Overclock.net banner

[crossmap] AMD Zen APU Release Date and Specs: Set to be Released by Q1 of 2017? Will be Called AMD Zen FX?

20K views 149 replies 56 participants last post by  Kana Chan 
#1 ·
#4 ·
regardless of the validity of the source....this seems par for the course when you consider AMD's history...at least recent CPU history.
 
#10 ·
I'm looking forward to this at least putting AMD back on the map in the CPU world. I really hope it's rumored Haswell esque IPC is true.

That kind of improvement might also cause Intel to bring their hexacore chips into the mainstream i7 slot for 10nm which would be nice for everyone.

With the way things are going it kind of seems like AMD is going to have to be the ones to push Intel forward because they're not doing much other then their annual 5-10% core improvements otherwise.
 
#11 ·
I feel like AMD should at least include a small GPU on all Zen. Even a 64/128shader GCN is still good enough for basic display purpose, and didnt take up too much die area.
 
#12 ·
I love the maybe in the title and hard to tell. Definitely news.
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocknut View Post

I feel like AMD should at least include a small GPU on all Zen. Even a 64/128shader GCN is still good enough for basic display purpose, and didnt take up too much die area.
Seriously no. I hate that my i5 has a crappy little GPU taking up precious die space when i can instead have two extra cpu cores and a larger cache. Look at this:



The iGPU is taking up 1/3 of the die, i want processor cores, not a GPU, i have a dedicated GPU to do a far better job than the integrated solution ever can. The fact that intel offers pure CPUs in the higher priced enthusiast chips is really insulting when they know most people buy the mainstream i5s/i7s for gaming which they're still very good for, but they can be even better and a far better value if they just ditched the GPU.

EDIT: In fact i despise that iGPU so much that i'll definitely be looking @ Zen for a new build if intel cannot respond with an 8 core CPU to compete with AMD @ the $300-400 mark.
biggrin.gif
 
#14 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malinkadink View Post

Seriously no. I hate that my i5 has a crappy little GPU taking up precious die space when i can instead have two extra cpu cores and a larger cache. Look at this:

The iGPU is taking up 1/3 of the die, i want processor cores, not a GPU, i have a dedicated GPU to do a far better job than the integrated solution ever can. The fact that intel offers pure CPUs in the higher priced enthusiast chips is really insulting when they know most people buy the mainstream i5s/i7s for gaming which they're still very good for, but they can be even better and a far better value if they just ditched the GPU.

EDIT: In fact i despise that iGPU so much that i'll definitely be looking @ Zen for a new build if intel cannot respond with an 8 core CPU to compete with AMD @ the $300-400 mark.
biggrin.gif
I think the reason why Intel add an iGPU is so that their CPUs will end up in all-in-one Dell systems and such.
At the university I go to, all their systems are rockin' Core i7 4770S processors and utilising the iGPU.
But I hate the iGPU as well, they're a waste of money and resources otherwise.
 
#15 ·
The only area where ZEN will compete with Haswell is PRICE
tongue.gif
!
 
#16 ·
AMD does have a window where Zen can breakthrough, Kaby lake has been delayed to 2017 is expected to stay at 4 cores with < 5% gains from skylake. AMD with Haswell IPC and mainstream hex , octo cores can be very competitive product at mainstream prices . I wish they thought out of the box little come up with 3ghz hex core laptop chips, apart from targeting mainstream desktops
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malinkadink View Post

Seriously no. I hate that my i5 has a crappy little GPU taking up precious die space when i can instead have two extra cpu cores and a larger cache. Look at this:
Read again what I said dude, I said a tiny iGPU, Not a oversize iGPU like intel's. For example, a 64/128shader GCN just for basic display only. Such size probably only take <10% of the CPU size or even less than that. If we have tiny iGPU, we wouldnt even need another discrete GPU if our main GPU break down.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by PooPipeBoy View Post

I think the reason why Intel add an iGPU is so that their CPUs will end up in all-in-one Dell systems and such.
At the university I go to, all their systems are rockin' Core i7 4770S processors and utilising the iGPU.
But I hate the iGPU as well, they're a waste of money and resources otherwise.
¨

The reason intel mainstream processors have iGPUs is that they are essentially laptop chip rejects and all laptop chips come with iGPU because only a minority of laptops sold have dGPU. Intel HEDT chips have no iGPU because they are Xeon rejects. Desktop is an afterthought for intel (and for AMD although this seems to be changing with Zen).
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtom320 View Post

I'm looking forward to this at least putting AMD back on the map in the CPU world. I really hope it's rumored Haswell esque IPC is true.

That kind of improvement might also cause Intel to bring their hexacore chips into the mainstream i7 slot for 10nm which would be nice for everyone.

With the way things are going it kind of seems like AMD is going to have to be the ones to push Intel forward because they're not doing much other then their annual 5-10% core improvements otherwise.
IF you've been waiting to upgrade your CPU since Sandybridge those 5 - 10% do stack and the additional PCI-E lanes will be a justifiable upgrade for gamers.. its a good time to be in need of a CPU upgrade with Zen and Kaby Lake about to be released. From a gamer perspective im still in good shape using a 2500k OC'd to 4.6 stable ..
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by okcomputer360 View Post

IF you've been waiting to upgrade your CPU since Sandybridge those 5 - 10% do stack and the additional PCI-E lanes will be a justifiable upgrade for gamers.. its a good time to be in need of a CPU upgrade with Zen and Kaby Lake about to be released. From a gamer perspective im still in good shape using a 2500k OC'd to 4.6 stable ..
They also get a little overexaggerated. I always found that if Intel raised IPc between 5% and 10% from one arch to the next and the average was 6% or 7%, you almost always had the majority of people saying 10%.

From Sandy to Broadwell after doing a quick search and looking on Anand, if you exclude Dolphin for obvious reasons of scewing the data as well as the lowest increase... I got between an 18% and 19% increase in IPC average... If you took the words of many on OCN and believed each gens IPC increases, the average IPC increase would be somewhere closer to 50% by now
tongue.gif


Sandy is still very relevant for most. And aside from enthusiasts/professionals and such, anything beyond isn't really worth the extra cash. So to be honest, AMD could come in at SB IPC with decent clocks and still be a huge winner for 95% of market as long as its a good price.
 
#22 ·
Skylake was actually a nice leap in IPC. You can check the Digital Foundry tests. Sandy, Ivy, and Haswell are all in the same league, but Skylake seems to be in its own league, at least as far as Intel generational leaps are concerned.

I have to say, I'm kind of regretting my upgrade a 3570K to a 4790K, even though I got a good price, seeing the Skylake results.
 
#23 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuell View Post

Sandy is still very relevant for most. And aside from enthusiasts/professionals and such, anything beyond isn't really worth the extra cash. So to be honest, AMD could come in at SB IPC with decent clocks and still be a huge winner for 95% of market as long as its a good price.
thats only when they offer double the core for Intel quad core price. Even 8 core SB performance @ 6700K price point aint gonna cut it, because 5820K is just around there.

I think if their Zen IPC didnt consistently at least equal to Haswell, their 8 core might need to price between 6600K - 6700K.
 
#24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocknut View Post

thats only when they offer double the core for Intel quad core price. Even 8 core SB performance @ 6700K price point aint gonna cut it, because 5820K is just around there.

I think if their Zen IPC didnt consistently at least equal to Haswell, their 8 core might need to price between 6600K - 6700K.
But from tests, going from SB to haswell is almost not gonna be noticeable most of the time...

For me personally, if they offer decent clocks at SB IPC for a good price I'll buy, anything over SB IPC is just extra awesome. The price will be the big factor. Hoping they won't go crazy if performance is decent... But Thuban launched too pricey, as did anything after PII... But Intel is insane with their prices now IMO, so who knows

( I got a 1090T for $300 CAD launch day and while it was awesome, I couldn't justify it. I luckily sold it on ebay for $325 just before prices came crashing to reality lol. Felt really bad for the buyer paying noticeably more for a used CPU than new if he had waited about a week
redface.gif
)
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuell View Post

They also get a little overexaggerated. I always found that if Intel raised IPc between 5% and 10% from one arch to the next and the average was 6% or 7%, you almost always had the majority of people saying 10%.

From Sandy to Broadwell after doing a quick search and looking on Anand, if you exclude Dolphin for obvious reasons of scewing the data as well as the lowest increase... I got between an 18% and 19% increase in IPC average... If you took the words of many on OCN and believed each gens IPC increases, the average IPC increase would be somewhere closer to 50% by now
tongue.gif


Sandy is still very relevant for most. And aside from enthusiasts/professionals and such, anything beyond isn't really worth the extra cash. So to be honest, AMD could come in at SB IPC with decent clocks and still be a huge winner for 95% of market as long as its a good price.
Sounds about right, and also pretty much what AnandTech got going from Sandy to Haswell: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7003/the-haswell-review-intel-core-i74770k-i54560k-tested/6
Quote:
Compared to Sandy Bridge, Haswell looks even more impressive. The Core i7-4770K outperforms the i7-2700K by 7 - 26%, with an average performance advantage of 17%. The gains over Sandy Bridge aren't large enough to make upgrading from a Sandy Bridge i7 to a Haswell i5 worthwhile though, as you still give up a lot if you go from 8 to 4 threads on a quad-core part running heavily threaded workloads.
 
#26 ·
CPU performance seems less and less important these days and upgrade is dictated by feature set that newer chipset provides more than CPU itself lol.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top