>ZEN will save AMD they said >ZEN will beat skylake th

This isn't a fair benchmark, a fair benchmark is SuperPi and x87 code.

Btw it was proved that isn't actually ZEN, it's some Intel chip with a modified CPUID, the real ZEN is in fact much slower

File: amd.png (42KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 653x726px

>>56090281
DELET

I don't even know who's shitposting who ITT

File: You_Were_The_Chosen_One[1].jpg (23KB, 600x342px)

23KB, 600x342px

>>56090281

>>56090281
look at the clock speed, and this is not the final product (minor tweaks inbound)

>>56090528
still, skylake beats the fuck out of 4790 (especially in gaming), so ZEN, even after tweaks and shit will have a hard time catching up.

>>56090560
didn't devils canyon i7 have better performance in some games than skylake i7?

>trusting leaked benchmarks
>ever
As I recall, leaked benchmarks also "proved" that bulldozer was better than sandy bridge.

Next step in the AMD Defence Force Playbook:

>ZEN wasn't even meant to compete with Skylake, it's a Haswell rival
>We never said it's gonna compete with Skylake, that was Intel shills trying to make us look bad
>It's gonna be cheaper, etc.

Just like their backpedalling after the 480 release

>>56090600
Next you'll tell me Skylake has more than 5% higher serial performance than Haswell so it matters that AMD is "2 gens behind"

File: let-down.png (609KB, 854x640px) Image search: [Google]

609KB, 854x640px

>>56090281

+1 If you want AMD to die alrdeay so we can get actual competition

Clock by clock comparison AMD should actually be stronger. That's if Zen can overclock but AMD CPUs besides being hot never had problems with that.

Anyone find it extremely strange that AMD keeps using this game for benchmarks when it only has a few thousand players?

>>56090281
For only $150 we're offering a pretty fair deal

>>56090560
>skylake beats the fuck out of 4790 (especially in gaming)

Any examples outside of RAM bandwidth hungry games? Even Sandy Bridge-E will smash a 4790k in Fallout 4 just because of the quad channels.

Guess what, zen will have ddr4 too.

>>56090833
like what?
VIA?

>>56090281
>ZEN will beat skylake they said
I remember. They said that Zen will be 18 cores, use 5W (total, not per core), and operate at 65GHz. Anything less than this, and Zen is a total and absolute failure.

And it must cost $40, too.

If you read the leaks carefully, the AMD chip is 1GHz slower than the Intel ones.
And these are engineering samples- engineering samples typically run slower than the release, simply because it's just a 'rough cut' of the processor.

>>56090900
fuck off tripfaggot

>>56090281

>Between haswell i5's and i7's

Considering I still struggle to find a 4790 below 300€, if amd prices this one at 250/300€ they might have a pretty good deal here.

Emphasis on "if".

>>56090930
if the cost matters, you're poor

>>56090934
or, intelligent buyer.
one of the two.

>>56090938
>not being born into millions
what a fucking loser lmao

File: Nuclearus Muti Core v 2_0_0_5350_C4650_N3150_graf_zpsrrktgbbg.jpg (48KB, 894x458px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 894x458px

>>56090896
VIA is almost as fast as AMD

>>56090934

>You know you don't become a richfag by overspending on shit you don't need, right?

>>56090971
that cherry picked chart puts Intel at the bottom though

>>56090930
>euro
lol good luck
Shit that runs $400 here is like 800 euros in cuckland.

>>56090700

Joke's on you, I'm on a Haswell i7

If i can't go zen with an itx board I'll go for Intel to be honest

>>56090328
gonna need some sauce for that

why isnt ARM going for high end desktop cpu's? They seem to be getting real good at mobile dept, whats stopping them from building proper desktop chips?

>>56091810
Insignificant market compared to servers and mobile.

>>56091810
Because making lots of simple cores instead of few powerful ones is a good strategy for mobile, not so much for servers. And it absolutely sucks ass for desktops, as Bulldozer demonstrated.

>>56090281
>Engineering sample
>Unknown clock rates
>Unknown final clock rates
For all we know they could have run that test with half the cores disabled

File: untitled-1.png (26KB, 686x601px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 686x601px

AYYMD IS FINISHED AND BANKRUPT

>>56090600
>ZEN wasn't even meant to compete with Skylake, it's a Haswell rival
This was always the point.
>We never said it's gonna compete with Skylake, that was Intel shills trying to make us look bad
Again, this was always true, no reliable source ever said it was meant to compete with Skylake.
>It's gonna be cheaper, etc.
And this was also always true.

You basically took a bunch of valid points (points 1 and 2 are the same thing rephrased) and thought that maybe if you added meme arrows it would look silly.

>Just like their backpedalling after the 480 release
What backpedalling? What did it fail to accomplish? Everything AMD promised came true.

File: index.jpg (4KB, 205x246px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 205x246px

>>56092068

>>56092103
every amdshill on /g/ ever was sperging how Zen is going to be a skylake for cheaps

>>56091014
except not maybe like 20% more depending on region

>>56092145
>every amdshill on /g/
Ok, and /x/ legitimately posts about how the Earth is flat, how does this constitute a failure by AMD?

>>56092145
i was expecting haswell-e for $500 cutting the 5960x's price in half.

File: proofs.png (6KB, 369x311px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 369x311px

>>56090328

>>56092068
AMD will never go bankrupt because Intel will just keep pumping money into them so they have something that looks like competition.

>>56090281
I think AMD is doomed and they will always be behind Nvidia.
Sad but true

>>56090328
>its lies

>>56090568
Yes.
It's not a big deal because Intel focuses on energy saving
I hope Zen won't be 220 W like Bulldozer

>>56090281
That benchmark is bullshit. It either proves that Zen has 80% higher IPC than Piledriver, which would put it in the same ballpark as Skylake, or it proves the complete opposite.

This is why you don't use games to benchmark CPUs.

>>56090281
>ZEN will save AMD they said
Partially, along with Polaris/Vega and Xbox, Playstation, Apple deals
>ZEN will beat skylake they said
No one said this except Intel shills, shill
>ZEN will bring back the competition they said
It will. Yeah, maybe not for the highest end parts, but for the vast majority of the market, yes.

>Op's pic
As long as the final product is clocked higher, it'll be fine.

>>56090918
No, you fuck off, anon.

>>56092068
That 5960 isn't at stock clocks, dummy

File: literally.png (100KB, 579x886px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 579x886px

>>56093285
amdrone pls. literally half a year ago every tech site speculated on how zen could perform against skylake. /g/g was NOT an exception.

>>56093344
That picture doesn't mean what you think it does.

>>56093344
Notice how every link saying that is from a forum, reddit or in one instance wccftech. You don't have a single reputable source. AMD NEVER in any way said Zen was meant to beat Skylake. Anything that other people speculated was their own fault.

>>56090598
99.999999% chance these AoTS bench is legit. The guy who posted them is a Chink, and someone allegedly stole a Summit Ridge test system from AMD's Computex event in Taipei.

The performance shown isn't necessarily bad. We're looking at an engineering sample with unknown settings. AoTS does scale with RAM speed to a high degree, the CPU could have turbo disabled, NB could be running at half rate, it could be mismanaging the SMT threads. All of that and its still substantially faster than the 4ghz FX 8450 at a much lower clock.
AMD only touted a 40% uplift in IPC over Excavator, and here we're seeing something like an 80% uplift in total performance vs Vishera.

>>56090281
>oh no, an engineering sample that's clocked 25% lower than the competitor's chip is 12% slower than it!
>must be a terrible chip!

>>56090281
I'm not even exaggerating right now. This is way better than what I had hoped for. If the TDP is the same, price slightly lower, I'm in.

>>56090281
>a 2.8~3.2GHz Zen chip beats a 4.0~4.2GHz FX-8350 by 16FPS
>somehow this is bad

>>56093751
It has a 95w TDP for the 8 core part and final clocks will be higher.
Don't count on it being priced below a mainstream i7.

>>56093344
I checked some of those links in your screenshot.

Literally everyone is saying it will probably only compete with haswell or come close.

Thats what the general consensus was. 40% IPC over FX series. AMD screenshot showed just that, roughly 38% better than 8350. Note it was a low clock variant too. Higher clock variant would no doubt gain more in performance, in a roughly linear fashion.

>>56090896
lol.
Are via actually around? Fuck they were terrible.

>>56093817
That doesn't sound too bad tbqhwyfam. Luckyly my 3570k doesn't really need an upgrade, so I can just wait and see what happens.

>>56090281
>currytech """"leaks""""
>promises made by AMD

File: Newest Benches.png (115KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1280x720px

>>56090281

>>56093751
>>56093817
I checked the link, this was a 8c16t ES variant. The low clock is due to the core/thread limitation. I reckon a 4c8t variant will spout around 3.5-4Ghz base. That would be roughly 10-25% faster base. Not sure how well that translates to the ingame metrics, but I suspect it would be anywhere from 5-15% faster. If we assume 10% boost in the game benchmarks, this would put the 4c8t variant (3.5-4Ghz) close to i7 4790 tier on base.

Now its just a matter of waiting on what the overclock potential would be.

>>56090281
that's pretty good. if the bench equates it will be significantly beating the best most common tier of high end intel cpu for gaming eg the four core i5's such as 2500k, 3570k, 4760k, etc.. considering nobody buys i7's for gaming that is.

Does this game have trouble pulling more than 6 threads? Clock the Zen core slightly up, drop it to 4 cores and it would do even better.

File: dx12_cpu_ashes_of_the_singularity_beta_2_average_cpu_frame_rate_high_quality_19x10-100647718-orig.png (13KB, 1097x697px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 1097x697px

>>56090281
>87% improvement going from 2 to 4 cores
>41% improvement going from 4 to 6 cores
>14% improvement going from 6 to 8 cores
AoS is worthless as a CPU benchmark

>>56093940
Engineering samples don't have final clocks. The top binned chip will probably have a 3ghz "base" clock and an all core turbo around 3.3-3.5ghz.
The design allows for very fine control over clocking and gating which everyone seems to be conveniently ignoring since its fun to shit all over AMD. Socket AM4 has tighter power delivery requirements than any socket out there, including intel's 2011v3.
Summit Ridge will have pstates set depending on how many cores are loaded, and how high their utilization is. A full CCX can be gating off in lightly threaded workloads, and clocks will be pushed higher to make full use of the 95w TDP on 4 or fewer threads. I guarantee they won't operate at their conventional base clock all the time either. They'll throttle down to almost nothing by default to bring idle power down.
Zen cores and the CCX scale, and socket AM4 demands absurdly fine grain power delivery to support it.

>>56094005
It can make use of more than 6 cores, but diminishing returns is always law.

>>56094016
Its highly sensitive to memory frequency and timings too.

>>56090560
>skylake beats the fuck out of 4790 (especially in gaming)
no it doesn't

it was just another 5% boost to performance as it is with every new generation from intel

hardly beating it the fuck out

>>56090560
There's like 3-5% of performance difference between those chips in general(no cherry picking).

ZEN only has to beat 2500k to be successful. You guys have completely forgotten how much CPUs used to cost when AMD was still in the game.

>>56094065
Realistically they need to beat the i7 3960X and i7 5960X in most well threaded workloads. Thats their target competition.
If they can match that then competing with mainstream i5s and i7s is only a matter of pushing clocks high enough with fewer cores. The Raven Ridge APUs is AMD's mainstream platform.

Summit Ridge = i7E
Top end Raven Ridge with HT = i7
Mid binning Raven Ridge = i5
Low tier Raven Ridge = i3
Raven Ridge with no IGP = Celeron and Pentium

>>56094016
Its actually not worthless, but rather normal.

Most games don't scale well past 4 cores. The fact that Ashes even scale at all even on 8 core is pretty good.

Also recheck your numbers.

>2c -> 4c
Thats 89% on game scaling and 100% on core scaling.

>4c->6c
thats 40% on game scaling and 50% on core scaling

>6c->8c
15% game scale and 33% core scaling

Its scaling appropriately. With diminishing returns hitting.

>>56094128
It needs to be as fast as/faster than SB, have more cores and OC well. The rest is insignificant.

>>56094137
I disagree. Pretty much all recent games can utilize and scale beyond 4 threads. Intel has realized that as well. In fact, there were the ones hindering the progress.

>believing in such wide benchmark variations when processors are all exactly the goddamn same these days thanks to a fucking wall they all slammed against years ago
Why are you all so gullible as to believe Intel's lies?

>>56094137
AoS does not scale well beyond 4 threads and does not scale at all beyond 8 threads. This makes it completely worthless to benchmark a 16 thread CPU.

File: b845d6344c8ec778765b0112b6e922c7.jpg (370KB, 2507x3541px)

370KB, 2507x3541px

>mfw AMD have been trying to beat the i5 2500k for 5 years now
LOL

MAKE WIDE CORE, FETCH MANY INSTRUCTION YA

>>56090560
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-4790-vs-Intel-Core-i7-6700/2293vs3515

Roughly only 5-6% better.

There's not much difference.

>>56094203
>>56094236
Name one recent game that has good scaling past 4 core.

DOOM is supposed to be really optimized, yet even that can only scale upto 4 core

Total War Warhammer is a CPU intensive game and supposed to be well optimized too. However even that isn't scaling well.

>http://www.techspot.com/review/1173-doom-benchmarks/page5.html
>http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/total-war-warhammer-directx-12-pc-graphics-performance-benchmark-review,8.html
>http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/far_cry_primal_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,9.html
>http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/anno_2205_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,9.html
>http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/rise_of_the_tomb_raider_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,9.html

Reality is, CPU scaling in Ashes is pretty good compared to its peers.

>>56094310
Most games don't really scale well because DX11 mostly hammers the main thread.
DX12 helps, but so far it hasn't really shown it can effectively use more than 6 cores.

>>56090281
them's leaks nobody cares

>>56090281
did anyone notice these two?

this one is http://i.imgur.com/5JEenmU.png - ES 1D2801A2M88E4 32/28 and scores 5,300.
this one is http://i.imgur.com/KVnTvmS.png - ES 2D2801A2M88E4 32/28 and scores 3,100.

they're both ran in standard, both at the same resolution, and both 8 core 16 threads, both 2.8 / 3.2ghz. but they're different ES samples. wccftech does touch on this but they decided to completely ignore the 2D2801A2M88E4 results. same with guru3d.

>There doesn’t seem to be any difference at first sight between the 1D and 2D variants. They are both purportedly clocked at the same rates and the only difference that we can see is the fact that the 2D variant fares much worse in terms of performance. ..................
>In any case, because of these reasons, I decided to focus on the 1D variant for our comparison.

clearly these are indeed ES samples and being ES samples we cannot truly gauge zen's performance since they have TWO ES samples floating around with drastic performance differences between the two. 2D2801A2M88E4 scores worse than amd's very own bulldozer and the other, 1D2801A2M88E4, takes 8 cores and 16 threads to slightly lead a 4 core 4 thread haswell i5. we don't know anything about the setups or the ES samples themselves. we don't know how many cores where actually activated, was amd's hyperthreading activated, the true frequency rates, what instruction sets activated, tdp levels allowed, or anything of the like. With two ES samples that appear to be similar spec tested with such a wide gap of performance differences between the two, we can only take these benchmarks with a grain of salt.

>>56094065
this. I paid like $200 CAD for my 2500k. now that's the price of an i3. buying a CPU now gives me as much bang for my buck as it did in 2011 and that's fucking retarded.

I know the currency took a hit but seriously.

>>56094372
Engineering samples are test beds. They will try out different configs and try to find out which ones work or not. The lesser performing will be dumped infavor of higher performing design.

>>56094310
The point being that games are not a valid benchmark for 16 thread CPUs

>>56090900
>480 comes out
>doesn't beat GPUs at twice the price
>b-b-but leaks said it would beat the 980 that's false advertising isn't it?

>>56090918
you fragile little shit

>>56094065
They have to do a lot more than that. If they offer Zen for about $200, with this current market of Intel CPUs not falling in value, it's a failure.

I got my 6600k for $200.

>>56094393
thanks for restating everything i wrote.

ES samples are ES samples.

>>56094372
The slower one might have bugged microcode, low frequency NB, disabled cache, missing instruction sets.
They're ES, they have bugs.

>>56094243
But look how close they got:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1684?vs=288
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1684?vs=186

(Carrizo)Excavator with no GeAPM, no throttling, no L3, and only half the L2 present in Steamroller. Its ends up slightly faster than the Phenom IIs in some things. Sandy Bridge is 20%-50% faster excluding heavy FPU bound workloads.
The performance differential would be slightly smaller if the APUs had an L3. So it looks like it took AMD about 4-5 solid years to finally surpass their own prior arch, which is still that far behind Sandy Bridge. A tremendous issue holding back BD performance was always cache throughput and latency.

Finally surpassing Sandy will be a big milestone for them.

Chinks aren't a valid source. Wait for the final product before you start shitting everywhere

>>56094413
thanks for restating everything i stated.

ES samples are ES samples and take them for a grains worth of salt.

>>56094403
The same CPU outside US and A is most likely 50-100% more expensive though. AMD might win everywhere else then.

>>56094397
AMD is trying to market the cpus for gamers. Gamers are the most vocal and enthusiastic about new cpus.

But you're right. 8c16t game benchmarks don't work well because they dont scale well in games, they also hold back the clocks because of the core/thread counts.

>>56094412
No, you said there's no conclusion to be made. I said the lower ES will be dumped in favor of higher ES. So where numbers count, the higher one would be a more valid approach to proper benchmark evaluation rather than saying "lul theres two and we cant make sense of anything"

>>56093344
>editorials
>speculation
>conjecture
>reddit posts

give me something directly from AMD if you want to claim that "beating skylake" was one of their allegations

>>56094445
how can you make a proper approach when they're ES samples?

the fact we had one ES sample that was LOWER than bulldozer and then another that was barely faster than a haswell i5, who is there to say there isn't another one thats faster than it that wasn't shown?

WE CANNOT draw any conclusions because ultimately we don't know fucking shit about any of AMD's ES samples.

we don't have a clue how they're setup or how the benchmarks were even tested.

we don't know shit.

all these articles keep doing is spreading fud and spewing nonsense from people.

>>56094442
In both Canada and UK it's still roughly the same price on Newegg, taxes and VAT not included.

It'll be sad if Zen fails though, as that'll probably be when AMD decides to ax their entire CPU division.

ES chips are often clocked lower than their retail equivalents because they're used to test functionality not performance. They might not even be fully enabled for all we know they have disabled specific instruction set extensions or disabled turbo. The software can be configured to ignore certain features as well

>>56094475
Who is to say god won't destroy the world tomorrow? HUH? HUH? PRAY TO GOD TODAY.

In a rational world of business, people will naturally go for what's the most efficient. Given two different engineering samples, the logical conclusion would lead to AMD adopting the higher performing design over lower performing design. This is not rocket science.

If you had to choose between 10 dollar and 5 dollar, everyone would choose $10 on high probability chance. Barring the retards.

So when there are two design frameworks, AMD would naturally get the best performing one and reprint that shit. There's no "well AMD might choose the lower performing ES design over higher performing ES design" scenario in real world scenarios.

>>56094494
>as that'll probably be when AMD decides to ax their entire CPU division.

not bloody likely. they have some highly lucrative contracts with console vendors and also selling SoCs in China.

worst case scenario I expect it'll be their last x86 desktop product line but they'll definitely keep making CPUs for a long time.

>>56094516
rationality is limited by your access to data.

you can make a perfect decision and still be wrong if you don't know half the story.

we will judge Zen when it's out and not before.

>>56090896
He thinks some other company will just come out of thin air and take on Intel and somehow release amazing products. Intel already won years ago when they straggled AMD out of the pre-built market. They've been fucked for the last 10 years and been living off GPU revenue.

Unless some major breakthrough happens with alternate materials/technology that overcome the current silicon limitations then nothings going to change in the immediate future. Zen will match or be slightly better than equivalent Intel offerings at best and Intel will just price adjust to make them less attractive. Once we're down to 7nm then that's pretty much it. Intel will most likely win that race though anyway due to having 10x the R&D budget.

>>56094416
underrated post

>>56094558
There's no perfection in life. If you pursue perfection, nothing will be done.

Stop being a retard. Real world works on probability.

>>56094516
no shit amd would opt to go with the higher performing design.

the problem? WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING about any of these samples NOR why they were even benchmarking the shitter one in the first place. we can only speculate.

they're testing chips. we can only speculate the intentions. everything from the shills like you in this thread to these click bait articles have been nothing but speculation. we have zero clue about anything that revolves around these ES samples or the configurations they were tested in.

if only the 2D variant was shown we would all be sitting here arguing over it when low and behold, unknown to us, the 1D variant existed offering higher performance. but hey we only saw the 2D and therefor only it exists?

who is there to say there isn't another variant? another reversion of 1D or 2D?

let alone, again, we don't know anything really about the ES samples themselves.

we don't know how many cores where actually activated, was amd's hyperthreading activated, the true frequency rates, what instruction sets activated, tdp levels allowed, or anything of the like.

just like polaris where everyone sat here reading these click bait articles thinking a $200 card was going to offer fury x level of performance or even the nvidia shills who day in and day out speculated the 1080 was going to offer a 50 - 70% increase over the 980 ti.

all the information we have is both samples, according to their ID codes, assuming we are reading them correctly, state 8 cores, 16 threads, 2.8ghz base with 3.2ghz boost. that's all we actually know. thats it. nothing else. and even then we don't actually know if 8 cores where even activated and what clock speeds they actually ran at. let alone tdp levels, activated instruction sets, or shit, even if these ES samples had issues to begin with like faulty instruction sets.

I don't understand. It's basically taking a giant shit on the i5 and will have i7 performance at 4 GHz.

What am I missing here?

>>56094571
I'm saying you have nothing. dick all. nada.

your "probability" isn't worth shit. you are speculating. fully talking out of your ass.

take your shitty opinions and your shitty pride and fuck off.

>>56094709
>What am I missing here?
actual trustworthy data.

no assumption, optimistic or pessimistic, is to be made at this point.

you all need to shut the fuck up and wait.

File: adrXPCM.jpg (40KB, 640x424px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 640x424px

>CPU framerate

>>56090281

OP you nigger, this proves that Zen is 15% faster than the 4790 clock for clock.

meaning its roughly 5 % faster than skylel

>>56090560

show one bench that has skylake beating the "fuck out of" 4790. 6700 or whatever the comparing cpu is it is about 2-5% faster.

Anyone got the "raja my son you must choose weak 6 pin or strong 8 pin connector" pic? Always makes me laugh for some reason.

File: AMD-Zen-ES-AotS-Benchmarks.jpg (704KB, 1256x750px) Image search: [Google]

704KB, 1256x750px

>>56092068

lol

>>56094016
Ever hear of Amdahl's Law?

>>56094781
NO ITS NOT FUCK YOU

>>56092068
>>56092068
>>56092068


GET OWNED

>>56093541
There are about 1.3 billion chinks, and any of them could've faked the leak.

>>56093285
That's the whole point. It was downclocked to match the boost clock of that Zen engineering sample, so it could be compared clock for clock.

>>56095091
Thats a big fat nope.
This wasn't even a "leak." The guy who had the Summit Ridge system in his possession didn't post the results and spread them around. He was simply fucking around with it, running benchmarks, and people happened to find them in AoTS by looking through the filters and seeing a new CPU listed.

>>56095122
No one knows if the engineering samples were running at 3.2GHz or not though. Also turbo is not the max speed of all 8 cores, the TDP only allows a portion of the cores to go that fast at one time. All 8 cores might go up to 3GHz while 2-4 cores might go up to 3.2GHz

>>56091852
>>>56091810
>Because making lots of simple cores instead of few powerful ones is a good strategy for mobile, not so much for servers
You have it the other way around, you fucking tool. More cores are good for comparatively similar (and concurrent and/or parallelizable) workloads, like server workloads. Desktop and mobile CPUs have a larger variety of workloads and are therefore often more complex.

File: amd2.jpg (52KB, 568x612px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 568x612px

>>56092068
>no source

>>56095224
https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-zen-engineering-sample-aos-further-analysis.html

>>56095648
That chip apparently maintains a fairly consistent framerate no matter what you set it to. Something fishy here.

File: ayyymd.png (13KB, 454x240px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 454x240px

Beat Skylake? Lmao even FX beats skylake, look at this http://overclocking.guide/overclocking-non-k-intel-skylake-cpus-performance-tests/

Especially at the cinebench marks towards the bottom. Now compare to this picture. Now compare the prices. The only thing skylake has going is about 50% higher single-core performance, coincidentally zen is supposed to have 50% higher instructions per clock.

>>56090281
>post yfw Zen releases at 4.0 Ghz

>>56095769
>8 cores
>each core is as wide as a BD module
>95w TDP
>4ghz

Nope.

>>56095788
A BD module is still smaller than a single Intel core.

Does Summit Ridge come with a integrated southbridge?

>>56096147
Yes

>>56090281
X99 here I come, seems like ayymd cannot compute

File: 9.jpg (317KB, 1732x1239px) Image search: [Google]

317KB, 1732x1239px

>>56096051
A 32nm Sandy Bridge core is 18.4mm2.
A BD module module is north of 18mm2, its nearly equal to Sandy Bridge in die size, might actually be slightly larger. 28nm Steamroller is 18.61mm2, if it were in 32nm silicon it would be larger Sandy considerably.
Its a small miracle that Excavator got compacted to such a high degree given its transistor count, and it still being 28nm, generic HPP even.

>>56096147
Yes.

>>56096257
Intel has a density advantage so no matter how you spin it a modern Intel core is still larger than a 2int/1fpu module

File: saudies.jpg (29KB, 625x410px)

29KB, 625x410px

yeah, theres no way in fucking hell that ZEN beats i5 4690k in most of the games

I wish it would, but lets be realiistic
we would dance and scream from joy if it would be level to it

i want /v/ to leave

>>56096372
/g/ would be dead without /v/
Admit it cucks, without us /g/ wouldn't have more than 2 posts a minute.

>>56094802
>Zen
>Raja

>>56096398
/g/ used to be a slow board and that was a good era for /g/.
You faggots ruined it with your inane horseshit.

>>56096301
http://www.realworldtech.com/iedm-2010/
http://www.realworldtech.com/iedm-2008/

Intel's 32nm bulk process has no significant area scaling advantage over IBM's 32nm PD-SOI that GloFo employed for AMD's Zambezi and Vishera chips.

>>56096338
Why is that?

Lets just use the benchmark as a base information. Why isn't it possible for Zen to beat i5 4690k?

>>56090281
just wait for the price you cuck, intel will be kill after that announcement

>>56096485
What about newer than SB cores? I heard that they're much smaller on 14nm

File: keller.png (479KB, 801x1022px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 801x1022px

THANKS BASED KELLER

>>56092289
Wasn't there that leak with both being 95w and under?

File: iedm08-16.png (35KB, 1207x709px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 1207x709px

>>56096529
Thats entirely irrelevant. I was comparing Bulldozer directly to Sandy Bridge since they're both chips made on 32nm nodes.

A 22nm Haswell core is 14.5mm2.
14nm Broadwell and Skylake cores are even smaller, but I have no specifics on hand regarding them.
Theres no meaningful comparison to be made here without digging through technical documents and extrapolating the area scaling of each process node.

>>56096490
>intel
>kill
AMD might kill Intel only in some alternative universe
>cuck
Oh just a newfag. Nevermind

>>56096486
AMD is too much behind
and they are providing more cores... its extremely unlikely those cores would be anywhere near IPC levels of haswell
I have this hope for being at the level of sandy bridge

but I would not be surprised if even that is not reached

>>56096580
still, my point is price will be the best factor of this CPU, it will destroy anything intel at price/performance for budget systems, just like FX-6300 did before the newer i3s significantly started to beat it

>>56096338
AoTS scales with threads.
The Summit Ridge ES tested is 8c/16t.
An i5 is 4c/4t. Raw IPC and clock speed advantage can be offset by additional threads.


>>56096595
You're really making an ass of yourself here.

>>56090300
>this isn't a fair benchmark, this is the benchmark amd uses for everything else.

>>56094016
Seems to scale in line with most of the multi-threaded desktop applications I have used, if not slightly better than many of the ones with large data sets.

>>56094413
The revision 1 ES was drawing too much power from the PCI bridge so they had to cut it back for the ES2

> using gaymes to benchmark CPU performance

>>56096462
> implying more posts is better