to up their game a couple of steps at least, even if the per core performance is slightly lower than Intel's.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is Intel's IPC doesn't even look much better. At most Intel will have a 10% advantage, and more likely it will be ~5%.

Intel will definitely have a raw performance advantage due to higher clockspeeds, but I'm not so sure they will win in efficiency at this point...
 
Captain_Tom said:
The funny thing is Intel's IPC doesn't even look much better. At most Intel will have a 10% advantage, and more likely it will be ~5%.

Intel will definitely have a raw performance advantage due to higher clockspeeds, but I'm not so sure they will win in efficiency at this point...
Click to expand...

Give me overclocking or give me death.
 
So a AMD "5960X" with 4.2 GHz possible on air for 300$? :wtf:

That I 'll only believe when I see it in shops ... sounds to good to be true.
 
the source is overclock.net


small correction all are unlocked, just that 500$ is special bin. Normal for 350$ should do 4.2ghz on avg, that 500$ probably ~ 4.6ghz.
 
Intel charges the consumer twice for the ability to overclock.
What I love about AMD, is unlike Intel they don't charge an extra premium for unlocked CPUs and Mainboards.



.eJwFwdsNwyAMAMBdGADzcOo4U3SDChFEqJKCsPNVdffefc09T7OZQ3XIBrA3yX3uVrTPVIutvdezpNHE5n5BUk35uMpHBTzHldhh4IgYmSNBQHKEtNDqgnssHDw8W9Z7lpdn-x7V_P5wHSN_.lSnpI43SM6bszEhF8FJWrBuxhLs
 
Did you guys who post about how amd used to price gouge actually build pc's back then?

And i'm not sure which era you mean, the one where i paid £55 for a barton xp, the one where i paid £70ish for a s939 3500, or the time i got an opteron 165 (my first dual core!) for about £90

Because you could overclock all of them to as fast as the top silly price chip (which they price matched to intels expensive units, pretty fair as they were faster)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top