>during last quarter’s earnings conference call President and CEO of the company Lisa Su announced that Zen is performing beyond initial expectations and that engineers have managed to achieve a greater than40% IPC improvement.
>>53479881
everyone knows Asus has a bad record for power draw on their cards
>>53479881
>msi used in comparison of efficiency
don't make me feel too special about my chink brand, anon. they're just a chink brand, after all
>>53479881
What is zen?
>>53480404
It's the next AMD CPU architecture, their long-awaited competition to Intel's i-series.
>>53480533
Thankyou.
lol, What were their initial expectations?
>>53480963
What they told us was 40% over excavator, which would put it around Haswell performance. If its performing above that, Zen would end up coming within spitting distance of broadwell/skylake.
>>53479881
What sort of bullshit are these system draw measurements? I have dual Titan X setup, with 6700k and I get about 350W of draw when playing at 4K.
>>53481130
So what's the point of zen? Are they going to be like 50% cheaper than the intel counterpart?
>>53481163
Zen is going to be AMD's attempt at getting back into the server/HPC market where all the cash is. Above-Haswell core performance and having a shitton more cores (32c for Zen's highest SKU according to CERN vs 22c for Broadwell-E) than the competition would work wonders in this regard.
They also have their admittedly very very good power control IP that they will most likely end up implementing, which would drive power and heat (thus costs) down even further. Keep in mind, a supercomputer costs thousands per hour to run, and if they shave 10w off on a per-processor basis, expanding to 50,000 processors in the supercomputer thats half a megawatt of power consumption that doesnt have to be paid for and rejected (which is a whole cost source on its own).
>>53481130
Skylake is broadwell +10% IPC 10% frequency. It can't into 8 physical cored because muh power. Zen is to have 8 cored and 16 with secondary cores i.e. "hyperthreading" apparently they've made massive improvements in power consumption.
>>53480533
>amd
>cpu
>competition
well, I'll wait until they come out to make final judgement but this should be pretty lulzy.
>>53479951
I want one so bad but i don't want to spend 500 dollars on a shitty ugly motherboard.
>>53481754
die guard?
how about instead of de-lidding you just get a better cpu?
>>53481769
I got a 4790k instead of a 5820k and i regret it everyday.
I didn't want memelake and i didnt want to pay the extra for ddr4, either.
Inb4 AMD shills
>>53481803
ddr4 is almost on par with ddr3, difference being higher gb per stick on ddr4, unless someone made a 16gb stick of ddr3.
>>53481707
either amd knocks it out of the park and you are laughing at intel and their jew prices, or you laugh at amd for not getting at least sandybridge performance... either way, true 8 core 16 thread cpu at mainstream prices.
>>53481163
>>53481234
don't forget, amd is replacing a 350$ at launch cpu with the 8 core, they have the leave way to sell it for anywhere as low as 150$ (nearly at cost) to upwards 400$ (highest end i7 before you go enthusiast not main stream)
EVEN if it only got sandy bridge performance, its 8 true cores, the only thing that intel makes that would touch it for performance is 1000$ (and possibly being dropped to the 5-700$ range i forget what the slide for intel's new e line said 8 cores cost)
if amd is exceeding haswell, fuck me is that going to be a monster of a cpu. oh, the chip is also half the size of their current 8350, so keep that in mind how much they would be able to sell it for on the low end.
>>53481147
You are very misinformed if you think that playing games is a stress test.
>>53483600
IIRC Intel's new E line is supposed to go from 6c to 10c, and scale from something like $600 to over double that for the 10c.
>>53483542
If AMD knocks it out of the park, Intel will just release what they've been holding back.
>>53483671
Not much for them to release. Their LGA 2011 Xeons are monster chips in terms of size, and all of their nonLGA 2011 chips use the same set of dies (mobile, E3 Xeon and Desktop).
Intel would be forced to sacrifice their precious power saving and/or iGPU performance to cram more CPU cores into the consumer chips, and releasing higher tier Xeon dies as i7 (or even i9 if they go that far) would run into serious heating issues. Haswell-E has enough problems with heat.
>>53483671
>this is what intelgoys ACTUALLY BELIEVE
>>53483524
Sorry, i meant i already had the ddr3.
