I must admit 2016 is going to be a very interesting year for us. AMD finally waking up and bringing us ZEN. We finally ditched 28nm and going for 16/14nm. nVidia Pascal, Amd Arctic Island, HBM2 i hope i didn't forget something. Very excited about 2016.

Serpent of DarknessThe article is meat to start setting up expectations and "light the beacons of Gondor" moment about AMD Zen. Until 3rd party benches are released, the only natural step is to be on the lookout for any news. The members of this forum and others, will continue their natural state of speculation, QQ-ing, arguments about the fails and wins of AMD Zen.

To answer your question, it gets the community members coming back to the website. Since the website is probably displaying ads for funding, the more members who recirculate back to see it, the better for TPU's benefit because they get a cut from it. Anything with focus words like "AMD ZEN" or "NVIDIA GTX Titan HBM 16GB PASCUAL" or "AMD R9-690x appears from the darkness" to name a few, will have community members coming back, and they will see the ads or pop-ups. Similar situation occurs on YouTube when you monetize videos. If consumers are watching some random person's videos, they will see the ads with the videos. The owner of the videos gets a cut of the money spent to put up the ads, and the cut goes up when more viewers watch the video because it equates to a greater chance that the viewer will purchase the product from newegg or an online store. So in a since, btarunr's actions could be justified to sustain the website on a financial level, if it was important. To go even further, Guru3D.com left their "QQ" post last week. It's a similar situation where pop-up blockers were stopping the ads from being displayed to community members and site visitors. Since less ads were being viewed, Guru3D makes less money in the process. Thus, this is the justification for the "QQ" post.

Wow.............

nemSeems sales of INTEL gone to the $hit.. ;)

Still trying to spread disinformation I see.

Let's take a look at reality instead. Read post #54 and then have a look at this

www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/press-release-2015apr16.aspx

www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/press-release-2015jul16.aspx

www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/press-release-2015oct15.aspx

Note that those figures include their GPU sales and the sales for chips for all three consoles too as well as CPU and APU.

Will Zen help AMD? Only if AMD can get a larger market share in the PC and server market. They have to sell the Zen chips to computer manufacturers. That is what will make or break AMD on the CPU side of their business.

Serpent of DarknessThe article is meat to start setting up expectations and "light the beacons of Gondor" moment about AMD Zen. Until 3rd party benches are released, the only natural step is to be on the lookout for any news. The members of this forum and others, will continue their natural state of speculation, QQ-ing, arguments about the fails and wins of AMD Zen.

To answer your question, it gets the community members coming back to the website. Since the website is probably displaying ads for funding, the more members who recirculate back to see it, the better for TPU's benefit because they get a cut from it. Anything with focus words like "AMD ZEN" or "NVIDIA GTX Titan HBM 16GB PASCUAL" or "AMD R9-690x appears from the darkness" to name a few, will have community members coming back, and they will see the ads or pop-ups. Similar situation occurs on YouTube when you monetize videos. If consumers are watching some random person's videos, they will see the ads with the videos. The owner of the videos gets a cut of the money spent to put up the ads, and the cut goes up when more viewers watch the video because it equates to a greater chance that the viewer will purchase the product from newegg or an online store. So in a since, btarunr's actions could be justified to sustain the website on a financial level, if it was important. To go even further, Guru3D.com left their "QQ" post last week. It's a similar situation where pop-up blockers were stopping the ads from being displayed to community members and site visitors. Since less ads were being viewed, Guru3D makes less money in the process. Thus, this is the justification for the "QQ" post.

We need TPU, we need Guru3D, we need Tomshardware. We need every tech site out there. Why? Because they are still give us something to read and place to discuss and sometimes fight for the sake of the brands we love. And it's free so we accept the adv as part of word free. Thanks for everyone make internet fun and free.

F-ZeroI must admit 2016 is going to be a very interesting year for us. AMD finally waking up and bringing us ZEN. We finally ditched 28nm and going for 16/14nm. nVidia Pascal, Amd Arctic Island, HBM2 i hope i didn't forget something. Very excited about 2016.

upgrades to storage data paths.

intel+micron vs sandisk+hp in ssd dimm.

vr finally getting good headsets that we can all afford.

4k screens the same too.

pc gaming finally getting a real poster boy as steam starts to push itself as such.

tiss really looking like being a great year for pc fans across the boards :D

R-T-Bacross the tech PR wire

But this isn't near any Public Relation release, it's just a backdoor rumor. One might speculate AMD planted this... or Intel plants it to start the forum world to "hype-over-sell" expectations. Or it has a shred of truth in that some person who has some "in" to AMD engineering said in passing it "meet all expectations" and "no significant bottlenecks found". And that's the problem I have with what btarunr wrote is there's no mention of a source unless you go to the article he referencing at OC3D.net. And then we find as others here indicate, what that tells us is it's all left to speculation. We need to leave it as that... speculation and rumor and give it no more "life" than that.

the54thvoidSo is this new click bait? Who cares, it's rumour and we all love rumour.

While I don't have a problem with an "unsubstantiated rumors", this click-bait is worse as it appears many members see it as offering substantial value, and/or delineated from AMD as btarunr and other sites include slides from AMD to give it an air of distinction.

I bet intel has some intel on layaway ready to destroy Zen

DieinafireI bet intel has some intel on layaway ready to destroy Zen

They always seem to,.....NVIDIA too.

It seems like they're both always holding onto their best, and only releasing whatever they're "forced to" to stay slightly ahead of the competition.
I resent this, because they don't care to give us their best gear when they could. Only when they have to.

They have us all on a schedule.

Of course they are. It takes only about 55W for intel today to make a powerful I7 quadcore CPU, practically without its ridicules iGPU. Do you think they will have any issues going ham when their competitor offers the same kind of performance for 95W?

No... not really. Pulling out a 6 core 3.6Ghz+ monster within 95W TDP for mainstream socket is something intel could easily do, if they gave a hoot.

Dj-ElectriCNo... not really. Pulling out a 6 core 3.6Ghz+ monster within 95W TDP for mainstream socket is something intel could easily do, if they gave a hoot.

I highly doubt that with any of the chips unless they have something really special hidden away. Even the low clocked 5820K is still using quite a lot of power on the X99 platform so even with the changes in architecture and a few things taken out I doubt its possible currently without heavy binning and clock reductions.

the54thvoidSaying Guru are 'QQ' about ad-blocking is unfair. Most tech sites have no financial backing so run all costs on ads revenue. Only other alternative is paid subscription or sponsorship (fixed banner - no pop ups) both of which are bad. It's mobile that's worse by far but also some sites use really invasive, page blocking ads. The ones used here and at Guru etc are tucked away neatly. Ad Blocking is useful for some but a selfish move. It's a case of 'I want free media' yet people forget that in real life , most things have a cost.

So is this new click bait? Who cares, it's rumour and we all love rumour.

^
Yea, I feel some people just want everything handed to them for free. I admit there are times where ads are overly abused or the ads themselves are beyond obnoxious/ridiculous but for most sites that's where they get their money whether its a youtube channel or a tech site. Mobile is really the only area that can be grey area in my book because of limited data when it comes to ad's but its still necessary.

DieinafireI bet intel has some intel on layaway ready to destroy Zen

An interesting proposition. May I offer a counter?

Intel is basically making an APU with their consumer level hardware. They haven't offered a true CPU in that bracket since Sandy Bridge. On the other hand, AMD will be offering a true CPU, that well be 10-20% under performing per die area, but have an extra 20-30% die space (I'm ball parking on space here, so please take the numbers with a huge grain of salt) to work with. Even those who swear by Intel have to admit what a huge benefit that is, because Intel is doing the same thing with the much more expensive enthusiast platforms.


I'd gladly forego Intel's wattage superiority to have less wasted space, more cores, and a platform which has more than 3 years of upgrade path. I'm currently running Intel CPUs only because AMD is a crap competitor. If they could release something even just within striking distance (not necessarily superior) of Intel I'd gladly make them a part of my next build.

lilhasselhofferIntel is basically making an APU with their consumer level hardware. They haven't offered a true CPU in that bracket since Sandy Bridge. On the other hand, AMD will be offering a true CPU, that well be 10-20% under performing per die area, but have an extra 20-30% die space (I'm ball parking on space here, so please take the numbers with a huge grain of salt) to work with. Even those who swear by Intel have to admit what a huge benefit that is, because Intel is doing the same thing with the much more expensive enthusiast platforms.

Shouldn't be a problem for Intel to manufacture the desired parts if they feel their market requires the presence. Haswell-EP for example is a pretty modular design. 14-18 cores (662mm^2) scales down to 4-8 cores (354mm^2) and 80-90W, and that still provides for a huge 20MB L3. I wouldn't think Broadwell or Skylake would be any different WRT modularity, so it probably comes down to mix-and-match core/TDP and turbo stepping/L3 and IGP/no-IGP options. Skylake (4C) with a more mainstream 8MB L3 is only 73mm^2 sans IGP, so package size wouldn't be a problem. Probably depends on how much of a threat Intel perceives Zen to be. Personally, I couldn't see Intel releasing a consumer part without at least some IGP functionality - even if rudimentary. Intel gain nothing by offering "chipsets" with no display out functionality.

Dj-ElectriCOf course they are. It takes only about 55W for intel today to make a powerful I7 quadcore CPU, practically without its ridicules iGPU. Do you think they will have any issues going ham when their competitor offers the same kind of performance for 95W?

No... not really. Pulling out a 6 core 3.6Ghz+ monster within 95W TDP for mainstream socket is something intel could easily do, if they gave a hoot.

www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/Xeon/D/X10SDV-8C-TLN4F.cfm
ark.intel.com/products/87039/Intel-Xeon-Processor-D-1540-12M-Cache-2_00-GHz
www.servethehome.com/intel-xeon-d-1540-performance-comparison/

If Intel can do a 8c/16t Xeon SoC in a 45-watt TDP envelope, I think Intel can do a lot more than what they're offering the run of the mill consumer.

HumanSmokeShouldn't be a problem for Intel to manufacture the desired parts if they feel their market requires the presence. Haswell-EP for example is a pretty modular design. 14-18 cores (662mm^2) scales down to 4-8 cores (354mm^2) and 80-90W, and that still provides for a huge 20MB L3. I wouldn't think Broadwell or Skylake would be any different WRT modularity, so it probably comes down to mix-and-match core/TDP and turbo stepping/L3 and IGP/no-IGP options. Skylake (4C) with a more mainstream 8MB L3 is only 73mm^2 sans IGP, so package size wouldn't be a problem. Probably depends on how much of a threat Intel perceives Zen to be. Personally, I couldn't see Intel releasing a consumer part without at least some IGP functionality - even if rudimentary. Intel gain nothing by offering "chipsets" with no display out functionality.

My only problem with the proposition is that it requires Intel to admit that they have to give up on IGP to compete with an offering from AMD. That seems like a huge reversal of course, and it also seems like a complete loss from the PR side. In my experience, Intel doesn't do that sort of thing until they've been demonstrated to be so massively wrong that it's the only option.

Frankly, I don't believe Zen could ever do that. It'd have to be one hell of a magic rabbit to be so much better than the Intel offering that it would force a change in their plans. I'm honestly just hoping for viable competition (on the high-end mainstream or low end enthusiast markets). Nobody in their right mind should believe AMD will somehow find the way to magically come back from near extinction to be a viable competitor to Intel with one CPU line. If it sounded like I was saying that then I've made an error in tone.

lilhasselhofferMy only problem with the proposition is that it requires Intel to admit that they have to give up on IGP to compete with an offering from AMD. That seems like a huge reversal of course, and it also seems like a complete loss from the PR side. In my experience, Intel doesn't do that sort of thing until they've been demonstrated to be so massively wrong that it's the only option.

Maybe, but AMD will market Zen as an enthusiasts "FX" platform, so unless AMD price it to compete with Intel's mainstream platform it will go up against whatever enthusiast SKU/HEDT Intel have. AMD could price down to Intel's mainstream, but that strategy hasn't worked particularly well up til now. Intel also have the option of dropping chipset prices back to X58 levels or lower (I'm sure the $50 they charge for X99 isn't warranted in any case) or offering a stratified chipset option if AMD look like achieving any serious inroads into Intel's business.

lilhasselhofferFrankly, I don't believe Zen could ever do that. It'd have to be one hell of a magic rabbit to be so much better than the Intel offering that it would force a change in their plans. I'm honestly just hoping for viable competition (on the high-end mainstream or low end enthusiast markets). Nobody in their right mind should believe AMD will somehow find the way to magically come back from near extinction to be a viable competitor to Intel with one CPU line. If it sounded like I was saying that then I've made an error in tone.

I would doubt it as well given the R&D of both companies. Even if Zen closed the gap completely ( I agree, extremely unlikely), AMD don't have the brand awareness, and are saddled with a management whose track record of success would put Sisyphus to shame in its ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Hopefully power consumption will be a bit more tame this time around. I turned a blind eye to it for a while, but it really was getting a bit much. I suppose the main concern is getting performance competitive though.

C'mon, AMD. We're rootin' for ya'.

I have a feeling it will "meat the expectations"... ;)

HumanSmokeMaybe, but AMD will market Zen as an enthusiasts "FX" platform, so unless AMD price it to compete with Intel's mainstream platform it will go up against whatever enthusiast SKU/HEDT Intel have. AMD could price down to Intel's mainstream, but that strategy hasn't worked particularly well up til now. Intel also have the option of dropping chipset prices back to X58 levels or lower (I'm sure the $50 they charge for X99 isn't warranted in any case) or offering a stratified chipset option if AMD look like achieving any serious inroads into Intel's business.
...

An interesting point. I always saw AMD as offering the better deal for upgrades, because your FX level processors and your standard processors all utilized the same chipsets (given, there was some distinction, but definitely not the fragmented mish-mash of Intel). I make this statement, looking at Intel right now. The PCH for SB and IB was basically the same offering (but requiring you purchase a new motherboard to insure compatibility with new CPUs and better PCI-e 3.0 support). Haswell finally got full SATA III support (and some M2), but that was about it. Broadwell never materialized. Skylake adds almost nothing to the mix that wasn't present in Haswell (at least nothing useful in the next 18 months based upon current trends and pricing). With each of these generations having at least 3 variants (and usually more), it was a pain in the butt to try and explain why one board cost more than another without having to whip out a comparative chart for features. Heck, that doesn't even cover the enthusiast lines and server lines (of which there was some cross-over).

While you're dealing with the Intel alphabet soup you had two or three chipset choices from AMD, that work with all their processors. If you bought a good motherboard when AM3+ came out it could see multiple processors over several years, assuming that you could live without some of the baked in features that Intel pushes with every minor revision. Right now I'm looking at several computer which have no real upgrade path (SB and IB), yet their PCH features are largely still sufficient for everything that I need today. Even if the CPUs weren't keeping up, the PCH would be enough for the next couple of years. That kind of logic works with AMD (or at least it did in the past), but Intel gives you 18-36 months (depending upon if there is a refresh).


I'm conjecturing that Intel only needs three cards to win most markets, and none of them is the raw performance card. They claim that they've got the most innovative features, by citing cost savings to businesses using their iGPU. They claim best thermal performance, to lock the server market. After that, the only card they need to play is recognition. Even if AMD went toe-to-toe, Zen couldn't beat these cards.

AMD has to win the enthusiast market for Zen to live, which wouldn't be hard with a sub $300 6 core or better CPU. Throw in all the PCH features that Skylake has, with an additional few PCI-e lanes, and you've got a platform worth spending some money on (it's easy once you admit that CPU upgrades will happen more often than new peripherals get added which will require drastic PCH changes). It's not like Intel gives a crap, based upon their enthusiast level PCH options (yes, I'm still stewing over the x79 PCH being both expensive and underwhelming). If AMD can make a decent dent on enthusiast CPUs they have a chance for their next CPU line to be a real success. I can't even count how many times over the past 5 years when somebody pointed out a cheap AMD system, and I immediately dismissed the savings because the performance wouldn't have justified it. If you can get people like us to seriously consider recommending AMD then they have a chance at being implemented. As it stands, I think the lackluster previous products prevent builders from recommending their product. They'll never get the server lines to survive, because you're right to say Intel will utterly stomp them with only minor changes to existing product. Cheaper CPUs are the only reason that AMD is still even in the CPU game, but that business is low margin and high volume (read: not enough money to support the R&D for future projects). I don't want to see AMD die, but even if Zen is a huge success it'll take a huge amount of effort to counteract the death spiral AMD management is making. Zen alone can't do that if they can't rebuild the loyal fan base.


I'm loathe to admit this, but AMD need people like SonyXperia. It needs die hard fans willing to buy day 1, and in order to do that AMD has to undo their reputation of mediocrity. The best way to do that isn't to compete with Intel, but to give those Intel has been ignoring a voice again. I can't be the only one angry that an ever increasing iGPU, lackluster generational performance increases, and consistently stupid choices (giving up solder, FIVR, etc..) has made buying a new Intel system feel like extortion over the past 5 years. Don't get me wrong, SB was the best overall platform I've ever seen. At the same time, IB, Haswell, and largely Skybridge have given me no reason to want to spend money on a platform. Assuming Zen isn't a flop for performance, I want to give AMD my business just to force Intel to get off their lazy backsides and make some real progress.

Let's also be people for just a moment here. Let's say Intel follows up Zen with Kaby Lake, and suddenly we see a generational improvement of 15%. I know that would piss me off to no end, because it'd be Intel telling customers that they only care about delivering their best products whenever there was competition. As a consumer, that's tantamount to being given the middle finger. Wouldn't that piss you off enough to take a minor loss in performance, just to give Intel the finger right back?

lilhasselhofferAn interesting point. I always saw AMD as offering the better deal for upgrades, because your FX level processors and your standard processors all utilized the same chipsets (given, there was some distinction, but definitely not the fragmented mish-mash of Intel). I make this statement, looking at Intel right now. The PCH for SB and IB was basically the same offering (but requiring you purchase a new motherboard to insure compatibility with new CPUs and better PCI-e 3.0 support).

It's why I run a supposedly antiquated 2600K @ 4.8G on an entry level Z77 board to this day. I suspect the same rationale exists for a lot of the group loosely termed enthusiasts. If I hadn't had the option of sifting through over two dozen 2600K's for a good clocker and a discounted board, I might still be using my old i7 950 /X58 combo. In the end "we" don't drive the market though, ODM/OEM's do. "Q" and "H" chipset boards sporting non-"K" CPUs are huge sellers for Intel, and the reason that locked processors sell for almost the same price as their unlocked brethren. Tell an OEM that they can put together an unspectacular box using a 400W PSU and minimal cooling with no concerns about product delivery and a built in "name brand" partner and they'll line up around the block to get the handshake, especially if it's bundled with server contracts also offering a smooth delivery schedule.

lilhasselhofferWhile you're dealing with the Intel alphabet soup you had two or three chipset choices from AMD, that work with all their processors. If you bought a good motherboard when AM3+ came out it could see multiple processors over several years, assuming that you could live without some of the baked in features that Intel pushes with every minor revision. Right now I'm looking at several computer which have no real upgrade path (SB and IB), yet their PCH features are largely still sufficient for everything that I need today. Even if the CPUs weren't keeping up, the PCH would be enough for the next couple of years. That kind of logic works with AMD (or at least it did in the past), but Intel gives you 18-36 months (depending upon if there is a refresh).

The only issues I see are that AMD has also dabbled with shortened socket/chipset life in recent times WRT APUs, and being at the budget end of the market, people driven by value for money aren't as likely to upgrade as often as those indulging at the sharp end of the industry.

lilhasselhofferI'm conjecturing that Intel only needs three cards to win most markets, and none of them is the raw performance card. They claim that they've got the most innovative features, by citing cost savings to businesses using their iGPU. They claim best thermal performance, to lock the server market. After that, the only card they need to play is recognition. Even if AMD went toe-to-toe, Zen couldn't beat these cards.

The big one is time-to-market and delivering on promises. Large stockists and ODM/OEMs tend to shy away if product cycle cadence slips and/or the feature set gets watered down. AMD have done themselves no favours (albeit GloFo shoulders a large part of the blame in some instances) with limited supply of the -particularly, the top SKUs when a new product line is launched (APUs being a prime example), hit-or-miss delivery schedules, and missing features ( Opteron A1100's missing the promised Freedom Fabric and its protracted delay virtually killed any momentum it had) will all give large customers pause for thought.

lilhasselhofferAMD has to win the enthusiast market for Zen to live, which wouldn't be hard with a sub $300 6 core or better CPU. Throw in all the PCH features that Skylake has, with an additional few PCI-e lanes, and you've got a platform worth spending some money on (it's easy once you admit that CPU upgrades will happen more often than new peripherals get added which will require drastic PCH changes). It's not like Intel gives a crap, based upon their enthusiast level PCH options (yes, I'm still stewing over the x79 PCH being both expensive and underwhelming)...[ ]...They'll never get the server lines to survive, because you're right to say Intel will utterly stomp them with only minor changes to existing product.

I agree wholeheartedly. If AMD deliver on what has been publicly disseminated, it should revitalize the market for both them and the motherboard vendors living off 800/900-chipset crumbs. They still need outright IPC and performance-per-core/thread/watt to take it to the next stage - the x86 server market, where the buyers are more discerning, the stakes are higher, and schedules are paramount....and no, I think AMD have burned too many bridges and Intel hasn't put a step out of place ( Buying InfiniBand and Cray's interconnect business is a declaration of intent in no uncertain terms) for AMD to regain anything more than crumbs from x86 server/HPC.

lilhasselhofferI don't want to see AMD die, but even if Zen is a huge success it'll take a huge amount of effort to counteract the death spiral AMD management is making. Zen alone can't do that if they can't rebuild the loyal fan base.

That's my question as well. If Zen does well it is great, but what AMD needs to do is follow up, because Intel don't stand still so AMD still need to match Intel's cadence. In the past, AMD have put out good product, but its increments after the first iteration have lasted more product cycles than they ought to

lilhasselhofferI'm loathe to admit this, but AMD need people like SonyXperia. It needs die hard fans willing to buy day 1, and in order to do that AMD has to undo their reputation of mediocrity. The best way to do that isn't to compete with Intel, but to give those Intel has been ignoring a voice again.

You'll need to see a pervasive market presence from AMD to achieve that, and to get wide exposure and get the brand front and centre. For that to happen AMD need to execute to gain the confidence of the vendors who would elevate the AMD brand as they would (hopefully) use it to elevate their own. Many more people gain exposure to an IHV by buying Dell, HP, Toshiba, Lenovo etc. than the DIY enthusiast sector. The latter generate a buzz, but the former brings the brand awareness that stands it in good stead when a repeat purchase or a move to a custom build beckon.

lilhasselhofferLet's also be people for just a moment here. Let's say Intel follows up Zen with Kaby Lake, and suddenly we see a generational improvement of 15%. I know that would piss me off to no end, because it'd be Intel telling customers that they only care about delivering their best products whenever there was competition. As a consumer, that's tantamount to being given the middle finger. Wouldn't that piss you off enough to take a minor loss in performance, just to give Intel the finger right back?

It's my understanding that Kaby Lake is a cut'n'paste product line. The succeedingIce Lake/Cannonlake and the Union Point chipsetare supposed to be the larger technology jump.

I love AMD/ATI, and I really really hope they kick the shit out of Intel/Nvidia. But for now I'm sticking with Intel/Nvidia. Once the benchmarks come, maybe I'll build another rig and use the rig I just built as a virtualization host.

HumanSmoke...
It's my understanding that Kaby Lake is a cut'n'paste product line. The succeedingIce Lake/Cannonlake and the Union Point chipsetare supposed to be the larger technology jump.

Damn. I was hoping that Kaby Lake would be worth something, given what Skylake brought to the picture (mainstream DDR4). It's a shame to think Kaby Lake will be another increment, but at least that means AMD might have a chance to put out Zen before Intel has something which truly eclipses it.


Edit:
I found the time to fully read that article, and I think I'm pissed.

It reads that Cannonlake is disappearing, with Kaby Lake taking its place. That's the source of my confusion with Kaby Lake not being just a minor increase, What galls me though is the reintroduction of FIVR.

Sorry folks, but that's another strike against Intel in my books. The reason Skylake is seeing some of the overclocks its seeing can be directly tied back to FIVR being booted to the curb. Now Intel wants to reintroduce it, with the justification that "it keeps people from burning out their processors." WTF?

They say outright overclocking voids warranties. They say outright that the FIVR exists as a measure to limit overclocking. After saying all of this, I think back to Intel saying that they're reaching out to the enthusiast community (their PR BS behind the new thermal interface for Devil's Canyon processors). All I can say is I really hope AMD pulls something special with Zen. I don't want to give Intel another penny if I don't have to. They seem to think we're idiots, so telling them to sit and spin with my money would be greatly appreciated.

lilhasselhofferDamn. I was hoping that Kaby Lake would be worth something, given what Skylake brought to the picture (mainstream DDR4). It's a shame to think Kaby Lake will be another increment, but at least that means AMD might have a chance to put out Zen before Intel has something which truly eclipses it.

If Zen is based off of Jaguar (which it looks like it is even if it is loosely) you are looking at a 100% clock for clock IPC increase over Phenom II (thuban), with the same multithreading ability and performance we saw with FX. Assuming AMD can scale that into a full scale 8 core CPU at a higher clock speed the loose information they have let loose is completely plausible and they should be competitive with intel's current 6th gen bare minimum.

It would be good if AMD launch something good.
Than Intel need to drop price of i7-7930K or even to launch 8 core Xtreme for 550$.
That would be fantastic because Skylake Extreme platform will be something really nice.
Off course with better AMD processor customers will know that Intel try best they can to offer nice performance.
They can't calculate with lower clock and next architecture to improve performance because higher clock only and similar things.
In period when Intel expect from AMD competitive processors they launch Sandy Bridge with flux solder and excellent performance.
When AMD didn't offer nothing Intel launch processor capable to OC 300-400MHz on 85C.
Except Xtreme class, they had always good Xtreme processors like small Xeons good and for games and for serious work.
After I tried i7-3770K... and he served me so good and give me so much confidence in Intel processors that no way to look on AMD as chance for upgrade only as chance to Intel offer cheaper models and better performance.

In all honesty, if AMD can push a very good IPC and strong single thread with Zen, I could care less about performance/watt ratio's and if they get to equal performance levels as current or last-gen Intels and the price is about the same, I'm getting one. I'll pay a few bucks more on the energy bill to support AMD, but I won't take an inferior product for granted to do so. Let's hope for the best :)

@Vlada011 I think that's abit premature. Intel still has a vast majority of the market, and even after a successful Zen launch and great performance, it is not like everyone is going to upgrade their system. This will take years, and thus it will also take several iterations of Zen and upgrades of Zen to recover market share. Intel has little to worry about and they can see it coming from miles away. I seriously doubt Intel is going to compromise its own high performance margins by 'adding cores' or pushing E-procs to a lower price bracket. If anything, it will create new product tiers that won't have the extra PCIE lanes etc. (Intel is already doing this with the most recent E-procs). Another big issue is that for both Intel or AMD there is absolutely zero benefit in starting a price war or even compete on price alone - AMD will lose the margins it so desperately needs, and Intel will comfortably adapt to it because of its huge reserves; if it goes the other way around, Intel will hand in on the budget which it desperately needs to get a foothold in ARM markets.

Another point many forget; there is only a very small market for the 'more cores' enthusiasts. Even if I look at myself, I see very little use for an octacore CPU when I have a fast quad core at this point. For gaming, it is pretty much a total waste especially with the consoles determining the market and performance ceilings, and with DX12 optimizations around the corner even a fast single thread becomes less important for future titles. The real bottleneck of this day and age is going to be GPU-related, and far less CPU-related for the consumer bracket. Think about VR: it will need beefy GPU to drive high FPS/high resolution, but the underlying game might even be more simple in terms of CPU tasks than legacy titles.

Huh, I would believe if some other engineers test any Zen unit and told that.
Surely, AMD will not lie, but marketers can tell anything to show that the new CPU/GPU/RAM is much better, while it is still on par or a little bit better.
Anyway, thumbs up for AMD. I'm still using an old-fashioned AMD FX-4300. But I had a choice, I would take a Phenom II rather than a Bulldozer or Piledriver.
PS: I saw that some retailers still have very old Phenom units, like PC24.de - there was an AMD Phenom II X2 3.3GHz. If that was a 4-core unit, I would take it...