AMD Zen! Will this change the future?

AMD is showing better than 4670K performance with an engineering sample clocked at 2.8ghz with a 3.2ghz boost clock. DDR4 doesn't provide nearly as much benefit as some seem to believe. The benefit of DDR4 only shows in applications that are bandwidth intensive, which isn't really the case with gaming, unless you're using an iGPU. If you're using a dedicated graphics card, the benefit of DDR4 over DDR3 is minimal. Also, the benefit of "more cores" in gaming is dependent on the game engine being used. Not all game engines are "optimized" for more cores. That's why we see i3 processors holding their own against i5s and i7s. Most games benefit more from IPC and frequency increases than they do core count increases.

 

That would be horrendous, if 8c/16t Zen couldn't beat a more than 3 years old 4c/4t cpu in a properly multithreaded dx12 game. Now, I'm interested in some random dx11 game result, where more cores doesn't matter too much.

 

According to these performance tests, the AMD Zen CPU is 38 percent faster than an AMD FX-8350 and around 10 percent faster than an Intel Core i5-4670K. From the above performance tests, there is not any difference between the 1D and 2D variants. They have both same frequencies, but the 2D variant fares much worse in terms of performance. There could be multiple reasons for why this is the case. Zen ES (Variant 1D) is about 11 percent slower than a Core i7-4790. If Zen ES (Variant 1D) can reach 4.00 GHz so it would easily exceed the performance of Intel Core i7-4790. Both engineering samples have eight physical cores, 16 threads tested with 16 GB of RAM coupled with Radeon RX 480 graphics card.

 

It's a DX12 game that scales poorly past 4 cores from my understanding. It's also a game that is not optimized for Zen in any way, unlike the Intel processors that Zen is being compared to. Even in DX12, more cores will not guarantee better performance since the objective of DX12 is to move as much of the graphics load to the GPU as possible. This will actually negate the benefits of increased CPU core count.

 

hope it comes in at a fair price; instead of using anal lube for 3yrs as newegg try and ass **** me. then the socket dies and goes legacy month later.

 

AMD zen outperform Broadwell-E

http://*************/amd-zen-cpus-o...roadwelle-architecture-am4-platform-detailed/

Its outperform 1000$ intel 6950X..f*k i just bought my Intel pc this week.

 

If it ships at 300 or under for the cpu, I'll be a convert. I early adopted Bulldozer and Vishara so I'm a lil skeptical if the performance is really there or not. Bulldozer straight up sucked. Vishera wasn't that bad but, still lacked. I'll give Zen a try if AMD undersells Intel at its usual price point.

 

Don't hype yourself, it's too early to jump to conclusions.

 

Zen, AMD’s Most Important Product In More Than A Decade
Many Years In The making
Zen has been one of AMD’s most eagerly anticipated products for as far as I can remember. It’s the company’s first attempt to compete at the high-end, enthusiast, CPU market since the introduction of the Bulldozer microarchitecture five years ago. Zen breaks new ground for AMD in many ways. It’s the company’s first ever CPU architecture to feature simultaneous multithreading. It’s also the very first product for AMD to be built on a process technology that’s very close to parity with Intel since the days of the original Athlon more than a decade ago.
This fact alone is huge. It means that for the very first time since the early 2000s AMD’s CPU products won’t be at an inherent disadvantage due to Intel’s process lead. From an architectural point of view Zen is a brand new clean-slate design that’s been led from the get-go by accomplished CPU architect Jim Keller. The very same engineer that played a pivotal role in designing the original Athlon XP and Athlon64 processors. The most competitive CPU products in the history of the company.

 

Wishful thinking that the 8c Zen CPU will trade blows with the 5960x. If its within a few thousand benchmarking units of whatever CPU benchmarking program you use would be a miracle.

 

Agreed. Just bought the same CPU(6700k). Frickin awesome over my 4.4Ghz 8320. It's overkill for what i do, but i figured i'd go big. Microcenter had the CPU for 299, and 30 off a mobo in a bundle.

I was waiting for Zen, but i got worried it might flop, and of course the price surges and bugs in the early months.

 

I dont think it will be cheap as people are thinking , but i think it will be priced reasonably as they need to make profit for that company to survive.

 

We are in same boat bro.I also bought intel and Nvidia this week cant wait for next year even i know Amd can save me some bucks.but i am happy with this set up

 

I suspect the 8 core Zen will be similarly priced to the i7-6700K, but potentially kick its butt.

 

I would say close to double what the FX 8320 went for at launch which was $183 bucks 4+ years ago. But a heck of alot better than the FX series chips.

 

I think it will equal or little less from i7 6700k.Only a miracle from AMD can beat 6700k.This is huge jump for AMD.

 

Zen will require win10
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/09/02/windows_intel_kaby_lake_amd_zen/

Boo

 

Well, I wanted to go with with ZEN mostly because AM4 will be current as far as mobo specs are concerned and obviously will be better than FX with lower TDP. But I found 6800k broadwell will most likely perform at the very least the same. I might have saved a few bux going AMD but also too the price tag for INTEL is more than worth the feature rich ability found with broadwell. Not sure if you guys are thinking about the ability to control and OC each core individually, which I have yet to hear about with ZEN.

 

Anyone thinking these are going to be cheap don't remember how AMD used to price their chips.