AMD Says "ZEN" CPU Architecture is Expected to Last 4 Years

[64K]

 

[Shamalamadingdong]

If tock = 2 Years
And he said Tock, Tock, Tock

Then 6 years for a lifecycle?

Also, perhaps their second biggest gain is coming from chip learning and they are hoping to expound on that for future iterations of this core design?

No, he said tock-tock-tock instead of a tick-tock cadence. That would translate to yearly improvements especially because they don't manufacture their own chips so they can't tightly schedule their releases with the fabrication advancements of third party companies.

The title kinda also says four years, not six.

 

[Konceptz]

AMD is really starting to annoy me. They keep talking about zen, yet there is no price or release date. I love my 8350 but I'm strongly considering a kabby lake i7 , nvidia card and calling it a day.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

What are you talking about? Intel went from 32nm to 14nm, a 25% increase in IPC, a reduction in TDP, improvements in HEVC encoding, massively better iGPU, etc.,

If you guys seriously think Intel hasn't improved in 6 years I would love to see you design your own CPU and compete with them.

So they improved co processor count type and ability shrunk it a lot and redesigned transistors, that's progress deffo and it's definitely work to improve but it's not a re-arch and that's what Intel now need.
And believe , Intel know this they have used most their r and d time trying to crack mobile in the last 8 years.

Intel announces it as a new architecture. Whether those changes are deserving of the 'new architecture' moniker or not are a matter for discussion - but I can say that I personally don't believe they are. But I don't have to say that on every post, and I can say things as neutrally as possible - and as they are accepted in the industry - while having my own opinion on a given subject wouldn't you agree?

Fair enough.

 

[semantics]

AMD is really starting to annoy me. They keep talking about zen, yet there is no price or release date. I love my 8350 but I'm strongly considering a kabby lake i7 , nvidia card and calling it a day.

Still waiting for 3rd party reviews of it, been burned by AMD PR way too much in the past.

 

[reez]

I wish we could some more benchmarks and less chit chat

 

[Hood]

I remember when performance was doubled every 2 years

It was easier back then, because PCs were so damn slow. Now we're dealing with "diminishing returns", at least until something completely new is invented (quantum computing?). Until then, the improvements have to be hard-won (expensive) and incremental. Note that AMCs improvements (Zen) are all due to changing their architecture to be more like Intel's Core architecture, hopefully with similar success.

 

[EarthDog]

Please don't take this personally but that's pretty weak evidence to make a statement like "At CES.. met with AMD.. played on some systems...I dont think we will be dissapointed."

You should have kept reading a bit more before posting.

As I said, we saw two systems, one intel octo, and Ryzen octo...both had titans. The FPS between the two were very close. I couldn't test empirically, but it's fair to say they have overcome their glass ceiling syndrome on high end cards.

Perhaps that makes it less weak?

@64K

 

[Alduin]

You must be young. 25% over MANY years? LOLOLOLOL. The shrinks aren't relevant as the architecture didn't change much (and was going to happen regardless). They fail at iGPU so bad, that's also irrelevant (and just a waste of die space).

I remember when performance was doubled every 2 years. Get off my lawn!

Yes architecture didn't change much
Because amd's best offer was FX 9590 With 220 W TDP that can not compete with Haswell based i3

 

[Blueberries]

You must be young. 25% over MANY years? LOLOLOLOL. The shrinks aren't relevant as the architecture didn't change much (and was going to happen regardless). They fail at iGPU so bad, that's also irrelevant (and just a waste of die space).

I remember when performance was doubled every 2 years. Get off my lawn!

You know what diminishing returns are, right? You can't expect the same percentage increase year after year.

The shrinks are also LITERALLY a change in architecture. Maybe Intel should have just picked a different naming scheme and people wouldn't complain?

 

[hat]

I hope it's better than Failnom and Faildozer (Phenom II was at least "good enough"). AMD always generates massive hype surrounding their new CPUs. I hope this time it's not all hot air. I'd even consider buying one, whenever it becomes possible for me to afford it.

 

[deu]

So much talk so little benchmarks
lolAMD 4 years .... I have core2duo systems that are 8 and still seeing regular use

Jesus you must be a troll or just plain stupid. (sorry to be harsh but its the most accurate description without resolving to cursing.)

1. "So much talk so little benchmarks" Benches have been shown at conference; and leaks of ES. (So what you would say is; when will the COU be out for reviews (that I await as well.) )
2. "AMD 4 years" :What the other dude said (you dont understand what you are talking about.)
3. "core2duo" why would that EVER have ANY relavance?!?! Somewhere some still uses my TI-84 but that doesnt make it a 8C16T CPU.

 

[TheGuruStud]

You know what diminishing returns are, right? You can't expect the same percentage increase year after year.

The shrinks are also LITERALLY a change in architecture. Maybe Intel should have just picked a different naming scheme and people wouldn't complain?

Shrinks are just shrinks. You don't have to change anything. And the reason for shrinks? To make more money, nothing else.

 

[Hood]

Shrinks are just shrinks. You don't have to change anything. And the reason for shrinks? To make more money, nothing else.

Money may be the driving force, but they also achieve better efficiency (IPC/watt) with every successful process shrink. Very important, considering the push towards more mobility/longer battery life in all things. Which also equals more money, so yeah, you're right.

 

[Melvis]

Still waiting for 3rd party reviews of it, been burned by AMD PR way too much in the past.

Once?

 

[Atnevon]

These powerpoint slides are great. What do I wish were on them? A price and release date. Intel put their stuff out right at CES fresh and ready. Are they going to drag in hopes of Vega? -_-

 

[JMccovery]

Shrinks are just shrinks. You don't have to change anything. And the reason for shrinks? To make more money, nothing else.

The reason for process shrinks is more than just making money. You shrink an existing architecture to work out any problems in the new process node, which can reduce delays and even save money. Once you feel that most of the kinks have been worked out, you develop your new(ish) architecture on that new process.

To be honest, whether its using finer processes, or new architectures, the end result is making money; how else would such an expensive enterprise survive without making money?

 

[dalekdukesboy]

You know what diminishing returns are, right? You can't expect the same percentage increase year after year.

The shrinks are also LITERALLY a change in architecture. Maybe Intel should have just picked a different naming scheme and people wouldn't complain?

You again? Yeah I'm with you guru stud....except I'd rephrase it to get the fuck off my lawn...damn kid.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

Seriously mr. Dingleberries do you work for Intel? I've had Intel processors exclusively for a freaking decade since my fx-55 AMD got retired, I loved them and appreciate what they do; however that is irrelevant and 7 years with very small improvements due to no competition from AMD whatsoever (so they are as much to blame if not more!) still leaves you sounding like a complete sycophantic, moronic troll who splooges breathlessly at the mere mention of your master Intel if dare we stupid old guys piss on the fire of your irrational love affair with Intel. You want less innovation and $1000 8 core and freaking $1700 10 core cpus by Intel? If you are that rich and like being bent over that's great, but most of us aren't getting paid the big bucks like you to mow your mom's neighbor's lawn....gurustud.

 

[TheGuruStud]

The reason for process shrinks is more than just making money. You shrink an existing architecture to work out any problems in the new process node, which can reduce delays and even save money. Once you feel that most of the kinks have been worked out, you develop your new(ish) architecture on that new process.

To be honest, whether its using finer processes, or new architectures, the end result is making money; how else would such an expensive enterprise survive without making money?

I mean Intel doesn't really care about better efficiency or anything else. They have no reason to do anything without competition. They did the bare minimum increases to get noobs to keep buying new CPUs. If AMD were to disappear, then you'd have skylake quad cores for 10 years and they'd shrink just to get more dies per wafer (barring any market shift to ARM, etc).

Main point was they did multiple shrinks with a nearly identical uarch and nodes mean poppy cocks when talking about raw perf.

They were perfectly content letting netburst play out for many more years up to several GHz with shrinks. Can you imagine the absurdly terrible performance we'd have today?

 

[Basard]

That's OK. Intel is already in it's six (or seven?) year already, without any major upgrades to its architecture.

Tick Tock is now the sound we hear waiting for something cool...

 

[eidairaman1]

tick tock is a gimmick.

 

[Blueberries]

Seriously mr. Dingleberries do you work for Intel? I've had Intel processors exclusively for a freaking decade since my fx-55 AMD got retired, I loved them and appreciate what they do; however that is irrelevant and 7 years with very small improvements due to no competition from AMD whatsoever (so they are as much to blame if not more!) still leaves you sounding like a complete sycophantic, moronic troll who splooges breathlessly at the mere mention of your master Intel if dare we stupid old guys piss on the fire of your irrational love affair with Intel. You want less innovation and $1000 8 core and freaking $1700 10 core cpus by Intel? If you are that rich and like being bent over that's great, but most of us aren't getting paid the big bucks like you to mow your mom's neighbor's lawn....gurustud.

I don't see why you feel entitled to a BMW processor for a FIAT price. You may not see any remarkable innovation but it's not like anyone else is doing anything better.

If you're happy with Sandy Bridge then don't upgrade, whatever, nobody is forcing you to.

 

[Melvis]

lolAMD 4 years .... I have core2duo systems that are 8 and still seeing regular use

Ive got customers that are still using Skt 939/AM2 systems even the odd 478 skt. Arch doesnt mean much, if the PC is able to do what the customer wants it to do then thats all that matters.

 

[lanlagger]

bottom line - intel progress stopped - everyone sees it now (even reviewers call it out) - I saw it from Ivy bridge (3-rd gen).... sadly some noobs do not even see it now and probably will upgrade to kabylake from skylake - those people are the reason why we have +25% performance of a 7 year old CPU and nothing more... before Sandy Bridge - the 2-nd gen - every generation was at least +25% vs previous one - those times are gone for good ...