# AMD RYZEN Demo Event - Beats $1,100 8-Core i7-6900K, With Lower TDP



## Raevenlord (Dec 13, 2016)

At their Austin, Texas "New Horizon" Event, AMD introduced us to live "ZEN" chips working full-tilt, showing us what AMD's passion and ingenuity managed to achieve. The "New Horizon" event was a celebration to what AMD sees as another one of those special, breakthrough moments for a company: after starting work on "ZEN" 4 years ago in 2012 as a complete new design. The focus: building a great machine, whilst increasing IPC by 40% over their previous architecture, at the same power constraints; and to create a smart machine, which could sense and adapt to environment and applications so it improves over time. The company's verdicts: "ZEN" met or exceeded their goals, with the desktop PC market being home to the very first "ZEN" product.

According to AMD's CEO Dr. Lisa Su, AMD's event was named "New Horizon" as a reference to AMD's vision in the computing space: that they're on a journey to bring a new generation of processor technology, and customers towards a new horizon of computing. Their intention? To directly connect with fans who love PC gaming, whilst doing what AMD does best - pushing the envelope on performance, power, frame-rates and technology. AMD also flaunted their renewed faith in gaming, with it being on the company's DNA and passion, whilst revisiting the old memory lane, reminiscing on the Athlon Thunderbird, the world's first chip to break the 1 GHz barrier; the launch of their first 64-bit processor; and breaking the 1 TFLOP barrier in computing power with their HD 4850 and 4870 gaming GPUs.



 

 

 



AMD confirmed that CPUs based on their "ZEN" micro-architecture will carry the brand "Ryzen" - a play on the "ZEN" architecture's focus on balance, high performance and low power, while introducing new features. Ryzen is AMD's take of a processor that is both powerful in purpose, and efficient in design, and it symbolizes the power of "ZEN" reaching the next horizon in computing. They will do so by starting with an 8-core, 16-thread, SMT-enabled, 3.4 GHz+ base clock and 20MB combined cache new high-performance CPU, leveraging all the improvements baked into AMD's new AM4 platform (with 3.4 GHz apparently being the lowest frequency a Ryzen, consumer-level desktop solution will carry).



 

 

 

 

To prove their words and commitment to Ryzen's performance, AMD showcased the chip's prowess in a Blender test, pitting a Ryzen CPU at 3.4 GHz base clock (without Boost), with the consumer market's only other 8-core, 16-thread CPU in the Intel i7 6900K, at its stock 3.2 GHz base clock, with Boost enabled and no adjustments, "straight out of the box". The verdict: Ryzen matched the 6900K's performance. Dr. Lisa Su was quick to point out the 6900K's pricing at $1100, though she left an intentional silence at the point where she could have made a bombastic pricing announcement for Ryzen - perhaps keeping her cards close to her chest so as to not allow Intel to figure out any pricing changes in their products (if any), should Ryzen prove deserving of such a response. But the bottom line, and the home-run hit by Lisa Su, was the announcement that Ryzen was able to match Intel's performance with 45 W less TDP - 95 W TDP on Ryzen against the 140 W TDP on Intel's 6900K. In another test, this time a Handbrake transcoding demo, Ryzen transcoded a video in 54 seconds, against 59 seconds on Intel's 6900K processor. 



 

 

Again at 3.4 GHz, Ryzen was shown "beating the game frame-rates of a Core i7 6900K playing Battlefield 1 at 4K resolution, with each CPU paired with an Nvidia Titan X GPU". Not drawing any more attention than needs to be drawn towards the usage of an NVIDIA solution at their own event (which was puzzling, since AMD did show a Ryzen CPU and a VEGA-based graphics cards running Star Wars Battlefront's as-of-yet unreleased Rogue One DLC at over 60fps in 4K), we didn't actually see any reported frame-rated on the Battlefield 1 demo - only that the Ryzen-based system offered considerably less frame-skipping than the Intel solution, with the expected effects that has on the gaming experience.



 

 

AMD also announced what constitutes part of Ryzen's beating heart: their SenseMI technology, which includes "Neural Net Prediction" - an artificial intelligence neural network that learns to predict what future pathway an application will take based on past runs; "Smart Prefetch", which drinks from the "Neural Net Prediction", anticipating the data an app needs and having it ready when needed (with these two features alone being responsible for 1/4 of Ryzen's performance uplift, according to Lisa Su). Additionally, AMD announced Ryzen's "Pure Power" and "Precision Boost" features: more than "100 embedded sensors with accuracy to the millivolt, milliwatt, and single degree level of temperature enable optimal voltage, clock frequency, and operating mode with minimal energy consumption", controlling each part of the chip, independently, in milliseconds, leveraging "smart logic that monitors integrated sensors and optimizes clock speeds, in increments as small as 25MHz, at up to a thousand times a second". Finishing the pentad of new features was the "Extended Frequency Range" (XFR), a temperature-based boost function where the processor knows what temperature it's operating at, enabling higher clock speeds as the system gets cooler (and vice-versa, we'd expect, towards the 3.4 GHz base clock).



 

 

 

 

 

 

At the event, AMD showed Ryzen running a VR demo, as well as delivering performance in raytracing, with physically based shaders and materials, HDR, and a grand total of 53 million polygons in a single model. Interestingly, AMD also showed their Ryzen CPU against an Intel 6700K processor overlocked towards an unspecified frequency, comparing the chip's performance in streaming DOTA 2: where the 6700K showed severe frame-skipping on the streaming screen, but Ryzen handled it beautifully.



 

 

 

 

As a sendoff, AMD's CEO Lisa SU mentioned that Ryzen will be on desktop and notebook solutions (leaving out the server market, which could mean a brand distinction between both solutions", whilst reaffirming that Ryzen's Q1 launch is completely on track, from the only company that has both high-performance CPUs and GPUs. And as an appetizer, the good doctor did say that Ryzen's performance will only improve until their promised launch.



 

 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## the54thvoid (Dec 13, 2016)

If this thing isn't out in January, I'll be sorely pissed.

In fact, I really wonder if it's ready for then at all.  Q1 can be all the way to March.


----------



## thesmokingman (Dec 13, 2016)

I dunno if I would say beat, more like match in one specific scenario.


----------



## qubit (Dec 13, 2016)

It's looking promising. Still, I'll reserve my excitement for the official reviews. If they say it's epic then I'll jump for joy.


----------



## Blueberries (Dec 13, 2016)

Things I would have liked to see:

1. Lower TDP (50-65W?) specs
2. XFR / Precision Boost benchmarked / demoed

I've trained myself not to believe the AMD hypetrain so I'm not entirely convinced just yet, but it was still nice to see _something_. Not that this isn't a giant leap forward for AMD and should cement them back in the CPU market for a while.

Is Ryzen going to throttle at 65-70C like antiquated AMD architectures? What about single thread performance? Is there an actual IPC advantage over SL/KL or is it just threadmagic? Time will tell?

Zen sounds much better than Ryzen. Not a fan of the new name.


----------



## Raevenlord (Dec 13, 2016)

thesmokingman said:


> I dunno if I would say beat, more like match in one specific scenario.



It did Beat it in the handbrake test though.


----------



## Darksword (Dec 13, 2016)

I'll believe it when I see it from independent testing.  AMD is the king of "hype leading to disappointment".


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 13, 2016)

And VEGA showcased as well. Freaking awesome.


----------



## Rivage (Dec 13, 2016)

Intel has better designers, at least... all those AMD slides looks... meh


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 13, 2016)

Darksword said:


> I'll believe it when I see it from independent testing.  AMD is the king of "hype leading to disappointment".




Well under Lisa Su it has improved a lot. The 480 hype was mostly generated by the good old internet hype train.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Dec 13, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> And VEGA showcased as well. Freaking awesome.



So was Titan X!

Still Zen sounds very promising.


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 13, 2016)

I am happy. Even though I am not going to build a new AMD system any time soon, the introduction of more competitive product will force the price of intel's HEDT down. If in one year I can upgrade to 6950X with $500 I will be thrilled!


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 13, 2016)

Fluffmeister said:


> So was Titan X!
> 
> Still Zen sounds very promising.




VEGA will be a faster clocked slightly efficiency bumped Fiji. Not gonna magically do way better in old DX11/OpenGL games, but will be great in DX12/Vulkan/VR applications.


----------



## renz496 (Dec 13, 2016)

so when independent review going to be available?


----------



## Xzibit (Dec 13, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> If this thing isn't out in January, I'll be sorely pissed.
> 
> In fact, I really wonder if it's ready for then at all.  Q1 can be all the way to March.



It wont.  You have CES coming up. I expect some motherboard vendors to start showcasing then. Earliest I see it coming to market is Mid-February but late March is more likely.




Fluffmeister said:


> So was Titan X!
> 
> Still Zen sounds very promising.



I think that was smart.  They took away the "AMD GPU optimization" concern i'm sure that would of come up if it was running an all AMD system with an undefined GPU.  They wanted to highlight the CPU and smartly enough they took the GPU out of the equation by using a competitor.


----------



## Steevo (Dec 13, 2016)

6700K was at 4.5Ghz in the demo.


----------



## mcraygsx (Dec 13, 2016)

Well it performs way better then my previous expectations which were 6700K. But performance equivalent of 6900K is a very bold move since it cost like $1050.


----------



## the54thvoid (Dec 13, 2016)

Xzibit said:


> It wont.  You have CES coming up. I expect some motherboard vendors to start showcasing then. Earliest I see it coming to market is Mid-February but late March is more likely.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Damn.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Dec 14, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> I am happy. Even though I am not going to build a new AMD system any time soon, the introduction of more competitive product will force the price of intel's HEDT down. If in one year I can upgrade to 6950X with $500 I will be thrilled!



But what if in 1 year, what AMD is offering is faster than a 6950X for the same price, or the same performance for like $400?


----------



## renz496 (Dec 14, 2016)

TheLaughingMan said:


> But what if in 1 year, what AMD is offering is faster than a 6950X for the same price, or the same performance for like $400?



if they have better solution they will charge for it. heck even when they not they still charge 1k for 9590.....initially.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Dec 14, 2016)

renz496 said:


> if they have better solution they will charge for it. heck even when they not they still charge 1k for 9590.....initially.


Yeah, no. The FX-9590 has never been anywhere near $1k. I think it maxed out at $250.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Dec 14, 2016)

Xzibit said:


> I think that was smart.  They took away the "AMD GPU optimization" concern i'm sure that would of come up if it was running an all AMD system with an undefined GPU.  They wanted to highlight the CPU and smartly enough they took the GPU out of the equation by using a competitor.



I don't disagree, besides nVidia's multi-threaded support is excellent so it's no wonder it's a great bed fellow for Zen.


----------



## thesmokingman (Dec 14, 2016)

Xzibit said:


> I think that was smart.  They took away the "AMD GPU optimization" concern i'm sure that would of come up if it was running an all AMD system with an undefined GPU.  They wanted to highlight the CPU and smartly enough they took the GPU out of the equation by using a competitor.



Ironically on another forum they were complaining that if Zen and Vega were all that why didn't they use it Vega. They can't win either way lol.


----------



## ShurikN (Dec 14, 2016)

Looks like they got a glimpse at the tdp over at guru3d, and it seems the cpu is around 95w


----------



## efikkan (Dec 14, 2016)

Raevenlord said:


> They will do so by starting with an 8-core, 16-thread, SMT-enabled, 3.4 GHz+ base clock  and 20MB combined cache new high-performance CPU, leveraging all the improvements baked into AMD's new AM4 platform (with 3.4 GHz apparently being the lowest frequency a Ryzen, consumer-level desktop solution will carry).


I wonder how the cache hierarchy will work. Zen will have more L2 cache, but less L3 cache per core. It will be interesting to see details about associativity etc.



Raevenlord said:


> To prove their words and commitment to Ryzen's performance, AMD showcased the chip's prowess in a Blender test, pitting a Ryzen CPU at 3.4 GHz base clock (without Boost), with the consumer market's only other 8-core, 16-thread CPU in the Intel i7 6900K, at its stock 3.2 GHz base clock…
> 
> In another test, this time a Handbrake transcoding demo, Ryzen transcoded a video in 54 seconds, against 59 seconds on Intel's 6900K processor.


Both of which are workloads with is expected to run well on Zen, considering it's more of a superscalar than Intel's architecture. How good will the general performance be? We will see in time.



Raevenlord said:


> Again at 3.4 GHz, Ryzen was shown "beating the game frame-rates of a Core i7 6900K playing Battlefield 1 at 4K resolution, with each CPU paired with an Nvidia Titan X GPU". Not drawing any more attention than needs to be drawn towards the usage of an NVIDIA solution at their own event (which was puzzling, since AMD did show a Ryzen CPU and a VEGA-based graphics cards running Star Wars Battlefront's as-of-yet unreleased Rogue One DLC at over 60fps in 4K)


So, they don't (yet) have confidence in their own graphics hardware.



Raevenlord said:


> AMD also announced what constitutes part of Ryzen's beating heart: their SenseMI technology, which includes "Neural Net Prediction" - an artificial intelligence neural network that learns to predict what future pathway an application will take based on past runs; "Smart Prefetch", which drinks from the "Neural Net Prediction", anticipating the data an app needs and having it ready when needed (with these two features alone being responsible for 1/4 of Ryzen's performance uplift, according to Lisa Su).


All of which is just fancy new buzzwords for technology existing for many years.


----------



## biffzinker (Dec 14, 2016)

Tried the Blender render test AMD used got this:





Look for this:




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


----------



## Camm (Dec 14, 2016)

I don't think AMD will price this high - it has too much to gain from regaining market and mindshare to fuck around with the sort of margins Intel keeps gouging.


----------



## Dbiggs9 (Dec 14, 2016)

$300-500 this would be a clear choice hope they don't aim for a premium as they do need market share. Loading up more shares I'm happy with it as is it they don't **** us on price.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Dec 14, 2016)

Hopefully AMD will awake the sleeping giant with this CPU, and get some proper CPU updates in the future...


----------



## Dbiggs9 (Dec 14, 2016)

No comment on lanes.. Do we know if they are matching intels 40?


----------



## Patriot (Dec 14, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> Tried the Blender render test AMD used got this:
> View attachment 81916
> 
> Look for this:
> ...




Does anyone have an exact time on theirs?   I got ~34s from the youtube demo video.
I rendered in 51.75 on my 1680v3, I am confuzzled... I shouldn't be slower than a 6900k...same cores same clock.


----------



## Evo85 (Dec 14, 2016)

It's good to see AMD finally going after the people who made that company big. The gamers. 

This may or may not put them back on top, but it should put them on the field again. 

Here's to another AMD vs Intel slugfest!


----------



## Fluffmeister (Dec 14, 2016)

efikkan said:


> So, they don't (yet) have confidence in their own graphics hardware.



These things don't happen by accident, I suspect it's not "AMD GPU optimization" Xzibit mentioned in defence but really the bonus of a "Nvidia GPU optimization":

http://www.techspot.com/review/1267-battlefield-1-benchmarks/page5.html

Sadly Nv's hard work gets them vilified showing no major DX12 gains thanks to devs not being to able optimize as well they can, but hey ho at least it makes Zen shine.

But I digress, point is they needed to show an improvement in CPU performance, ironically using their own hardware might not have shown that.


----------



## Melvis (Dec 14, 2016)

renz496 said:


> so when independent review going to be available?



When the product is finalised, there still working out final clock speeds and Turbo speeds. 

Prices? I would be very surprised if they sell there top tier CPU for under $500 AUS considering thats a third of the price of a 6900K, they are a business afterall and in business its all about making $$$$$, will it be cheaper? hell yes, but that much cheaper? I dont think so. 

I watch the event and I was surprised they used a Nvidia Titan X in one of those benchies but I was glad they did, showed no BIAS, was a smart move. 

Overall its going to be a fast CPU, no matter what, it will be quick, its going to multi task/thread like a beast and I think be competitive at more single threaded apps. Either way I have noticed over the yrs with software advancements for multi core CPU's my 8350 has only gotten faster, so the future should be looking good for these monster cored beasts.


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 14, 2016)

8 core 16 threads is finally becoming mainstream. This is definitely good news for everyone. We have been stuck at 4 core 8 threads for far too long.


----------



## chuck216 (Dec 14, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> Tried the Blender render test AMD used got this:
> View attachment 81916
> 
> Look for this:
> ...



Not going to post a screenshot but my FX-8320 @ it's stock 3.5 Ghz took 3:12.34 to complete it. So it definitely has an advantage over the "Previous Generation"


----------



## cdawall (Dec 14, 2016)

I'll try it on my 5820k when I get home I'm curious how it compares.


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 14, 2016)

Let's compare your scores here!

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/posts/3569623/


----------



## Xzibit (Dec 14, 2016)

efikkan said:


> So, they don't (yet) have confidence in their own graphics hardware.



Might want to read and know what the event was for first.

This was a Zen preview not a VEGA preview. *"New Horizon begins now. Join our journey into the future with a special preview of our newest CPU"*



Fluffmeister said:


> These things don't happen by accident, I suspect it's not "AMD GPU optimization" Xzibit mentioned in defence but really the bonus of a "Nvidia GPU optimization":
> 
> http://www.techspot.com/review/1267-battlefield-1-benchmarks/page5.html
> 
> ...



The BF1 demo was to showcase Zen @ 4k Ultra settings reguardless of GPU.  That's why they used a Titan X(P). Not to disclose VEGA. RX480 wouldnt have been an option for those settings.

I doubt AMD or Nvidia will go out of their way to showcase a unreleased product just to satisfy some forum naysayers so they can move on to the next thread and complain about something else 5 minutes later.



thesmokingman said:


> Ironically on another forum they were complaining that if Zen and Vega were all that why didn't they use it Vega. They can't win either way lol.



I'm sure we'll get some here.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Dec 14, 2016)

Xzibit said:


> The BF1 demo was to showcase Zen @ 4k Ultra settings reguardless of GPU.  That's why they used a Titan X(P). Not to disclose VEGA.
> 
> I doubt AMD or Nvidia will go out of their way to showcase a unreleased product just to satisfy some forum naysayers so they can move on to the next thread and complain about something else 5 minutes later.



The presentation was about Zen, not Vega....

Zen looks great, might even upgrade after 8 years, but I appreciate you can get defensive at times.

Still what is wrong with using Fury X, or better yet the Pro Duo?


----------



## m0nt3 (Dec 14, 2016)

TheLaughingMan said:


> Yeah, no. The FX-9590 has never been anywhere near $1k. I think it maxed out at $250.



No, it was in the $800 -$900 dollar range when it first released, it didnt last very long.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 14, 2016)

m0nt3 said:


> No, it was in the $800 -$900 dollar range when it first released, it didnt last very long.



No people price gouged them pre-release at 800+, the CPU was listed by AMD was $300-370 depending if you got the CLC with it.

I purchased my 9370 at release for something like 269.99


----------



## AsRock (Dec 14, 2016)

qubit said:


> It's looking promising. Still, I'll reserve my excitement for the official reviews. If they say it's epic then I'll jump for joy.



For sure, how ever if they are as good as they claim i really hope they don't cut the prices to much so they can have some chance of making a decent amount of money.


----------



## Blueberries (Dec 14, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> 8 core 16 threads is finally becoming mainstream. This is definitely good news for everyone. We have been stuck at 4 core 8 threads for far too long.



We haven't been stuck, there's just no demand. What "mainstream" application uses 16 threads? WinRAR?


----------



## m0nt3 (Dec 14, 2016)

cdawall said:


> No people price gouged them pre-release at 800+, the CPU was listed by AMD was $300-370 depending if you got the CLC with it.
> 
> I purchased my 9370 at release for something like 269.99


I remember seeing it on newegg in the $800's wether or not it was MSRP, idk. Never looked into, if it wasnt great.


----------



## qubit (Dec 14, 2016)

Blueberries said:


> We haven't been stuck, there's just no demand. What "mainstream" application uses 16 threads? WinRAR?


If the capability is there, then the apps will come. Saying what's the point just highlights the stagnation of current technology. It's about time it moved on.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 14, 2016)

qubit said:


> If the capability is there, then the apps will come. Saying what's the point just highlights the stagnation of current technology. It's about time it moved on.



I use it albeit I have some oddball usages. I run a plex server in home so have a 12 core 24 thread Xeon. I could have saved a lot of money if they offered a reasonably high clocked 8 core 16 thread mainstream chip instead.


----------



## qubit (Dec 14, 2016)

cdawall said:


> I use it albeit I have some oddball usages. I run a plex server in home so have a 12 core 24 thread Xeon. I could have saved a lot of money if they offered a reasonably high clocked 8 core 16 thread mainstream chip instead.


And once more threads become mainstream, just watch them all get used up. We already have some games using 4 cores for example.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 14, 2016)

qubit said:


> And once more threads become mainstream, just watch them all get used up. We already have some games using 4 cores for example.



We have games using 8-12 threads happily. They are just rarer than the 4 core stuff.


----------



## qubit (Dec 14, 2016)

cdawall said:


> We have games using 8-12 threads happily. They are just rarer than the 4 core stuff.


Wow, seriously?  Do you know which ones they are?


----------



## cdawall (Dec 14, 2016)

qubit said:


> Wow, seriously?  Do you know which ones they are?



I know ashes was there are others my Google search is failing me right now. There was a nice review showing everything from a Pentium to 5960x with game scaling.


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 14, 2016)

Also you get to remember, personal computing is not just about gaming, A LOT of office/research computation relies on good multi threaded CPU performance.


----------



## Blueberries (Dec 14, 2016)

qubit said:


> If the capability is there, then the apps will come. Saying what's the point just highlights the stagnation of current technology. It's about time it moved on.



It's not "what's the point," it's "is it worth the cost?" More cores isn't free, it comes with a larger TDP.

We've had 64C+ processors for years now (and dual-CPU motherboards!), 8C/16T is easy to do, but only a small percentage of PC users can take advantage of it. Keep in mind there's also a severe diminishing return, and it doesn't take long before more threads is negligible at best and detrimental at worst (except in specific computational tasks e.g., deep learning, AI).

Intel and AMD could also easily introduce add-in PCIe cards that would effectively add an additional 32+ parallel hyper/SMT threads , but why?


----------



## Prima.Vera (Dec 14, 2016)

Seems like all sites are spreading the same crappy CLICK BAIT after only one test made by AMD...


----------



## cdawall (Dec 14, 2016)

Blueberries said:


> It's not "what's the point," it's "is it worth the cost?" More cores isn't free, it comes with a larger TDP.
> 
> We've had 64C+ processors for years now, 8C/16T is easy to do, but only a small percentage of PC users can take advantage of it. Keep in mind there's also a severe diminishing return, and it doesn't take long before more threads is negligible at best and detrimental at worst.
> 
> Intel and AMD could also easily introduce add-in PCIe cards that would effectively add an additional 32+ parallel hyper/SMT threads , but why?



Some of this is correct, however on the TDP not better written software using more threads could accomplish more work with less clockspeed and a lower tdp. Ask my 105w xeon 12 core.


----------



## Blueberries (Dec 14, 2016)

cdawall said:


> Some of this is correct, however on the TDP not better written software using more threads could accomplish more work with less clockspeed and a lower tdp. Ask my 105w xeon 12 core.



That entirely depends on the software, not everything benefits from more threads, and 8 threads is a lot!

I'm not suggesting there's no point in 12C CPUs, but most mainstream, real-world, students, average-joes, gamers, call it whatever you want-- they're going to prefer a lower TDP / footprint and higher clock/boost speed.


----------



## s17speedex (Dec 14, 2016)

> against an Intel 6700K processor overlocked towards an unspecified frequency,



4.5ghz; 47:22 min in video


----------



## evernessince (Dec 14, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> VEGA will be a faster clocked slightly efficiency bumped Fiji. Not gonna magically do way better in old DX11/OpenGL games, but will be great in DX12/Vulkan/VR applications.



Uh, no it won't.  Why in the hell would AMD not design VEGA based off of Polaris.  "Oh hey guys, let's base our top end GPU off our last gen cards", said no one ever.  That would be called a refresh.

No, VEGA is Polaris + HBM2 + Various other improvements from VEGA (like improved shaders).

FYI AMD's DX 11 performance has gotten better with polaris and the release of their ReLive drivers.  If you haven't checked, the RX 480 is now on par with the GTX 1060 is DX 11.


----------



## Camm (Dec 14, 2016)

evernessince said:


> Uh, no it won't.  Why in the hell would AMD not design VEGA based off of Polaris.  "Oh hey guys, let's base our top end GPU off our last gen cards", said no one ever.  That would be called a refresh.
> 
> No, VEGA is Polaris + HBM2 + Various other improvements from VEGA (like improved shaders).
> 
> FYI AMD's DX 11 performance has gotten better with polaris and the release of their ReLive drivers.  If you haven't checked, the RX 480 is now on par with the GTX 1060 is DX 11.



Being fair, you would expect it to be equal in DX11 since the 480 die is about 15% larger than the 1060 and with another 64 bit on the memory bus .


----------



## evernessince (Dec 14, 2016)

Camm said:


> Being fair, you would expect it to be equal in DX11 since the 480 die is about 15% larger than the 1060 and with another 64 bit on the memory bus .



Actually the larger memory bus on the RX 480 is probably what takes up that extra die space.  Nvidia often goes small on the bus size as it can be very space intensive on the GPU.  It's also why you see Nvidia cards start to drop in performance compared to their AMD counterparts, just look at the GTX 970.


----------



## ShurikN (Dec 14, 2016)

qubit said:


> Wow, seriously?  Do you know which ones they are?


Isn't Doom (Vulkan) insane on the cpu front?


----------



## Ascalaphus (Dec 14, 2016)

thesmokingman said:


> I dunno if I would say beat, more like match in one specific scenario.



You're missing the bigger picture:
It will cost *LESS* than a i7-6900k as well.


----------



## efikkan (Dec 14, 2016)

Blueberries said:


> We haven't been stuck, there's just no demand. What "mainstream" application uses 16 threads? WinRAR?


And you are just using a single application at the time?
There are OS subsystems, multiple drivers, a web browser and some other stuff you are running, perhaps an anti-virus program and a pile of other "hidden" crap running in the background, in addition to the task you are "working" on. Even if your little game only uses 3-4 threads, more cores will help reduce stutter and other problems, even if it doesn't show up in average framerate benchmarks. Anything less than 6 (real) cores for a power-user today is not going to cut it.


----------



## renz496 (Dec 14, 2016)

TheLaughingMan said:


> Yeah, no. The FX-9590 has never been anywhere near $1k. I think it maxed out at $250.



i said *initially*. it doesn't last long though where AMD end up "dropping" the price massively just after a few months. 



> Two different UK-based online and retail outlets were showing the FX-9590 for sale for as low as £279 or $434 USD.  That is a big price drop from £699 rate ($1008 USD) and obviously is causing quite a stir in the community.  This puts the latest entries in the world of AMD FX just above the other parts like the standard FX-8350 in terms of cost which was definitely NOT the case in June or July.



https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AMD-FX-9590-50-GHz-processor-getting-price-drop


----------



## cdawall (Dec 14, 2016)

Blueberries said:


> That entirely depends on the software, not everything benefits from more threads, and 8 threads is a lot!
> 
> I'm not suggesting there's no point in 12C CPUs, but most mainstream, real-world, students, average-joes, gamers, call it whatever you want-- they're going to prefer a lower TDP / footprint and higher clock/boost speed.



Most average Joe CPU users can happily use onboard video and a pentium. I could care less about average Joe I am enthusiast Chris.


----------



## fullinfusion (Dec 14, 2016)

All I'd like to say is good on AMD and their new tech.

Running with no boost clock, and matching, and then beating the intel chip just made my week!

Come on AMD give us a February launch because my tax refund will be burning a hole in my pockets.

RYZEN is such cool name, I believe there's going to be a lot of sad intel users in he very near future hmm. 
And I don't think this is hype like the bulldozer was. I honestly believe the hype is real this time


----------



## renz496 (Dec 14, 2016)

Camm said:


> I don't think AMD will price this high - it has too much to gain from regaining market and mindshare to fuck around with the sort of margins Intel keeps gouging.



that's what people said with 7970 as well. at this point i will just waiting until the actual hardware hit the market.


----------



## renz496 (Dec 14, 2016)

cdawall said:


> No people price gouged them pre-release at 800+, the CPU was listed by AMD was $300-370 depending if you got the CLC with it.
> 
> I purchased my 9370 at release for something like 269.99


nope. there is no price gouging. back then AMD definitely intend to sell 9590 for around $900-$1k for being some kind of special edition processor. the pricing did not meant to reflect to other FX-9xxx series processor. also if i remember correctly AMD did not sell the processor directly to any customer. only exclusive to system boutique at that premium pricing. but it really did not last that long.


----------



## renz496 (Dec 14, 2016)

evernessince said:


> Uh, no it won't.  Why in the hell would AMD not design VEGA based off of Polaris.  "Oh hey guys, let's base our top end GPU off our last gen cards", said no one ever.  That would be called a refresh.
> 
> No, VEGA is Polaris + HBM2 + Various other improvements from VEGA (like improved shaders).
> 
> FYI AMD's DX 11 performance has gotten better with polaris and the release of their ReLive drivers.  If you haven't checked, *the RX 480 is now on par with the GTX 1060 is DX 11.*



no. not really. you guys need to carefully look how hardware canucks made the conclusion. RX480 closing the gap with to GTX1060 in DX11 using *average combined score*. hardware canucks adds more tittle that favoring AMD card so that affect the average score towards AMD. when they present that numbers it doesn't mean that now RX480 are as fast as GTX1060 in *every* DX11 tittles.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 14, 2016)

renz496 said:


> nope. there is no price gouging. back then AMD definitely intend to sell 9590 for around $900-$1k for being some kind of special edition processor. the pricing did not meant to reflect to other FX-9xxx series processor. also if i remember correctly AMD did not sell the processor directly to any customer. only exclusive to system boutique at that premium pricing. but it really did not last that long.



I purchased mine on release from amazon. Not exactly a boutique.


----------



## renz496 (Dec 14, 2016)

cdawall said:


> I purchased mine on release from amazon. Not exactly a boutique.



as i said that exclusive deal did not last long. 



> First, according to AMD the FX-9590 was never intended to be sold as an OEM part and rather was supposed to ship only in pre-built systems from companies like iBuyPower or in bundles that include a motherboard and cooler along with the processor.  If these bundles were slow sellers though it seems plausible that the retailers would find ways to expire the bundle program and "accidentally" start selling the processors alone.  Based on photos from ReviewBros that appears to be the case.





> As for the idea of a "price drop", things are just more complicated than that.  AMD tells me that *because it was never intended to sell as an OEM part any pricing changes are not a result of AMD's demands.*  Honestly I don't know why AMD is so opposed to just saying there has been a price drop other than the negative reaction of the initial launch buyers; but that is always the case in the enthusiast market.



https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AMD-FX-9590-50-GHz-processor-getting-price-drop


----------



## evernessince (Dec 14, 2016)

renz496 said:


> no. not really. you guys need to carefully look how hardware canucks made the conclusion. RX480 closing the gap with to GTX1060 in DX11 using *average combined score*. hardware canucks adds more tittle that favoring AMD card so that affect the average score towards AMD. when they present that numbers it doesn't mean that now RX480 are as fast as GTX1060 in *every* DX11 tittles.



It doesn't need to be as fast as the 1060 in every title, average is a better indicator of speed.  You can go look anywhere, it's not just hardware canucks re reviewing after AMD's new driver.


----------



## Frick (Dec 14, 2016)

Here's hoping Haswell users will rush to AMD so I can get a better CPU on the cheap. 

Also, Zen>Ryzen.


----------



## rvalencia (Dec 14, 2016)

evernessince said:


> Uh, no it won't.  Why in the hell would AMD not design VEGA based off of Polaris.  "Oh hey guys, let's base our top end GPU off our last gen cards", said no one ever.  That would be called a refresh.
> 
> No, VEGA is Polaris + HBM2 + Various other improvements from VEGA (like improved shaders).
> 
> FYI AMD's DX 11 performance has gotten better with polaris and the release of their ReLive drivers.  If you haven't checked, the RX 480 is now on par with the GTX 1060 is DX 11.


Polaris 10 doesn't have double rate 16bit FP feature while both PS4 Pro and Vega 10 has double rate 16 bit FP feature.

Native 16bit FP support is important for incoming Shader Model 6.0.


----------



## cyneater (Dec 14, 2016)

Rivage said:


> Intel has better designers, at least... all those AMD slides looks... meh



except for this guy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Keller_(engineer) originally from DEC done work for AMD and apple


Lets wait to zen hits the actual market its not like AMD has used PR before ... 

anyone else remember the Althon XP's....


----------



## Brusfantomet (Dec 14, 2016)

AMD stock seems to be down 2% in after market trading as of writing this, witch i find weird.
Most people would consider the performance demonstrated from zen to be good, but maybe the market is taking the numbers with a "truckload of salt"?



cyneater said:


> except for this guy
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Keller_(engineer) originally from DEC done work for AMD and apple
> 
> ...



Think he was referring to graphical designers.


----------



## Assimilator (Dec 14, 2016)

Ascalaphus said:


> You're missing the bigger picture:
> It will cost *LESS* than a i7-6900k as well.



AMD hasn't released any pricing information on Zen/Ryzen yet, so I'd like to know what evidence you're basing this statement on.



efikkan said:


> And you are just using a single application at the time?
> There are OS subsystems, multiple drivers, a web browser and some other stuff you are running, perhaps an anti-virus program and a pile of other "hidden" crap running in the background, in addition to the task you are "working" on. Even if your little game only uses 3-4 threads, more cores will help reduce stutter and other problems, even if it doesn't show up in average framerate benchmarks. Anything less than 6 (real) cores for a power-user today is not going to cut it.



If a "pile of other hidden crap" is slowing down your PC, it's almost certainly not because it's tying up your CPU, it's because it's reading from or writing to a mechanical disk. In which case you can be running a 128-core CPU and your PC as a whole is still gonna be slow. CPUs and operating systems are extremely good at task scheduling and context switching, precisely because that's their main use case.

And what is a "power user"? I consider myself a power user because I generally have half a dozen browser windows, with dozens of tabs in each, open - plus at least two instances of Visual Studio - and I play a game at the same time, and my 4-core 4-thread i5-3570K is still perfectly adequate for that. Power users don't need more cores/threads, people who do video rendering do, and that is a very small percentage of the market that explains why core counts have stagnated and higher core counts command higher prices.

Let's be honest, AMD has been trying to force the "MOAR CORES BETTAR" Kool-Aid down our throat for years and it hasn't worked out, for the simple reason that writing code that takes advantage of parallelism is difficult and hence the majority of apps around (old and new) don't do it. High core counts are and will remain a niche market for years to come.


----------



## LucidStrike (Dec 14, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> I am happy. Even though I am not going to build a new AMD system any time soon, the introduction of more competitive product will force the price of intel's HEDT down. If in one year I can upgrade to 6950X with $500 I will be thrilled!


Unless you already have an LGA 2011-3 board, it doesn't make sense not to at least consider switching to a comparable Zen chip.


----------



## LucidStrike (Dec 14, 2016)

renz496 said:


> that's what people said with 7970 as well. at this point i will just waiting until the actual hardware hit the market.


That said, it's exactly the approach AMD 'just' took with the RX lineup, focusing on gaining marketshare with high price-performance ratios.


----------



## renz496 (Dec 14, 2016)

evernessince said:


> It doesn't need to be as fast as the 1060 in every title, average is a better indicator of speed.  You can go look anywhere, it's not just hardware canucks re reviewing after AMD's new driver.


hardware canucks test was not made using latest Relive driver either. it depends on what tittle being tested in the suite. one of TPU latest GPU review that include both RX480 and GTX1060 (done in mid november; the test on hardware canucks also using AMD november drivers) the relative performance chart still put 1060 6GB ahead of RX480. and the changes from the new driver is not that big. from launch driver to relive both TPU and guru3d shows average around 2-3% performance improvement for RX480. and i also check the  numbers from 1060 and RX480 launch drivers versus much more recent one. while RX480 did gain more performance on much recent test the same also happen with 1060. so RX480 is not the only card gaining more performance.  hardware canucks chart probably going to paint a different result if they include a few new tittles that favors nvidia cards such as Watch Dogs 2 and Dishonored 2.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 14, 2016)

LucidStrike said:


> Unless you already have an LGA 2011-3 board, it doesn't make sense not to at least consider switching to a comparable Zen chip.





LucidStrike said:


> That said, it's exactly the approach AMD 'just' took with the RX lineup, focusing on gaining marketshare with high price-performance ratios.



Do not double post, use the multiquote button


----------



## renz496 (Dec 14, 2016)

rvalencia said:


> Polaris 10 doesn't have double rate 16bit FP feature while both PS4 Pro and Vega 10 has double rate 16 bit FP feature.
> 
> Native 16bit FP support is important for incoming Shader Model 6.0.


AFAIK FP16 support in games is not that new. if anything using FP16 probably going to reduce image quality. on mobile (like SoC) the reason to use FP16 is to save power and bandwidth. can you provide the link talking about the importance of FP16 in upcoming SM6?


----------



## P4-630 (Dec 14, 2016)

qubit said:


> Wow, seriously?  Do you know which ones they are?



GTA V, CAPS showed it once with his xeon.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Dec 14, 2016)

There were a few of us that watched the livestream from Discord. Sad more of you all were not there to comment.


----------



## bug (Dec 14, 2016)

Hm, AMD is at it again.
Nice play on "Zen with no boost vs intel with boost". When all cores are being used, intel doesn't boost either (except for a short while - a few seconds, till it gets hot).

But overall a solid showing.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 14, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> 8 core 16 threads is finally becoming mainstream. This is definitely good news for everyone. We have been stuck at 4 core 8 threads for far too long.



Agreed, but I expect a 6-core mainstream Zen before 8-core gets there.  Still good.



LucidStrike said:


> Unless you already have an LGA 2011-3 board, it doesn't make sense not to at least consider switching to a comparable Zen chip.



His system specs are literally a click away, you know?


----------



## YautjaLord (Dec 14, 2016)

Aside from that Handbrake graph for both ZEN & - if my memory serves me well - 6900k, everything else seemed like "What, where's fps counter, no Lisa, Mrs. Su, what sh!t 68fps in 4k in Star Wars Battlefront Rogue One DLC you talk about? Are you guys serious?" Seemed like more of a hype train, but i digress. I'm still hungry for AM4/X370 mobos & benchmarks, oh & i don't buy that Blender demo on ZEN vs 6900k sh!t either. Waiting for you guys to actually benchmark the beast yourselves, man i am really hyped. 

Other than that - it's good that AMD gets back into competition? Bring on the benchies, who's gonna bench this thing? Bring Kaby Lake & Skylake to compare, 6900k is Skylake right?


----------



## bug (Dec 14, 2016)

YautjaLord said:


> Other than that - it's good that AMD gets back into competition? Bring on the benchies, who's gonna bench this thing? Bring Kaby Lake & Skylake to compare, 6900k is Skylake right?



6900k is actually Broadwell, but performance-wise, Skylake isn't any faster.

Edit: 6990k is actually 6900k


----------



## YautjaLord (Dec 14, 2016)

bug said:


> 6990k is actually Broadwell, but performance-wise, Skylake isn't any faster.



Now i'm completely confused. They pitted ZEN vs 6990k? I heard something like 6900k. Thanx regardless, maybe it's my hearing & fact that i remember more what CPUs were used in Dota 2 while streaming. 6700k was OC'd to 4.5GHz & struggled (hype?), ZEN & 6900k(?) ran smoothly. And in AMD fashion the bald guy engineer(?) said 6900k cost twice more than ZEN. lol 1100$ or something like that?

P.S. ASUS, MSI & Gigabyte still don't have AM4/X370 mobos in their mobos list. I checked. lol

P.P.S. Loved the ZBrush demo with ray-tracing & 53 million polygons models stuff.


----------



## P4-630 (Dec 14, 2016)




----------



## R0H1T (Dec 14, 2016)

YautjaLord said:


> Now i'm completely confused. They pitted ZEN vs 6990k? I heard something like 6900k. Thanx regardless, maybe it's my hearing & fact that i remember more what CPUs were used in Dota 2 while streaming. 6700k was OC'd to 4.5GHz & struggled (hype?), ZEN & 6900k(?) ran smoothly. And in AMD fashion the bald guy engineer(?) said 6900k cost twice more than ZEN. lol 1100$ or something like that?
> 
> P.S. ASUS, MSI & Gigabyte still don't have AM4/X370 mobos in their mobos list. I checked. lol
> 
> P.P.S. Loved the ZBrush demo with ray-tracing & 53 million polygons models stuff.


Well there's no 6990K, although there was the AMD/ATI 6990, it's just a typo from the poster.


----------



## ratirt (Dec 14, 2016)

This ZEN looks pretty promising. Not sure if I should get one when it shows up on the market or wait a bit longer. Seeing what it can do is great although waiting for reviews and more benchmarks might be wise idea to clarify what that CPU can really do. Anyway I think I'm getting an AMD platform  Grrr I can even fill that chill crawled up my spine when thinking of this  I really wanna go with AMD and try this thing with all features it gives 

Just an add.
Finally maybe we will get mainstream 8/16 c/t instead 4/8  Gotta sell my still good 3770k


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (Dec 14, 2016)

bug said:


> Hm, AMD is at it again.
> Nice play on "Zen with no boost vs intel with boost". When all cores are being used, intel doesn't boost either (except for a short while - a few seconds, till it gets hot).
> 
> But overall a solid showing.




My ive bridge i5 has 0 issue maintaining it's maximum rated boost speed on all four cores without any tinkering on my end. A halfway decent cooler will keep those chips boosting 24/7.


----------



## bug (Dec 14, 2016)

TheinsanegamerN said:


> My ive bridge i5 has 0 issue maintaining it's maximum rated boost speed on all four cores without any tinkering on my end. A halfway decent cooler will keep those chips boosting 24/7.


What i5 exactly and what "boost" frequency does it maintain?


----------



## YautjaLord (Dec 14, 2016)

Have slightly mixed feelings about the showcasing of BF1 as well, meaning - couldn't for a f*ckin' life of me see the actual fps counters/graphs/stats/etc... - that one can be called a con(?), but the fact guy said both rigs had Titan X[P] in 'em should indicate something. And the fact it ran that not yet released Rogue One SW Battlefront DLC (or any other game) in 4k - good news. Right? Overall, I enjoyed it more with occasional "wtf? you guys serious? dafuq y'all talking about?" moments in-between. 

P.S. I see 4k LED IPS monitors in my PC store drop prices, time for ZEN-based, air-cooled (for now), 4k gaming/Blender'ing rig. Yeah, i use this awesome, awesome app for some project i have for Carma: R & Carma: Max Damage. Can rival 3DSMax actually & you can't beat the awesome price of free. lol


----------



## HD64G (Dec 14, 2016)

renz496 said:


> hardware canucks test was not made using latest Relive driver either. it depends on what tittle being tested in the suite. one of TPU latest GPU review that include both RX480 and GTX1060 (done in mid november; the test on hardware canucks also using AMD november drivers) the relative performance chart still put 1060 6GB ahead of RX480. and the changes from the new driver is not that big. from launch driver to relive both TPU and guru3d shows average around 2-3% performance improvement for RX480. and i also check the  numbers from 1060 and RX480 launch drivers versus much more recent one. while RX480 did gain more performance on much recent test the same also happen with 1060. so RX480 is not the only card gaining more performance.  hardware canucks chart probably going to paint a different result if they include a few new tittles that favors nvidia cards such as Watch Dogs 2 and Dishonored 2.



You didn't check the last page in the HW Canacks reveiw eh? Because there is a comparison table there that perfectly describes the benefit that RX480 had vs the GTX1060 from the June2016 until November's driver release. So, while you are correct that 1060 gained also from newer drivers, RX480 gained much more and so it closed the gap to just over 2% for the games HW Canucks tested and to just over 4% for the gamelist TPU's @W1zzard uses. And it is *an established fact now that CGN clearly wins the nVidia's arch there with the gap being visible for almost all games*.


----------



## ADHDGAMING (Dec 14, 2016)

renz496 said:


> if they have better solution they will charge for it. heck even when they not they still charge 1k for 9590.....initially.




Sue made it a point to mention the Intel Chips price for a reason .. Pay attention she was dropping clues. it will certainly be cheaper.


----------



## Assimilator (Dec 14, 2016)

ADHDGAMING said:


> Sue made it a point to mention the Intel Chips price for a reason .. Pay attention she was dropping clues. it will certainly be cheaper.



You have no understanding of how companies work, do you?


----------



## dozenfury (Dec 14, 2016)

FYI, another site (AT) they did some CSI-ish examination of the presentation, because scores were suspiciously not lining up with where they should be in that Ryzen demo and they noticed something.  In the AMD Ryzen demo, the video shows that the render sample value is changed to 100 instead of the default 200, which dramatically changes the scores.  So if you download the demo from AMD and just hit go, you will have the default 200 render sample value and will have a slow score.  You will need to change the render sample value to 100 to get an accurate comparison, and that's assuming they also didn't change anything else.

Incredibly sneaky, and more reason to wait for real third-party unbiased benches.  I'm very hopeful it turns out to be good, but stuff like this raises some major red flags especially considering AMD's history of letdowns.


----------



## bug (Dec 14, 2016)

dozenfury said:


> FYI, another site (AT) they did some CSI-ish examination of the presentation, because scores were suspiciously not lining up with where they should be in that Ryzen demo and they noticed something.  In the AMD Ryzen demo, the video shows that the render sample value is changed to 100 instead of the default 200, which dramatically changes the scores.  So if you download the demo from AMD and just hit go, you will have the default 200 render sample value and will have a slow score.  You will need to change the render sample value to 100 to get an accurate comparison, and that's assuming they also didn't change anything else.
> 
> Incredibly sneaky, and more reason to wait for real third-party unbiased benches.  I'm very hopeful it turns out to be good, but stuff like this raises some major red flags especially considering AMD's history of letdowns.


This is the reason I mostly avoid these articles altogether. In most cases it avoids me the unrealistic hype.


----------



## Octavean (Dec 14, 2016)

Ascalaphus said:


> You're missing the bigger picture:
> It will cost *LESS* than a i7-6900k as well.



Well, to be fair the bigger picture is that RYZEN will likely cost less then what the Core i7 6900K *currently* costs.  Right now the Intel HEDT line is alone in the market.  Reasonable competition in the HEDT segment of the market from AMD setting lower prices on the RYZEN line could simply force Intel to drop prices. Or Intel might further segment their lineup with newer models at lower prices in order to avoid dropping price on their current lineup. 

I don't think there is any doubt that Intel can weather the storm of lower prices at least for the short term. In fact Intel could probably lower their prices below AMD pricing and boost performance if need be.  

Its good to see there is still some fight in AMD but a price war could get ugly for them. Not ugly for the consumer though,.....

Right now, I already have a Core i7 5820K processor. Theoretically speaking:

If a RYZEN 8 core 16 thread monster came in at about ~$300 to ~$400 USD retail I would be very interested and tempted.  However, if Intel were to drop prices on the Core i7 6900K to the same price range it would be easier and simpler for me to just buy the Core i7 6900K because its a drop-in upgrade.  That is a big "if" though.


----------



## Ja.KooLit (Dec 14, 2016)

wow all haters to AMD you can continue buying expensive intel or nvidia 

Dont you guys happy if AMD actually deliver what they promised?

Anyway, if these Ryzen is a success and intel will step up. Consumers will get alot of benefits


----------



## Dbiggs9 (Dec 14, 2016)

Found this on the Rumor Board. 

Ryzen SR7 $549 USD 8c 3.6ghz 4.2-4.4 boost
Ryzen SR5 $329 USD 6c 3.8ghz 4.4-4.7 boost


----------



## ADHDGAMING (Dec 14, 2016)

Assimilator said:


> You have no understanding of how companies work, do you?



only need to know how Lisa Sue works in this case....


----------



## HD64G (Dec 14, 2016)

Assimilator said:


> You have no understanding of how companies work, do you?


I do and he is totally correct. A clear hint there from LS about Ryzen being cheaper. Now, why don't you wait a few weeks to see who's correct about it?

And to anyone who doesn't like Intel being challenged from AMD and being pessimistic without reason after this Ryzen demo, I have to say one word. Fanboyism...


----------



## Nergal (Dec 14, 2016)

Whatever people speculate on speed and pricing.

It will be GOOD ENOUGH to compete with Intel.

Prices will drop.

Going "Full Red" is now a real option. 




Octavean said:


> If a RYZEN 8 core 16 thread monster came in at about ~$300 to ~$400 USD retail I would be very interested and tempted.  However, if Intel were to drop prices on the Core i7 6900K to the same price range it would be easier and simpler for me to just buy the Core i7 6900K because its a drop-in upgrade.  That is a big "if" though.



And to be honest, would you buy a CPU from a company that was priced 1.100 previous month, and now suddenly only 400? Doesn´t that just show that the company asked too much initially? And you would support that?


----------



## YautjaLord (Dec 14, 2016)

Dbiggs9 said:


> Found this on the Rumor Board.
> 
> Ryzen SR7 $549 USD 8c 3.6ghz 4.2-4.4 boost
> Ryzen SR5 $329 USD 6c 3.8ghz 4.4-4.7 boost



lol He said Rumor Board. FUDZilla charts? rofl jk

Found Guru3D, Paul's Hardware (ft. Bitwit) & some other coverage of the event on YT, check 'em out:


























Motherboards, God-f*ckin-dangit!  C'mon AMD, glad there's actually a 4k rig fitted with Zen & Titan X Pascal, i want actual numbers n sh!t! Dangit, i'm hyped. lol


----------



## bug (Dec 14, 2016)

night.fox said:


> wow all haters to AMD you can continue buying expensive intel or nvidia
> 
> Dont you guys happy if AMD actually deliver what they promised?
> 
> Anyway, if these Ryzen is a success and intel will step up. Consumers will get alot of benefits


Everybody's gonna be happy if AMD delivers. But can you say they'll deliver based on marketing presentations? It's looking good so far (when AMD didn't deliver, they haven't leaked anything before the actual release), but let's wait for the real deal.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 14, 2016)

dozenfury said:


> FYI, another site (AT) they did some CSI-ish examination of the presentation, because scores were suspiciously not lining up with where they should be in that Ryzen demo and they noticed something.  In the AMD Ryzen demo, the video shows that the render sample value is changed to 100 instead of the default 200, which dramatically changes the scores.  So if you download the demo from AMD and just hit go, you will have the default 200 render sample value and will have a slow score.  You will need to change the render sample value to 100 to get an accurate comparison, and that's assuming they also didn't change anything else.
> 
> *Incredibly sneaky*, and more reason to wait for real third-party unbiased benches.  I'm very hopeful it turns out to be good, but stuff like this raises some major red flags especially considering AMD's history of letdowns.


Well unless AMD has somehow handicapped the 6900K system & then run the blender/x264 benches (without changing anything else?) your assumption or allegation sounds frivolous. I'm pretty sure the two configs, hardware & software, would be as similar as possible & between them the SR7 won. They haven't released their test system specs but it (the demo) does show you that Ryzen has exceeded the 6900K at a lower TDP & with similar *config* in a couple of benches, obviously you can't make the two exactly the same so we'll take whatever we have with a pinch of salt. Anything more would be speculation at best.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 14, 2016)

R0H1T said:


> Well unless AMD has somehow handicapped the 6900K system & then run the blender/x264 benches (without changing anything else?) your assumption or allegation sounds frivolous. I'm pretty sure the two configs, hardware & software, would be as similar as possible & between them the SR7 won. They haven't released their test system specs but it (the demo) does show you that Ryzen has exceeded the 6900K at a lower TDP & with similar *config* in a couple of benches, obviously you can't make the two exactly the same so we'll take whatever we have with a pinch of salt. Anything more would be speculation at best.



My honest guess is they dropped render time because no one wants to sit there and wait for a minute for both rigs to render something. It looks like both ran the same test just dropped in time?


----------



## Fx (Dec 14, 2016)

I have been waiting for Zen before building my next gaming rig. I am really encouraged by this news that its performance will deliver. I will be buying the first iteration of Ryzen, and sell it for a better chip as they roll them out.
Good job AMD


----------



## Franzen4Real (Dec 14, 2016)

Xzibit said:


> Might want to read and know what the event was for first.
> 
> This was a Zen preview not a VEGA preview. *"New Horizon begins now. Join our journey into the future with a special preview of our newest CPU"*
> 
> ...



So true


----------



## Octavean (Dec 14, 2016)

Nergal said:


> And to be honest, would you buy a CPU from a company that was priced 1.100 previous month, and now suddenly only 400? Doesn´t that just show that the company asked too much initially? And you would support that?



That is certainly one way of looking at it and I don't begrudge anyone their particular viewpoint on this.   However, there are more ways of looking at it including being able to buy a product at a greatly reduced price which to most people is typically seen as a good thing as is competition. We are getting ahead of ourselves though, Intel hasn't dropped any prices just yet and they may never.  

No matter what happens though I'm reasonably satisfied with the hardware choices I've made. Its well known that hardware metrics / performance levels are surpassed as time goes by (efficiency too).  I've enjoyed excellent hardware performance for a number of years and none of that changes because a newer faster bit of kit hit the block or will soon in 2017.   If we are bing totally honest here I'm willing to stick with what I have for another year or two if not more.   It is self indulgent to consider an upgrade at this point or at least it is for me. 

Either way I am pleased the AMD is finally poised to match and possibly dictate price / performance levels. Everybody wins!!!

I will be considering an AMD platform for next build though and I would consider investing in the company before RYZEN launch in anticipation of their stock going up,....


----------



## thesmokingman (Dec 14, 2016)

Ascalaphus said:


> You're missing the bigger picture:
> It will cost *LESS* than a i7-6900k as well.



I'm betting it will be cheaper too but that's not the point. It's too early for grandiose titles like that.


----------



## cyneater (Dec 14, 2016)

night.fox said:


> wow all haters to AMD you can continue buying expensive intel or nvidia
> 
> Dont you guys happy if AMD actually deliver what they promised?
> 
> Anyway, if these Ryzen is a success and intel will step up. Consumers will get alot of benefits




Not haters ... just re-living the athlon XP ... 

AMD's last P4 killer was the Athlon 64 since then they have been full of marketing BS... 

Until someone other than AMD benchmarks the new chips


----------



## bug (Dec 14, 2016)

R0H1T said:


> Well unless AMD has somehow handicapped the 6900K system & then run the blender/x264 benches (without changing anything else?) your assumption or allegation sounds frivolous. I'm pretty sure the two configs, hardware & software, would be as similar as possible & between them the SR7 won. They haven't released their test system specs but it (the demo) does show you that Ryzen has exceeded the 6900K at a lower TDP & with similar *config* in a couple of benches, obviously you can't make the two exactly the same so we'll take whatever we have with a pinch of salt. Anything more would be speculation at best.


Every single leak about Zen has been a Blender benchmark. Doesn't that raise any flags?


----------



## YautjaLord (Dec 14, 2016)

bug said:


> Every single leak about Zen has been a Blender benchmark. Doesn't that raise any flags?



Not entirely, but mostly yeah, Google gives mostly the slides of either a aforementioned benchmark or AMD's hardware slides when i search for this stuff & also that AM4 mobo slide looks fugly. lol But atleast it can play BF1 in 4k n can be fitted with Titan X Pascal, good right? lol jk _*not sarcastic* _

Don't tell me TPU staff only gonna have the samples of both any AM4/X370 mobo & SR7 @ the same time or even after CES 2017, my head about to explode already, can't cope up with hype-based awesomeness overload of yesterday's sneak preview.


----------



## P4-630 (Dec 14, 2016)

Meanwhile at Intel.....

 
http://iq.intel.com/artificial-intelligence-for-animal-lovers/


----------



## rvalencia (Dec 14, 2016)

renz496 said:


> AFAIK FP16 support in games is not that new. if anything using FP16 probably going to reduce image quality. on mobile (like SoC) the reason to use FP16 is to save power and bandwidth. can you provide the link talking about the importance of FP16 in upcoming SM6?


Native 16 FP support was removed during DX10 era.





Note float16 'half' types. 16 bit FP has existed since DX9a.

Xbox Scorpio would have PS4 Pro's double rate 16 bit FP mode.


----------



## bug (Dec 14, 2016)

YautjaLord said:


> Don't tell me TPU staff only gonna have the samples of both any AM4/X370 mobo & SR7 @ the same time or even after CES 2017, my head about to explode already, can't cope up with hype-based awesomeness overload of yesterday's sneak preview.



AMD themselves didn't have both Zen and Vega samples for their own show. Another raised flag.
But let's be clear, when I say "raised flag", I mean things are still uncertain, I'm not implying AMD is doing something sneaky.


----------



## rvalencia (Dec 14, 2016)

bug said:


> AMD themselves didn't have both Zen and Vega samples for their own show. Another raised flag.
> But let's be clear, when I say "raised flag", I mean things are still uncertain, I'm not implying AMD is doing something sneaky.


AMD's show has demo'ed both RyZEN and Vega, hence they have engineering samples.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Dec 14, 2016)

bug said:


> AMD themselves didn't have both Zen and Vega samples for their own show. Another raised flag.
> But let's be clear, when I say "raised flag", I mean things are still uncertain, I'm not implying AMD is doing something sneaky.


wtf are you on about? did you not watch the same livestream I did? what source for your "facts" there?


----------



## thesmokingman (Dec 14, 2016)

bug said:


> I'm not implying AMD is doing something sneaky.



Ironically, that is exactly what yer implying.


----------



## bug (Dec 14, 2016)

rvalencia said:


> AMD's show has demo'ed both RyZEN and Vega, hence they have engineering samples.


Yeah, but when showing us how powerful Zen is, they paired it with a Titan X. Which is fine by me, but a bit puzzling.


----------



## Octavean (Dec 15, 2016)

bug said:


> Yeah, but when showing us how powerful Zen is, they paired it with a Titan X. Which is fine by me, but a bit puzzling.



No there was a RYZEN + Vega segment to the demo too as evident by the following clip of the even't:

www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· xD_xP2B0


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 15, 2016)

bug said:


> Every single leak about Zen has been a Blender benchmark. Doesn't that raise any flags?


I guess you must've missed the handbrake demo, or the multitasking one with Dota2 & twitch?


----------



## Assimilator (Dec 15, 2016)

HD64G said:


> I do and he is totally correct. A clear hint there from LS about Ryzen being cheaper. Now, why don't you wait a few weeks to see who's correct about it?



So a "hint" in a marketing presentation translates to a guarantee... got it.

You might understand how companies work, but you certainly don't understand how financially successful companies work: they produce the best product, then charge as much money for it as consumers are willing to pay. It's called "capitalism". (Your evident bias towards AMD, a company that is the exact opposite of financially successful, explains why you don't understand this.)



HD64G said:


> And to anyone who doesn't like Intel being challenged from AMD and being pessimistic without reason after this Ryzen demo, I have to say one word. Fanboyism...



The only one who has claimed that people don't like Intel being challenged is... you.
The only one who has accused others of being fanboys is... you.

Perhaps you should look in a mirror once in a while, or take a course on basic logical reasoning. Because there's absolutely nothing fanboy-ish about being skeptical of a company's claims if that company has consistently lied about similar claims in the past (Bulldozer anyone?). On the other hand, refusing to scrutinise those claims is exactly the type of behaviour I'd expect from an actual fanboy.

Pot, kettle, black.


----------



## Shihab (Dec 15, 2016)

Blueberries said:


> We haven't been stuck, there's just no demand. What "mainstream" application uses 16 threads? WinRAR?



Depends on your definition for "mainstream". Since simple users have started the exodus do those droid and iOS toys, the PC landscape hasn't been the same as it was back when running a flash application was the most demanding task for the average user. 

There's also the view that sees utility being driven by availability. PCIe wasn't meant for [direct] storage, yet when the storage industry reached the point of needing high bandwidths, PCIe was there for it. Same goes for many if not most of the GPUs' Unified Shader architectures uses these days.


----------



## Ikaruga (Dec 15, 2016)

*Q1*, There is a * at the title bar of the blender window on the Intel system, which means the file was edited without saving. *What's changed?

Q2, *Why can't we see the taskbar of the Intel system, *what's there? *(as the camera pans over the table, it seems that more apps are running on the AMD rig).


----------



## YautjaLord (Dec 15, 2016)

Ikaruga said:


> *Q1*, There is a * at the title bar of the blender window on the Intel system, which means the file was edited without saving. *What's changed?
> 
> Q2, *Why can't we see the taskbar of the Intel system, *what's there? *(as the camera pans over the table, it seems that more apps are running on the AMD rig).



That. Have to watch that stream again, but i have the same question, you basically ninja-posted me? lol

Wait for TPU or any other tech site to benchmark this beast vs all the best Intel offerings, that's the best solution, God that's irritating. 

Or for CES 2017.


----------



## john_ (Dec 15, 2016)

HD64G said:


> And to anyone who doesn't like Intel being challenged from AMD and being pessimistic without reason after this Ryzen demo, I have to say one word. Fanboyism...


Everyone wants AMD to challenge Intel, at least in theory. In reality they also want AMD products to lose in direct comparisons. They want AMD to offer products that will lower the prices of Intel(and Nvidia) products, but at the same time to be INFERIOR IN EVERYTHING compared to those products. Performance, features, efficiency, overclocking, so they can continue feeling they are part of a higher society that uses superior brands compare to those used by regular... peasants. They want those products to be only good when looking at performance per dollar and only in the beginning. They are dreaming that then, Intel(and Nvidia) will come with their hammers and drop them on AMD's head in the form of nice price cuts, making AMD to lose that advantage also. Ironic and hypocritical at the same time. The worst part here? I am not sure I am exaggerating. So, nothing strange if some people will find plenty of faults on RYZEN.


----------



## bug (Dec 15, 2016)

john_ said:


> Everyone wants AMD to challenge Intel, at least in theory. In reality they also want AMD products to lose in direct comparisons. They want AMD to offer products that will lower the prices of Intel(and Nvidia) products, but at the same time to be INFERIOR IN EVERYTHING compared to those products. Performance, features, efficiency, overclocking, so they can continue feeling they are part of a higher society that uses superior brands compare to those used by regular... peasants. They want those products to be only good when looking at performance per dollar and only in the beginning. They are dreaming that then, Intel(and Nvidia) will come with their hammers and drop them on AMD's head in the form of nice price cuts, making AMD to lose that advantage also. Ironic and hypocritical at the same time. The worst part here? I am not sure I am exaggerating. So, nothing strange if some people will find plenty of faults on RYZEN.


That (what you just wrote) is just fanboyism in a different form. Not even Bulldozer or P4 were "INFERIOR IN EVERYTHING", so why would anyone expect this from either camp? What happens is marketing presentations are inherently one-sided and whoever doesn't wear horse-goggles, is taking them with a pinch of salt. Maybe too much salt in cases.


----------



## john_ (Dec 15, 2016)

bug said:


> That (what you just wrote) is just fanboyism in a different form. Not even Bulldozer or P4 were "INFERIOR IN EVERYTHING", so why would anyone expect this from either camp? What happens is marketing presentations are inherently one-sided and whoever doesn't wear horse-goggles, is taking them with a pinch of salt. Maybe too much salt in cases.


I was very specific. Direct comparisons with products in the same category and what some people WANT, not what it really is. For example, you will find plenty of people saying that a i3 is superior to an 8 core FX. Nothing more.


----------



## bug (Dec 15, 2016)

john_ said:


> I was very specific. Direct comparisons with products in the same category and what some people WANT, not what it really is. *For example, you will find plenty of people saying that a i3 is superior to an 8 core FX*. Nothing more.



Depending on what they mean, those people can be right or wrong. They're right if they're talking about single-thread performance and wrong if they need to do heavily multi-threaded work. Just stating the obvious.


----------



## HD64G (Dec 15, 2016)

Assimilator said:


> So a "hint" in a marketing presentation translates to a guarantee... got it.
> 
> You might understand how companies work, but you certainly don't understand how financially successful companies work: they produce the best product, then charge as much money for it as consumers are willing to pay. It's called "capitalism". (Your evident bias towards AMD, a company that is the exact opposite of financially successful, explains why you don't understand this.)
> 
> ...


You question the knowledge of an unknown person on economics and you pretend you know better? Who is showing immaturity now? And who is constant in being (or petending to be) ignorant of clear truths just to poke AMD? AMD CEO clearly put the i7 6900K price into perspective to show that Ryzen will be cheaper even being as fast as the Intel CPU. If that's difficult to get it, it is your empathy towards AMD, not us being irrelevant to economics and capitalism...

As for me, I just buy the best b4b for decades now and don't allow any marketing or prestige bs to milk from me...

Insults directly sent back in your face  as you took personally a general opinion I posted about some of the people in forums that enjoy bashing on AMD no matter how and what they do. And I always like small companies to challenge big ones and providing us more value for our hardly earned money. 

Don't bother to keep replying, as I won't spend any time more for you.


----------



## Nergal (Dec 15, 2016)

Assimilator said:


> So a "hint" in a marketing presentation translates to a guarantee... got it.
> 
> You might understand how companies work, but you certainly don't understand how financially successful companies work: they produce the best product, then charge as much money for it as consumers are willing to pay. It's called "capitalism". (Your evident bias towards AMD, a company that is the exact opposite of financially successful, explains why you don't understand this.)
> 
> ...














It is clear to everyone that ZEN will be at the very least a somewhat decent product that will bring AMD in direct competition.

Everyone is free to speculate on the details and discuss with each other about those ideas, which is why we have this nice tech-savvy forum platform. 

Not to insult.


----------



## Shihab (Dec 16, 2016)

john_ said:


> I am not sure I am exaggerating. So, nothing strange if some people will find plenty of faults on RYZEN.



Well, at least at some level you're aware that what you just said has no shred of rationality or proof.
I agree with Assimilator on one part: There's too much circular reasoning going around here. 
Fanboys exist on both camps, yet many consumers belong to neither. Just because someone criticizes a product of one doesn't necessarily paint them the other's colours.


----------



## simlariver (Dec 16, 2016)

I remembrer a few years back, right after the Athlon X2 came out, that AMD signed a massive deal with a software firm that was supposed to provide CPU architecture design and replace hundred of engineers in the process. the whole thing ended up being a flop and the whole thing was swept under the rug by the board of directors. It's a classic effect of a company being run by "admin-type" people that don't understand the underling technology enabling their core product.

Anybody else remember that episode or am I the only one ?

I guess ZEN is the first man-made cpu design since they got stuck with the robot-designed cpu cores fiasco a while back. I'm glad they are coming back but I'll wait for reviews and some general feedback before I approve of it. Also, I think that AMD will help the same of their new hardware platform by giving away lots of free games like they have been doing for a while. That's something Intel will have a harder time to match.

Edit: Benchmark, benchmark, benchmark ... In the end, that's mainly what we are waiting for.


----------



## john_ (Dec 16, 2016)

Shihabyooo said:


> Well, at least at some level you're aware that what you just said has no shred of rationality or proof.


Nice cut and paste and a happy conclusion.


----------



## YautjaLord (Dec 17, 2016)

Checked the CES website, Samsung (i think), NVidia, were among the attendees, haven't seen AMD, hell even typed "AMD @ CES 2017" in Google - nothing that shows even were they'll gonna located in that expo. lol Two n a half weeks, or even more left til that expo goes live. ASUS, MSI, etc... show nothing on their homepages that reads AM4/X370 either. I _need _every info bout these!!!!! I gonna finish both original Carma & Splat Pack b4 this event happens, ffs!


----------



## Xzibit (Dec 17, 2016)

YautjaLord said:


> Checked the CES website, Samsung (i think), NVidia, were among the attendees, haven't seen AMD, hell even typed "AMD @ CES 2017" in Google - nothing that shows even were they'll gonna located in that expo. lol Two n a half weeks, or even more left til that expo goes live. ASUS, MSI, etc... show nothing on their homepages that reads AM4/X370 either. I _need _every info bout these!!!!! I gonna finish both original Carma & Splat Pack b4 this event happens, ffs!



Here you go

*Advanced Micro Devices*
Booth Locations:
Venetian, Lvl 3 - San Polo 3402,
Venetian, Lvl 3 - San Polo 3403 
Venetian, Lvl 3 - San Polo 3404 

*Advanced Micro Devices*
Booth Locations:
Venetian Tower - Suite 30-316,
Palazzo Tower,
Hospitality - Venetian Palazzo Hospitality Suites


----------



## Vayra86 (Dec 18, 2016)

All I am interested in at this point, is how well it will overclock.

Depending on the final single threaded perf I'm ugraded either which way, but AMD will definitely be cheaper and insta-buy if it easily clocks 4+ Ghz.


----------



## EarthDog (Dec 18, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> All I am interested in at this point, is how well it will overclock.
> 
> Depending on the final single threaded perf I'm ugraded either which way, but AMD will definitely be cheaper and insta-buy if it easily clocks 4.*5*+ Ghz.


Fixed that for you...


----------



## Vayra86 (Dec 18, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> Fixed that for you...



Gotcha, but even at 4 I would consider it because of the additional cores at similar price point.


----------



## YautjaLord (Dec 18, 2016)

Xzibit said:


> Here you go
> 
> *Advanced Micro Devices*
> Booth Locations:
> ...



CES website is a forest, thanx for info.  But it's not like i'm goin to attend it. lol Hope they'll (CES) stream it live, how's their Android app works on - say - Galaxy J5? Had Twitch.tv app on this thing, worked like sh!t.


----------



## EarthDog (Dec 18, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> Gotcha, but even at 4 I would consider it because of the additional cores at similar price point.


For overclocking purposes, it better hit 4.5ghz+. I'm talking about pushing these things. Not daily driving on an overclock. 

Forgot I was at TPU amd not my homesite. Expectations are different.


----------



## bug (Dec 18, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> All I am interested in at this point, is how well it will overclock.
> 
> Depending on the final single threaded perf I'm ugraded either which way, but AMD will definitely be cheaper and insta-buy if it easily clocks 4+ Ghz.


How could have your overclock set in stone when you don't know Zen's IPC?


----------



## YautjaLord (Dec 18, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> For overclocking purposes, it better hit 4.5ghz+. I'm talking about pushing these things. *Not daily driving on an overclock*.
> 
> Forgot I was at TPU amd not my homesite. Expectations are different.



4.5GHz can be daily, 24/7 OC, but yeah i'm with you on that one. 4.0 or even 4.2GHz can be this thing's Turbo/XFR*(?) clock (depending on cooling solution), make this beast go higher; i intent on testing 4.0GHz with Prime95 raping it for 1 hour, 4.5GHz raped with Prime95 for 4 - *FOUR *- hours!!!!! lol After benchmarks here surface & once i have the LCS (EKWB custom liquid loop) along with the rest of planned components, ofc.

*eXtended Frequency Range, type of Turbo Core? Or is it Precision Boost? Both sound more or less the same to me.


----------



## BiggieShady (Dec 18, 2016)

For those who are wondering about IPC judging from the multi threaded tests, the only way possible that Ryzen's IPC is much worse than Broadwell E, is if SMT is much better than HyperThreading ... 8c16t broadwell e has tons of cache and HT is rather mature/refined after all these years, so the IPC should be competitive.
About OC potential, 3.4 GHz base clock is nothing to sneeze at for a 8c16t part ... and with total power consumption lowered, the only real question that remains: Will the chip be as resistant (to electromigration) as intel's at temps over 80C?


----------



## Eknex (Dec 18, 2016)

Do you think that the price of socket 2011-3 will decrease with the output of AMD Zen?


----------



## rruff (Dec 18, 2016)

john_ said:


> For example, you will find plenty of people saying that a i3 is superior to an 8 core FX. Nothing more.



That would be me! An i3 performs better (faster) in any task that uses 4 threads or less (which is the great majority) and consumes a lot less power ($) doing it. 

So tell me I'm a fanboy. I'd happily get AMD if it made sense. I *was* an AMD fan until it stopped making sense ~8 years ago.  I really hope it will make sense again, because we will all be better off. Competition is good.


----------



## rruff (Dec 18, 2016)

Octavean said:


> If a RYZEN 8 core 16 thread monster came in at about ~$300 to ~$400 USD retail I would be very interested and tempted.  However, if Intel were to drop prices on the Core i7 6900K to the same price range it would be easier and simpler for me to just buy the Core i7 6900K because its a drop-in upgrade.  That is a big "if" though.



Expect Intel to match or beat AMD on $/performance and to introduce chips that are superior to anything AMD makes where they will get higher margins. 

I could very well be wrong, but I doubt Intel has been really been giving us their "best" the last several years. They simply haven't needed to.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Dec 18, 2016)

Just want this to hurry up already hit the shelves and blow up the market. I'm gagging on the high end chip prices for x79 nevermind x99!  I think it's almost an understatement to say Intel hasn't been giving it it's best the last several years...why it has no need.  Just give small incremental improvements while selling for crazy money because AMD just isn't even in the picture.  So yeah, I'm kinda anxious for that crap to end and competition and innovation to be brought back into the market again.


----------



## Shihab (Dec 18, 2016)

BiggieShady said:


> For those who are wondering about IPC judging from the multi threaded tests, the only way possible that Ryzen's IPC is much worse than Broadwell E, is if SMT is much better than HyperThreading ... 8c16t broadwell e has tons of cache and HT is rather mature/refined after all these years, so the IPC should be competitive.
> About OC potential, 3.4 GHz base clock is nothing to sneeze at for a 8c16t part ... and with total power consumption lowered, the only real question that remains: Will the chip be as resistant (to electromigration) as intel's at temps over 80C?



Zen's memory hierarchy is slightly different from BW-E's, the latter's cache is only larger on the upper level. I've always had the illusion that L3 cache's size is practically irrelevant for common use (Raytracing and encoding included), can't find a confirmation for it yet though. But it remains that cache size -in general- isn't necessarily a win for Intel or that it helped cover up lower IPC compared to Zen.
Other than that, I agree. It isn't plausible that AMD's SMT application would reach intel's efficiency. Zen's IPC might prove better.

Nitpicking: Hyperthreading _is _an SMT application, the term is non-brand specific general jargon.


----------



## BiggieShady (Dec 18, 2016)

Shihabyooo said:


> But it remains that cache size -in general- isn't necessarily a win for Intel or that it helped cover up lower IPC compared to Zen.


I never meant to compare cache sizes, I meant that the L2+L3 cache is so abundant in Broadwell E so blender/handbrake multithreaded tasks scale almost perfectly ... which means we can somewhat draw conclusions about single thread performance of zen ... it can't be worse unless AMD SMT is more efficient than HT


Shihabyooo said:


> Nitpicking: Hyperthreading _is _an SMT application, the term is non-brand specific general jargon.


Yeah, it truly is general term, when I said SMT I meant AMD SMT


----------



## P4-630 (Dec 20, 2016)

*AMD RYZEN ZEN 8 Core / 16 Thread CPU Cinebench R15 and Fritz Chess Benchmarks Leaked – Compared Against i7-7700K and i7-6900K

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-zen-cpu-benchmarks-leak/*


----------



## Eknex (Dec 20, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> *AMD RYZEN ZEN 8 Core / 16 Thread CPU Cinebench R15 and Fritz Chess Benchmarks Leaked – Compared Against i7-7700K and i7-6900K
> 
> http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-zen-cpu-benchmarks-leak/*


----------



## Vayra86 (Dec 20, 2016)

Eknex said:


>



WCCFTech should just be ignored imo. The amount of BS they spread around the internet is borderline criminal.


----------



## GoldenX (Dec 20, 2016)

Is there any rumor on lower/lowest end parts, and the TDP support for the different chipsets?
A quad core (Ry)Zen on the lowest chipset (as I understand, that means no chipset at all, just the Zen SoC) should be extremly cheap.


----------



## BiggieShady (Dec 21, 2016)

Gotta have one


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Dec 21, 2016)

I thought that was a picture of all their current chips...just add water to perk up a few hundred mhz and you can still only dream of touching Intel's head Watermelon's performance


----------



## anubis44 (Dec 21, 2016)

TheLaughingMan said:


> But what if in 1 year, what AMD is offering is faster than a 6950X for the same price, or the same performance for like $400?


He's still planning to buy Intel anyway, even if it's slower and more expensive.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Dec 21, 2016)

anubis44 said:


> He's still planning to buy Intel anyway, even if it's slower and more expensive.



Kinda tough to criticize someone who said something plausible to reply to that after you dig up a quote from 5 pages and days ago...You're sadly defining troll and faboi with one two sentence post, doubt that's your intent but that's your end result.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 23, 2016)

Not sure if this has been posted anywhere else, anyway 





This is RYZEN (engineering sample)


----------



## Caring1 (Dec 24, 2016)

So basically it is better at calculations and crunching, but still beaten soundly in other areas.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 24, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> So basically it is better at calculations and crunching, but still *beaten soundly* in other areas.


Say what 

The tests were done with a clock speed disadvantage of around 5~10% for ryzen, as compared to 6900K, not to mention quad channel memory for BDW-E. So far what I gather, from this review, is that ryzen is between 5960x & 6900k in terms of performance & that with the final production silicon still a few weeks (months?) away. If the auto OC feature works as advertised & ryzen is not an OCing dud, it should sell out quickly provided the price isn't exorbitant.


----------



## P4-630 (Dec 24, 2016)

Note translated with google translate:

https://translate.google.com/transl...lijke-amd-ryzen-benchmarks&edit-text=&act=url

Original article:
https://nl.hardware.info/nieuws/50470/eerste-onafhankelijke-amd-ryzen-benchmarks


----------



## bug (Dec 24, 2016)

R0H1T said:


> Say what
> 
> The tests were done with a clock speed disadvantage of around 5~10% for ryzen, as compared to 6900K, not to mention quad channel memory for BDW-E. So far what I gather, from this review, is that ryzen is between 5960x & 6900k in terms of performance & that with the final production silicon still a few weeks (months?) away. If the auto OC feature works as advertised & ryzen is not an OCing dud, it should sell out quickly provided the price isn't exorbitant.


I'm sure the final silicon will be twice as fast and need half the electrical power


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 24, 2016)

bug said:


> I'm sure the final silicon will be *twice as fast and need half the electrical power*


Sure, I'll take your word for it


----------



## Vayra86 (Dec 24, 2016)

What I find far more fascinating is that you can see a 68% perf increase at 75% of the clocks of an FX 8370 while keeping a very low power draw. That's massive progress.

If AMD can do this with a completely fresh architecture on an ES and place that this close to Intel's top end CPU that's been seeing no less than 3-4 refreshes, imagine the refresh a year from now.


----------



## EarthDog (Dec 24, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> What I find far more fascinating is that you can see a 68% perf increase at 75% of the clocks of an FX 8370 while keeping a very low power draw. That's massive progress.
> 
> If AMD can do this with a completely fresh architecture on an ES and place that this close to Intel's top end CPU that's been seeing no less than 3-4 refreshes, imagine the refresh a year from now.


What.... a piledrver to bulldozer increase? (None)

Honestly, I have zero expectations of an amd refresh past this so.... who the hell knows what they  put out after this. We don't even know what 'this' is, nonetheless it's next iteration..


----------



## Vayra86 (Dec 24, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> What.... a piledrver to bulldozer increase? (None)
> 
> Honestly, I have zero expectations of an amd refresh past this so.... who the hell knows what they  put out after this. We don't even know what 'this' is, nonetheless it's next iteration..



Let's not keep putting salt in that old wound  It's painful to think about that, hopefully AMD noticed that too and they won't repeat it ^^

Gaming benchmarks: 1% below an i5 that runs at 3.5/3.9. If Zen can push similar clocks, it will be faster than the i5 in IPC. If that is consistent, Im officially impressed.


----------



## EarthDog (Dec 24, 2016)

Keep wishing...

Point is, we don't know know what this is. Nonetheless the next zen...lol.


----------



## P4-630 (Dec 24, 2016)

After Ryzen will be available I think it takes them many years for a good successor again.


----------



## Vayra86 (Dec 24, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> After Ryzen will be available I think it takes them many years for a good successor again.



Likely, but it will be peanuts to get better yields and better clocking CPUs. It's very normal and is essentially what Intel's been doing ever since they released something on 14nm. Small IPC gains, small clock bumps, nothing extraordinary.


----------



## EarthDog (Dec 24, 2016)

Still waiting for that out of bulldozer...

I wouldn't hold my breath.


----------



## bug (Dec 24, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> Likely, but it will be peanuts to get better yields and better clocking CPUs. It's very normal and is essentially what Intel's been doing ever since they released something on 14nm. Small IPC gains, small clock bumps, nothing extraordinary.



Honestly, that's what intel has been doing ever since they launched their Core architecture. They worked hard on their mobile chips, but on the desktop you could skip 2-3 generations and not miss much at all.


----------



## X828 (Dec 24, 2016)

The AMD pre-emptive disappointment in this thread is thick.    Let's wait and see how it fairs before we start shooting Zen down.


----------



## Frick (Dec 24, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> So basically it is better at calculations and crunching, but still beaten soundly in other areas.



Honestly if they have Haswell levels IPC I would call it a success. All these comparisions with the 6900k makes me worried for them.



X828 said:


> The AMD pre-emptive disappointment in this thread is thick.    Let's wait and see how it fairs before we start shooting Zen down.



It's managing expectations, which AMD has proven terrible at.


----------



## john_ (Dec 26, 2016)

I think that leaked review is the verification we where hoping to see. In multithreded scenarios is close to Broadwell, in games it's pretty fine, considering the frequency and the power consumption is also close to Intel's magical 14nm+. Of course Intel added tooth paste in it's Kaby Lake series instead of thermal paste, I guess hoping to do a "Devil's Canyon Part 2" next year, but that's not AMD's problem.

Ryzen looks good. The problem is not so much the end frequency, as much as availability. I don't think anyone feels secure with GlobalFoundries in the pilot's seat


Spoiler


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Dec 26, 2016)

Maybe, but no one feels secure with AMD sucking and Intel doing whatever it wants and charging for tech that's only marginally better in many ways than what it had in 2011-2012, that's just sad.  However due to the red camp essentially "bulldozing" itself rather than Intel AMD is as much to blame as anyone for what we are currently stuck with for tech and worse yet the high cost for such modest gains.  So yes Ryzen even being in the same park as Broadwell is almost a grand slam...let's face it other than being cheap and "good enough" to get you online and do tasks/gaming etc AMD has been irrelevant for several years thanks to how their products literally weren't even in the same country as the Intel ballpark, forget being in the same stadium.


----------



## john_ (Dec 26, 2016)

Intel will continue to do whatever it wants, at least in the retail market, and people deserve the marginal increment in performance and the high prices.

When the first AOTS benchmark came out, many where laughing at Zen.
Then Blender came out and many where saying that Blender was fixed to make AMD look good. Those "AMD" commands in Blender's source code where perfect.
At 13th we saw one more presentation and still it wasn't enough for many.
Now that things look even more promising, many are demanding for the 8 core / 16 threads model 4.0GHZ and prices that are ridiculous for a 16 threads cpu model. Prices that, if you ask them in a private message to sell you their 6 core / 12 threads second hand Intel processor at those prices, they will just block you so to never bother them again.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 26, 2016)

john_ said:


> Intel will continue to do whatever it wants, at least in the retail market, and *people deserve the marginal increment in performance and the high prices*.
> 
> When the first AOTS benchmark came out, many where laughing at Zen.
> Then Blender came out and many where saying that Blender was fixed to make AMD look good. Those "AMD" commands in Blender's source code where perfect.
> ...


Of course it's like asking someone to ditch their iPhone or Galaxy/Note for a lowly one plus 3.

In the end the consumers get what exactly they deserve & not necessarily what they demand, also their favorite brand (Intel/Apple/Nvidia/Samsung) certainly won't indulge in such charitable endeavors that they expect AMD to come up with.


----------



## bug (Dec 26, 2016)

john_ said:


> Intel will continue to do whatever it wants, at least in the retail market, and people deserve the marginal increment in performance and the high prices.
> 
> When the first AOTS benchmark came out, many where laughing at Zen.
> Then Blender came out and many where saying that Blender was fixed to make AMD look good. Those "AMD" commands in Blender's source code where perfect.
> ...



Well, to see whether Zen is actually good, all we need is to see single core performance. It it's better than intel in a comparable power envelope, then we'll know Zen is not Bulldozer 2.0. Imho, Zen will actually need to soundly beat intel, otherwise they'll be back to convincing system builders they need to look at their CPUs, just as they did with AthlonXP.

Also, it's quite telling that you think we actually have numbers on our hands. We have stuff coming out of leaks and presentations, which is not the same thing. I've said it before, when AMD flopped, they were careful not to leak anything before the actual launch, so them leaking numbers now is a good sign. But do not take the numbers seen so far without a pinch of salt.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Dec 26, 2016)

Yeah when you score an F on a test you usually don't leak that information to your classmates.


----------



## john_ (Dec 26, 2016)

bug said:


> Well, to see whether Zen is actually good, all we need is to see single core performance. It it's better than intel in a comparable power envelope, then we'll know Zen is not Bulldozer 2.0. Imho, *Zen will actually need to soundly beat intel*, otherwise they'll be back to convincing system builders they need to look at their CPUs, just as they did with AthlonXP.
> 
> Also, it's quite telling that you think we actually have numbers on our hands. We have stuff coming out of leaks and presentations, which is not the same thing. I've said it before, when AMD flopped, they were careful not to leak anything before the actual launch, so them leaking numbers now is a good sign. But do not take the numbers seen so far without a pinch of salt.


E....nope. Not really. I have said that before. Not every system on the planet is based on a 6950X and a new Nvidia Titan X. Why does AMD need to win over Intel single thread performance? Is SuperPi the only important software on the planet? AMD only needs to offer valid alternatives at better value, not better alternatives at better value at the same time. System builders, OEMs and big companies are not stupid and they are not fanboys. If AMD is offering a valid alternative they will buy it, they will have two suppliers of CPUs and they will be able to negotiate better deals not only with AMD but also Intel. 


Anyway. Again I am amazed how eager people are to find excuses to discredit AMD's hardware. The next thing I am going to read is that the Wraith cooler is too damn silent and a system running Ryzen doesn't... sound powerful enough(when the Harrier airplane came out, people where not impressed with it because it was landing on aircraft carriers extremely softly compared to the airplanes used before it by the Royal Navy(I don't remember the model)).


----------



## bug (Dec 26, 2016)

john_ said:


> E....nope. Not really. I have said that before. Not every system on the planet is based on a 6950X and a new Nvidia Titan X. Why does AMD need to win over Intel single thread performance? Is SuperPi the only important software on the planet? AMD only needs to offer valid alternatives at better value, not better alternatives at better value at the same time.



AMD can't offer value if it doesn't have single-thread performance. Because most things today run very well on 4 cores or less, the show AMD is putting by comparing to 6900X is little more than smoke and mirrors.


john_ said:


> System builders, OEMs and big companies are not stupid and they are not fanboys. If AMD is offering a valid alternative they will buy it, they will have two suppliers of CPUs and they will be able to negotiate better deals not only with AMD but also Intel.



As for system builders, again, you need to look at what happened with AthlonXP.



john_ said:


> Anyway. Again I am amazed how eager people are to find excuses to discredit AMD's hardware. The next thing I am going to read is that the Wraith cooler is too damn silent and a system running Ryzen doesn't... sound powerful enough(when the Harrier airplane came out, people where not impressed with it because it was landing on aircraft carriers extremely softly compared to the airplanes used before it by the Royal Navy(I don't remember the model)).



It's amusing how a call to calling a leak a leak (and not actual set-in-stone, reproducible benchmark) is seen as an attempt to "discredit AMD's hardware" by some. But then again, that is what prompted my previous post as well: people taking preliminary figures as hard, irrefutable fact.


----------



## john_ (Dec 27, 2016)

What a waste of time. You have already made up your mind anyway and you just ignore parts of my post that are not convenient to you. At least you are not taking preliminary figures as hard, you are just absolutely confident that the whole Rysen presentation was a "little more than smoke and mirrors". Nothing more to post here.


----------



## bug (Dec 27, 2016)

john_ said:


> What a waste of time. You have already made up your mind anyway and *you just ignore parts of my post that are not convenient to you*. At least you are not taking preliminary figures as hard, you are just absolutely confident that the whole Rysen presentation was a "little more than smoke and mirrors". Nothing more to post here.



Umm, who quoted who first, ignoring that meat of the post and bolding just the part clearly marked with "imho"?


----------



## john_ (Dec 27, 2016)

bug said:


> Umm, who quoted who first, ignoring that meat of the post and bolding just the part clearly marked with "imho"?


Oh come on, stop trolling around. You quoted me first. post #184


----------



## bug (Dec 27, 2016)

john_ said:


> Oh come on, stop trolling around. You quoted me first. post #184


Ah, reading comprehension challenged. That explains it, sorry.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jan 4, 2017)

Take it with gigantic, ok maybe i exaggerate, big spoon of salt, it's from WCCFTech - after searchin for anything AMD @ CES 2017 related, i stumbled upon this thing:



Spoiler












The above one is X370-based & this one is B350-based:



Spoiler











AMD rep talks to GG from ASUS on Twitch tv right now, best i could find in twitch.tv/amd. That B350 mobo looks like the one of AMD's slides they had @ their "New Horizon" event. 

The article itself: http://wccftech.com/msi-am4-x370-motherboard-ryzen-cpu/


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 4, 2017)

Nice, admittedly was disappointed though informative and interesting as mobos are doesn't tell us much about what the end product will produce a pentium 4 mobo could look nice if you dressed it up right.  I'm surprised Ces seems so quiet I thought they leak stuff and even pre-release things before it starts to tease their products etc?


----------



## YautjaLord (Jan 4, 2017)

Here are 3 more that talk about this X370 mobo:

PCGamesHardware.de: http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Mainboard-Hardware-154107/News/Ryzen-AM4-High-End-MSI-1217429/

LinusTechTips.com (their forums): https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/717419-msis-am4-platform-shown-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium/

OCAHolic: http://www.ocaholic.co.uk/modules/news/article.php?storyid=15959

@dalekdukesboy:

Atleast now you & i, & pretty much anyone else here (plus these 4 aforementioned sites) knows how's this AM4/X370 stuff looks like. Something to start with, y'know?!


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 4, 2017)

True it is SOMETHING, just not at all what I am waiting for lol.  Call me impatient as I've said prior this is so overdue to the tech world of CPU's that remaining days/weeks are agony as I hope Intel's monopoly turns to dust in the wind.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jan 4, 2017)

Few more hours - twitch.tv/amd is my source on all this stuff, i hope they'll stream their event @ CES on this channel tomorrow. BTW: found out MSI's booth not that far away from AMD's booth in this venue actually. Make twitch.tv/amd your friend.


----------



## Xzibit (Jan 4, 2017)

RyZen + Vega 4k Ultra @ CES 2017


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 4, 2017)

Promising especially at 4k I don't know how demanding that game is but it's new I know so to run as such with Zen and the even more mysterious Vega is pretty interesting...even the Vega if good enough could shake up things a bit because although not as bad as cpu non-war at the moment even with Gpu's Nvidia is coasting a bit since AMD has nothing to even compete with their top offerings atm.


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Jan 8, 2017)

Darksword said:


> I'll believe it when I see it from independent testing.  AMD is the king of "hype leading to disappointment".


Congrats on making it into a Linus Tech Tips video!  

*about 50s in*


----------



## pikunsia (Jan 8, 2017)

If indeed the rizen can match the i7-6900k, then Intel will down its price to about $800, so that the rizen price should be about $700 when it releases.


----------



## ratirt (Jan 9, 2017)

pikunsia said:


> If indeed the rizen can match the i7-6900k, then Intel will down its price to about $800, so that the rizen price should be about $700 when it releases.


Is that a statement or assumption?


----------



## Nergal (Jan 9, 2017)

ratirt said:


> Is that a statement or assumption?



Could very well be a statement. 
Since as long as I can remember, Intel and NV have adjusted pricing as follows.

Take their piece of hardware that is (slightly) performing slower than AMD´s equivalent and ask 10% more for it. 
Initially, it can vary, but when the dust has settled down, that is what the user is left with.

aka paying premium for something.

Is what Audi did; still can´t get my head wrapped around why people would consider Audi premium.


----------



## pikunsia (Jan 9, 2017)

ratirt said:


> Is that a statement or assumption?


Of course it is a conjecture.


----------



## ratirt (Jan 10, 2017)

pikunsia said:


> Of course it is a conjecture.


Ok but you still don't know what the price for Ryzen will be and what sort of CPU's AMD will release since we know there wont be just one Ryzen 8c/16 but different options. I only hope AMD will stop at 6c/12t as the lowest and move on from there.


----------



## Frick (Jan 10, 2017)

ratirt said:


> I only hope AMD will stop at 6c/12t as the lowest and move on from there.



Would not make sense. A 6c/12t part might exist, but it will not be the lowliest Ryzen. That will either be 4c/8t or maybe even 2c/4t. I'd definitely take an overclockable 2c/4t CPU if the price is good enough and the overclocking motherboards are not much more expensive than the base models. 3c/6t ... I dunno, I find it unlikely. It would be nice though, especially if that was the base model, but that depends on how the CPU is designed I guess.


----------



## ratirt (Jan 10, 2017)

Frick said:


> Would not make sense. A 6c/12t part might exist, but it will not be the lowliest Ryzen. That will either be 4c/8t or maybe even 2c/4t. I'd definitely take an overclockable 2c/4t CPU if the price is good enough and the overclocking motherboards are not much more expensive than the base models. 3c/6t ... I dunno, I find it unlikely. It would be nice though, especially if that was the base model, but that depends on how the CPU is designed I guess.


Probably yes but i'd think that if AMD's idea is to kick Intel's butt then 6c as the lowest option would be great idea. That would kill i3 which is very likely both as low end pc. Getting 6c with double the IPC or at least way better than I3 for similar price would be great and AMD would rise up on the market. There's always other stuff like cpu frequency to adjust speed. Considering more and more applications now-days use multi-thread it's an option. It is maybe my wishful thinking but who knows


----------

