Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [iTWire] AMD's John Taylor "We are far close to Intel than ever before"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[iTWire] AMD's John Taylor "We are far close to Intel than ever before" - Page 18

post #171 of 187
Sounds like AMD is stating that their ready to play ball one more time. Of course they won't win the performance crown againt Intel any time soon - if ever. Who in the world would actually consider that remotely possible? Could go either way against Nvidia.

Marketing hype plays a huge roll regarding public statements like this. Can't ignore that. I'm pleased to take this news as AMD isn't neccesarily claiming they will/can win, but that they can/will bring on some competition back to the game.

I'd rather be hopeful and positive about their current situation than doubtful and bitter. thumb.gif
 
ThinkPad Yoga
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Baytrail Quad Core @ 2.16 Ghz OEM Lenovo 20DAS02X00 Intel HD Graphics 8GB DDR3L 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
240GB Kingston SSD N/A Windows 8.1 Pro 11.6" IPS Touch Display @ 1366 x 768 
KeyboardAudio
ThinkPad baby... HD Audio 
  hide details  
Reply
 
ThinkPad Yoga
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Baytrail Quad Core @ 2.16 Ghz OEM Lenovo 20DAS02X00 Intel HD Graphics 8GB DDR3L 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
240GB Kingston SSD N/A Windows 8.1 Pro 11.6" IPS Touch Display @ 1366 x 768 
KeyboardAudio
ThinkPad baby... HD Audio 
  hide details  
Reply
post #172 of 187
I really hope AMD has something good this go around.
I've been itching to upgrade my 3770K so bad but the difference between my CPU and a i7 6700K is just negligible.
Not only that but I'm not looking into buying a CPU where half the die is garbage iGPU, and I need moar cores because when I'm encoding two things at once my i7 just starts choking.

If Broadwell-E comes out sooner rather than later I might just pick one of those up instead of waiting for Zen.
post #173 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrawesome421 View Post

Sounds like AMD is stating that their ready to play ball one more time. Of course they won't win the performance crown againt Intel any time soon - if ever. Who in the world would actually consider that remotely possible? Could go either way against Nvidia.

It's about the design. AMD could easily just beat intel or NVIDIAs offerings on either front out of the blue. It's just not likely.
Skoll
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820k@4.4 Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion Sapphire 290X TriX 8GB Crossfire G.Skill Ripjaws V @3200 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 850 Evo Noctua NH-D15 Windows 7  Asus MG279Q 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Custom Poker SeaSonic SS-850 Thermaltake Core X9 Logitech G5 v1 
Mouse PadAudio
Razer Destructor 2 Vali 2 + Modi 2 Uber + ATH-AD1000X 
  hide details  
Reply
Skoll
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820k@4.4 Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion Sapphire 290X TriX 8GB Crossfire G.Skill Ripjaws V @3200 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 850 Evo Noctua NH-D15 Windows 7  Asus MG279Q 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Custom Poker SeaSonic SS-850 Thermaltake Core X9 Logitech G5 v1 
Mouse PadAudio
Razer Destructor 2 Vali 2 + Modi 2 Uber + ATH-AD1000X 
  hide details  
Reply
post #174 of 187
It's been said, but this is AMD. People who have especially developed a tradition of embellishing their IRL data. I feel like AMD is even a little bit juvenile, like how their 8 cores are really just hyperthreaded 4 core. Factor the specs against real benchmarks and AMD hasn't ever been able to make a dollar out of four quarters.

I actually do hope they straighten out a bit. It breaks my heart every time somebody tells me they want to build their first gaming system from an AMD platform, and I myself was almost one of those people many years ago.
post #175 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Thompson View Post

It's been said, but this is AMD. People who have especially developed a tradition of embellishing their IRL data. I feel like AMD is even a little bit juvenile, like how their 8 cores are really just hyperthreaded 4 core. Factor the specs against real benchmarks and AMD hasn't ever been able to make a dollar out of four quarters.

I actually do hope they straighten out a bit. It breaks my heart every time somebody tells me they want to build their first gaming system from an AMD platform, and I myself was almost one of those people many years ago.

Whaaaat? FX 8350 is not and quad core with HT. SMT is different than CMT.... its like saying that i7 6700K is eight core just, because its really fast.

Instead of baiting its rumored that amd will introduce bristol ridge with polaris at the end of may.
AM4 will be soon here....
Edited by Themisseble - 5/22/16 at 9:30am
post #176 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thready View Post

I and about 90% of PC gamers could care less about high end, flagship, basically any graphics card over $400.

I think its more about how you want/need the game to run. Resolution, Aspect Ratio, Refresh Rate, In-Game Settings, VR , Texture Mods etc.

I must be able to play at 60 FPS+ 1440P @ Absolute MAX in-game settings with 4K texture mods.

If I was trying to play at 1080p my rig would be absolute overkill and like you would go with a $300-$400 card.

AMD isn't powerful enough, so I went with Nvidia/Intel.
post #177 of 187
Main
(16 items)
 
Dedicated Encoder
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8320@4Ghz Gigabyte 970 UD3P rev2.1 Gainward GTX 750Ti Corsair XMS3 1600Mhz 16GB (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOptical Drive
Crucial BX100 250GB Western Digital Green 2TB LiteOn Blu-Ray Burner IHBS 112-2 LG BH16NS55 Blu-Ray Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Scythe Katana 3 Windows 7 Pro 64bit ASUS 22" VS228HR Microsoft Wired Keyboard 600 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
EVGA 430W Sharkoon VG4-V Logitech M90 Onboard 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8300 Asrock 970 Extreme3 HIS 6570 Silence Corsair XMS3 1600Mhz 8GB (2x4GB) CAS9 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Plextor M6S 128GB Toshiba 2TB SATAIII LiteOn Blu Ray burner IHBS 112-2 Xigmatek Balder 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro 64bit Samsung S22B350H Microsoft Wired 600 Corsair VS350 
CaseMouseAudio
Lepa LPC 306 Logitech M90 Onboard 
  hide details  
Reply
Main
(16 items)
 
Dedicated Encoder
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8320@4Ghz Gigabyte 970 UD3P rev2.1 Gainward GTX 750Ti Corsair XMS3 1600Mhz 16GB (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOptical Drive
Crucial BX100 250GB Western Digital Green 2TB LiteOn Blu-Ray Burner IHBS 112-2 LG BH16NS55 Blu-Ray Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Scythe Katana 3 Windows 7 Pro 64bit ASUS 22" VS228HR Microsoft Wired Keyboard 600 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
EVGA 430W Sharkoon VG4-V Logitech M90 Onboard 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8300 Asrock 970 Extreme3 HIS 6570 Silence Corsair XMS3 1600Mhz 8GB (2x4GB) CAS9 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Plextor M6S 128GB Toshiba 2TB SATAIII LiteOn Blu Ray burner IHBS 112-2 Xigmatek Balder 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro 64bit Samsung S22B350H Microsoft Wired 600 Corsair VS350 
CaseMouseAudio
Lepa LPC 306 Logitech M90 Onboard 
  hide details  
Reply
post #178 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwishaMane View Post

Are they far, or are they close? They can't be far close...

i just realized this contradiction too, which is it exactly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kylzer View Post

Bulldozer was disappointing

but it was 8 cores just designed badly with CMT to share some resources between cores

making it 4 modules instead of just 8 cores.

CMT is a good concept, it just doesn't work well with big cores.

if they had used it on small cores, e.g. bigcat cores or like intel's atom cores, they would be able to fit 1.5x~2.0x times more cores at the same die size.
with that in mind, not only will these chips have more cores per die, it would also cost much less, plus it doesn't matter even if per-core IPC drops to 1/2 of a full small-core.
such a package would be beneficial to clusters used on servers where 48+ cores are still considered "few", or budget devices where a very cheap multi-core processor is quite a good deal.

of course, this design would directly clash with ARM's LITTLE cores (cortex-A53).
but a CMT bigcat (littlecat? kitten?) would be more efficient in die utilization, making a 2M/4C compete against a 4core A53 processor possible while being smaller and cheaper.
Edited by epic1337 - 5/22/16 at 11:28am
post #179 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic1337 View Post

i just realized this contradiction too, which is it exactly?
CMT is a good concept, it just doesn't work well with big cores.

if they had used it on small cores, e.g. bigcat cores or like intel's atom cores, they would be able to fit 1.5x~2.0x times more cores at the same die size.
with that in mind, not only will these chips have more cores per die, it would also cost much less, plus it doesn't matter even if per-core IPC drops to 1/2 of a full small-core.
such a package would be beneficial to clusters used on servers where 48+ cores are still considered "few", or budget devices where a very cheap multi-core processor is quite a good deal.

Yup when i first read all the about all of the architecture "improvements" bulldozer was designed with

I was excited but while looking good on paper it did not translate well into practice.
post #180 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vispor View Post

While I don't think this will be as bad as Bulldozer, I don't think it will be as good as Skylake. If it's not better, then what's the point? Cheaper isn't really a reason because then you could just go with an older generation Intel that will probably still be more power efficient.


This post is ridiculous. Intel never drops the price on older generation cpu's for one thing. So since ZEN isn't going to be as good as Skylake at release AMD should just fold their tent and go home?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [iTWire] AMD's John Taylor "We are far close to Intel than ever before"