Alphacool EISBAER Ex BLACK LCS review
Netgear Nighthawk AX12 Wi-Fi 6 router review
Corsair HS60 PRO Surround Headset Review
MSI Radeon RX 5700 Gaming X review
Team Group Cardea II NVMe 1 TB SSD Review
ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming ITX/TB3 review
Promo: URCDKey Autumn Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
Patriot P200 1TB SATA3 SSD Review
ASRock Radeon RX 5700 XT Taichi OC+ review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - September 2019
AMD ZEN 8-core Summit Ridge To launch January 17th 2017
You should mark that date in your agenda, 17-1-2017 as there now is a very strong indication that the 8-core ZEN processors from AMD is to be launched or available on that date. An AMD China partner called Maxsun shared some detail on the launch., which found its way onto the web.
Before we begin, as always rumors are just that ... rumors and we certainly can't verify this information. However, the indication and partner seems valid. That would mean availability of AMD Zen on January the 17th, which matches up with a CES 2017 announcement (5th of January through the 8th)
Yesterday we already mentioned an indication for Summit Ridge processors (the 8-core ZEN part) pricing, MAXSUN here as well confirms that pricing scheme. The companies SR7 processors (high-end SKUs) in the Zen line-up would sit in the 1500-2000 Yuan segment, and that is $200-$300.
MAXSUN also kind of confirmed the clock frequency range for AMD's next processors as they are quoting 3.15-3.30 GHz base clocks with 3.5 GHz boost clocks (similar to Intel's most high-end 8 and 10-core SKUs). On top of that they claim the processors can be clocked to 4.2 GHz fairly easily with conventional cooling and up to 5 GHz with LN2. In the posted screenshots they mention that the top-end SKU can compete with the Intel 6850K
Let me end where I began, as always rumors are just that ... rumors. But this one does seem valid. Let's hope that the hype is real.
The initial “Zen” CPU core will come to market first in an 8-core, 16-thread system-on-chip for desktops (=Summit Ridge). The "Summit Ridge" Zen family will feature a unified AM4 socket with its GPU-equipped "Bristol Ridge" APU counterparts, and feature DDR4 support and a an expected 95W TDP. We expect each Zen core will have four integer units, two address generation units and four floating point units, and the decoder can decode four instructions per clock cycle. L1 data cache size is 32 KiB and L2 cache size 512 KiB per core. 2 CCUs = 2x8MB (L3) + 8x512KB (L2) = 20MB
In a recent presenation AMD shows Summit Ridge to be faster compared to an octacore-Broadwell-E at the same clock frequency.
AMD Zen to get three perf tiers and sits at the €200 marker - 11/17/2016 02:05 PM
An interesting slide surfaced at the Chiphell forum. As you guys know, AMD ZEN processors developed under code-name Summit Ridge (RS) will be released in Q1 of 2017. The initial wave will see 8-core ...
AMD ZEN 8-core Summit Ridge available in February 2017 - 09/12/2016 02:02 PM
As you guys know, the 8-core Summit Ridge processor series from AMD will be the first ZEN based product series released to the desktop consumer market. As it looks right now, Summit Ridge is to be rel...
Intel Kaby Lake and AMD Zen processors to only support Windows 10 and Unix - 09/02/2016 08:12 AM
News hits the web on multiple websites today that it seems likely that both AMD ZEN and Intel's Kaby lake processors are to only support Windows 10 and Unix compatible operating systems. That would b...
AMD ZEN Engineering Sample AOS - Further Performance Analysis - 08/12/2016 05:58 PM
In this news-item we'll look a little deeper into the benchmark performance of AMD Zen and Ahses of Singularity. After the some results leaked yesterday a lot of questions have been raised....
AMD ZEN Engineering Sample Shows Promising Perf - 08/11/2016 06:34 PM
In the Ashes of the Singularity-benchmark database a couple of product codes appeared with corresponding benchmark results. They appear to be ZEN engineering samples that can be recognized by their O...
xrodney
Senior Member
Posts: 326
Joined: 2015-06-18
Senior Member
Posts: 326
Joined: 2015-06-18
#5360540 Posted on: 11/19/2016 02:59 AM
Way over.
I'm also wondering at motherboard costs, everyone is so super focused on the CPUs themselves. I'm more interested in the chipsets supporting them at this point. Unless you need specific extras, you can buy any OC'able Intel motherboard and expect solid results. That isn't always the case with AMD, and while the general user probably doesn't care about the ability to OC... I'm sure you get my meaning. It's going to be an interesting month or two until we see these things launch.
Yeah, that's what bothering me as well as I have usually little too specific requirements that even most intel boards does not fulfill.
Way over.
I'm also wondering at motherboard costs, everyone is so super focused on the CPUs themselves. I'm more interested in the chipsets supporting them at this point. Unless you need specific extras, you can buy any OC'able Intel motherboard and expect solid results. That isn't always the case with AMD, and while the general user probably doesn't care about the ability to OC... I'm sure you get my meaning. It's going to be an interesting month or two until we see these things launch.
Yeah, that's what bothering me as well as I have usually little too specific requirements that even most intel boards does not fulfill.
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 7004
Joined: 2014-09-27
Senior Member
Posts: 7004
Joined: 2014-09-27
#5360550 Posted on: 11/19/2016 04:03 AM
Yes both unlocked, normal I guess up to 4.2-4.3Ghz on avg, better one, well from what I saw how current ES do atm, I would say up to 4.5-4.7Ghz.
They used LN2 @ 5Ghz on early sample that does 3.8GHz with errata on or 4.2ghz with errata off (air).
These are Zen clocks you are talking about here?
Yes both unlocked, normal I guess up to 4.2-4.3Ghz on avg, better one, well from what I saw how current ES do atm, I would say up to 4.5-4.7Ghz.
They used LN2 @ 5Ghz on early sample that does 3.8GHz with errata on or 4.2ghz with errata off (air).
These are Zen clocks you are talking about here?
icedman
Senior Member
Posts: 907
Joined: 2013-02-22
Senior Member
Posts: 907
Joined: 2013-02-22
#5360555 Posted on: 11/19/2016 04:29 AM
I hope glofo's process is better for CPU's than it has been on their GPU's for overclocking.
I hope glofo's process is better for CPU's than it has been on their GPU's for overclocking.
ht_addict
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: 2010-11-27
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: 2010-11-27
#5360560 Posted on: 11/19/2016 04:36 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but games reviewed on this site are showing marginal difference in gaming performance between a FX8370 and 5960X. So why is everyone going on about performance. All you doing is benching? if a $200-300 CPU offers performance of a $500 CPU that's a win/win in my books. On top of that the motherboards will be a fraction of the cost of Intel.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but games reviewed on this site are showing marginal difference in gaming performance between a FX8370 and 5960X. So why is everyone going on about performance. All you doing is benching? if a $200-300 CPU offers performance of a $500 CPU that's a win/win in my books. On top of that the motherboards will be a fraction of the cost of Intel.
Elder III
Senior Member
Posts: 3574
Joined: 2010-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 3574
Joined: 2010-05-16
#5360564 Posted on: 11/19/2016 05:03 AM
Yes both unlocked, normal I guess up to 4.2-4.3Ghz on avg, better one, well from what I saw how current ES do atm, I would say up to 4.5-4.7Ghz.
They used LN2 @ 5Ghz on early sample that does 3.8GHz with errata on or 4.2ghz with errata off (air).
I would be more then pleased with a 4+Ghz CPU.... I'm always conservative with voltages anyways, so I'd never be trying to break any records.
Yes both unlocked, normal I guess up to 4.2-4.3Ghz on avg, better one, well from what I saw how current ES do atm, I would say up to 4.5-4.7Ghz.
They used LN2 @ 5Ghz on early sample that does 3.8GHz with errata on or 4.2ghz with errata off (air).
I would be more then pleased with a 4+Ghz CPU.... I'm always conservative with voltages anyways, so I'd never be trying to break any records.
snip3r_3
Senior Member
Posts: 2985
Joined: 2004-12-17
Senior Member
Posts: 2985
Joined: 2004-12-17
#5360577 Posted on: 11/19/2016 05:49 AM
In some games the differences can be huge. These might be RTS, some MMORPGS, and/or others that don't scale too well past 2-4 threads.
Performance is also key to most things outside of gaming. Notable CAD, image/video editing, 3D modeling and rendering, and many more (the extremely large spectrum of server computing). In these non-gaming usages, AMD has been terrible for a very long time due to low IPC, high power consumption, and high heat production.
The key metric here isn't just performance. It is performance/watt. AMD needs revenue/profits and not a user base. User base != money, which AMD needs more of to continue costly R&D.
The cost of a chip is always peanuts compared to the R&D. To most people commenting on the BOM of a chip, seriously either go work at one of the companies or do some additional research, the "real" price is usually several times higher. Of course there is a profit margin, but it usually isn't more than 2X-2.5X of the actual cost. (You also have to factor in support, including kernel upgrades and the inevitable bug fixing, which is VERY costly).
For Zen, the pricing will should generally reflect the performance of the closest competitor product but at around 70-80% the price. AMD isn't going to sell you a $300 CPU that can compete with Intel's $1000+ CPUs, that's just shooting both themselves and the market down.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but games reviewed on this site are showing marginal difference in gaming performance between a FX8370 and 5960X. So why is everyone going on about performance. All you doing is benching? if a $200-300 CPU offers performance of a $500 CPU that's a win/win in my books. On top of that the motherboards will be a fraction of the cost of Intel.
In some games the differences can be huge. These might be RTS, some MMORPGS, and/or others that don't scale too well past 2-4 threads.
Performance is also key to most things outside of gaming. Notable CAD, image/video editing, 3D modeling and rendering, and many more (the extremely large spectrum of server computing). In these non-gaming usages, AMD has been terrible for a very long time due to low IPC, high power consumption, and high heat production.
The key metric here isn't just performance. It is performance/watt. AMD needs revenue/profits and not a user base. User base != money, which AMD needs more of to continue costly R&D.
The cost of a chip is always peanuts compared to the R&D. To most people commenting on the BOM of a chip, seriously either go work at one of the companies or do some additional research, the "real" price is usually several times higher. Of course there is a profit margin, but it usually isn't more than 2X-2.5X of the actual cost. (You also have to factor in support, including kernel upgrades and the inevitable bug fixing, which is VERY costly).
For Zen, the pricing will should generally reflect the performance of the closest competitor product but at around 70-80% the price. AMD isn't going to sell you a $300 CPU that can compete with Intel's $1000+ CPUs, that's just shooting both themselves and the market down.
nicugoalkeper
Senior Member
Posts: 867
Joined: 2006-04-13
Senior Member
Posts: 867
Joined: 2006-04-13
#5360614 Posted on: 11/19/2016 11:10 AM
I just hope that the first version of AMD ZEN and motherboards for it will come with few squirts to be fixed on the next version (after they postponed the release so much time)!
Every time a new hardware comes to play, there is a risk of problems.
I don't think that will buy AMD ZEN in the first 6 months, until i know is all ok.
I think that at best AMD will sell they'r CPU at 10-20$ lover as Intel (for same performance). If the price is to low, then it will flood the market with new CPU, but it will be a problem for the next version if the difference in performance will be not be that big. And there is another problem.
I don't think that they want to improve the PC (desktop gaming) segment that much because they will leave console market to far behind. AMD makes good money from consoles were at the moment they are kings (why the risk on PC). AMD only wants to keep up with Intel on this market.
Anyway hope I'm wrong and we will get a monster at a better price that Intel.
I just hope that the first version of AMD ZEN and motherboards for it will come with few squirts to be fixed on the next version (after they postponed the release so much time)!
Every time a new hardware comes to play, there is a risk of problems.
I don't think that will buy AMD ZEN in the first 6 months, until i know is all ok.
I think that at best AMD will sell they'r CPU at 10-20$ lover as Intel (for same performance). If the price is to low, then it will flood the market with new CPU, but it will be a problem for the next version if the difference in performance will be not be that big. And there is another problem.
I don't think that they want to improve the PC (desktop gaming) segment that much because they will leave console market to far behind. AMD makes good money from consoles were at the moment they are kings (why the risk on PC). AMD only wants to keep up with Intel on this market.
Anyway hope I'm wrong and we will get a monster at a better price that Intel.
pokyeah88
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: 2015-04-20
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: 2015-04-20
#5360724 Posted on: 11/19/2016 09:24 PM
i got 20-40 fps on wow WoD (at that time)@ 1080p with an a10 5800k@4.4ghz, using rebranded 7850 ( the r7 265) to constant 60fps after changing to an intel offering. ( note : before i decided to upgrade to 390).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but games reviewed on this site are showing marginal difference in gaming performance between a FX8370 and 5960X. So why is everyone going on about performance. All you doing is benching? if a $200-300 CPU offers performance of a $500 CPU that's a win/win in my books. On top of that the motherboards will be a fraction of the cost of Intel.
i got 20-40 fps on wow WoD (at that time)@ 1080p with an a10 5800k@4.4ghz, using rebranded 7850 ( the r7 265) to constant 60fps after changing to an intel offering. ( note : before i decided to upgrade to 390).
chispy
Senior Member
Posts: 8758
Joined: 2006-10-29
Senior Member
Posts: 8758
Joined: 2006-10-29
#5360769 Posted on: 11/20/2016 12:47 AM
Until we see real benchmarks and proper reviews nothing is written on stone , we can guesstimate more or less the performance based on rumors and leaks. Until then take all the information with a tea spoon of salt ( Or a Dumpster Truck of it
)
Until we see real benchmarks and proper reviews nothing is written on stone , we can guesstimate more or less the performance based on rumors and leaks. Until then take all the information with a tea spoon of salt ( Or a Dumpster Truck of it
)
Prince Valiant
Senior Member
Posts: 687
Joined: 2014-02-23
Senior Member
Posts: 687
Joined: 2014-02-23
#5360774 Posted on: 11/20/2016 01:35 AM
Way over.
I'm also wondering at motherboard costs, everyone is so super focused on the CPUs themselves. I'm more interested in the chipsets supporting them at this point. Unless you need specific extras, you can buy any OC'able Intel motherboard and expect solid results. That isn't always the case with AMD, and while the general user probably doesn't care about the ability to OC... I'm sure you get my meaning. It's going to be an interesting month or two until we see these things launch.
Indeed. I'd hate to see them meet their launch and have competitive CPUs only to get sullied by no decent motherboards being available.
Way over.
I'm also wondering at motherboard costs, everyone is so super focused on the CPUs themselves. I'm more interested in the chipsets supporting them at this point. Unless you need specific extras, you can buy any OC'able Intel motherboard and expect solid results. That isn't always the case with AMD, and while the general user probably doesn't care about the ability to OC... I'm sure you get my meaning. It's going to be an interesting month or two until we see these things launch.
Indeed. I'd hate to see them meet their launch and have competitive CPUs only to get sullied by no decent motherboards being available.
vbetts
Moderator
Posts: 14675
Joined: 2006-07-04
Moderator
Posts: 14675
Joined: 2006-07-04
#5360776 Posted on: 11/20/2016 01:43 AM
In some games the differences can be huge. These might be RTS, some MMORPGS, and/or others that don't scale too well past 2-4 threads.
Performance is also key to most things outside of gaming. Notable CAD, image/video editing, 3D modeling and rendering, and many more (the extremely large spectrum of server computing). In these non-gaming usages, AMD has been terrible for a very long time due to low IPC, high power consumption, and high heat production.
The key metric here isn't just performance. It is performance/watt. AMD needs revenue/profits and not a user base. User base != money, which AMD needs more of to continue costly R&D.
The cost of a chip is always peanuts compared to the R&D. To most people commenting on the BOM of a chip, seriously either go work at one of the companies or do some additional research, the "real" price is usually several times higher. Of course there is a profit margin, but it usually isn't more than 2X-2.5X of the actual cost. (You also have to factor in support, including kernel upgrades and the inevitable bug fixing, which is VERY costly).
For Zen, the pricing will should generally reflect the performance of the closest competitor product but at around 70-80% the price. AMD isn't going to sell you a $300 CPU that can compete with Intel's $1000+ CPUs, that's just shooting both themselves and the market down.
Keep in mind too, Intel has ddr4 support and other things such as full nvme support, and even proper USB 3.1 controllers. For applications that take advantage of high pref ram and USB transfer speeds, that's someth Jog you cannot get with AMD currently. There's also Thunderbolt, which all of these are mainly used for professional tools mind you.
In some games the differences can be huge. These might be RTS, some MMORPGS, and/or others that don't scale too well past 2-4 threads.
Performance is also key to most things outside of gaming. Notable CAD, image/video editing, 3D modeling and rendering, and many more (the extremely large spectrum of server computing). In these non-gaming usages, AMD has been terrible for a very long time due to low IPC, high power consumption, and high heat production.
The key metric here isn't just performance. It is performance/watt. AMD needs revenue/profits and not a user base. User base != money, which AMD needs more of to continue costly R&D.
The cost of a chip is always peanuts compared to the R&D. To most people commenting on the BOM of a chip, seriously either go work at one of the companies or do some additional research, the "real" price is usually several times higher. Of course there is a profit margin, but it usually isn't more than 2X-2.5X of the actual cost. (You also have to factor in support, including kernel upgrades and the inevitable bug fixing, which is VERY costly).
For Zen, the pricing will should generally reflect the performance of the closest competitor product but at around 70-80% the price. AMD isn't going to sell you a $300 CPU that can compete with Intel's $1000+ CPUs, that's just shooting both themselves and the market down.
Keep in mind too, Intel has ddr4 support and other things such as full nvme support, and even proper USB 3.1 controllers. For applications that take advantage of high pref ram and USB transfer speeds, that's someth Jog you cannot get with AMD currently. There's also Thunderbolt, which all of these are mainly used for professional tools mind you.
nz3777
Senior Member
Posts: 2364
Joined: 2014-01-21
Senior Member
Posts: 2364
Joined: 2014-01-21
#5360777 Posted on: 11/20/2016 01:51 AM
Amd doesn't get to set the price on the zen 8/16 I will tell you why... Intel at the same level which is a 5960x or 6900 is $1000 dollars! If they wanna take market share from intel yes they will have to price it at $300-$350 usd, I don't think anyone else in there right mind would pay more then that for a amd CPU. If they price em higher oh we'll it's just gonna sit on the shelfs and nobody will buy them. Just remember what I said you can quote me on when they launch.... $ 500 dollars and zen is a complete waste of time! Back to intel for me and Iam sure a lot of other power users as well.
Amd doesn't get to set the price on the zen 8/16 I will tell you why... Intel at the same level which is a 5960x or 6900 is $1000 dollars! If they wanna take market share from intel yes they will have to price it at $300-$350 usd, I don't think anyone else in there right mind would pay more then that for a amd CPU. If they price em higher oh we'll it's just gonna sit on the shelfs and nobody will buy them. Just remember what I said you can quote me on when they launch.... $ 500 dollars and zen is a complete waste of time! Back to intel for me and Iam sure a lot of other power users as well.
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 7004
Joined: 2014-09-27
Senior Member
Posts: 7004
Joined: 2014-09-27
#5360788 Posted on: 11/20/2016 02:29 AM
Companies going only after profit margins fail. Look at Apple in desktop back in the day, Matrox etc.
When you stop being relevant, nothing else really matters. A big user base is vital for the software optimizations alone.
User base != money, which AMD needs more of to continue costly R&D.
Companies going only after profit margins fail. Look at Apple in desktop back in the day, Matrox etc.
When you stop being relevant, nothing else really matters. A big user base is vital for the software optimizations alone.
tensai28
Senior Member
Posts: 1416
Joined: 2013-10-31
Senior Member
Posts: 1416
Joined: 2013-10-31
#5360804 Posted on: 11/20/2016 05:02 AM
Well this is AMD we are talking about and as much as I want to believe it, I'll believe it when I see it. As a gamer it would be nice to have options when upgrading but I just recently bought this 6600k so hopefully this won't render my CPU obsolete just yet.
Well this is AMD we are talking about and as much as I want to believe it, I'll believe it when I see it. As a gamer it would be nice to have options when upgrading but I just recently bought this 6600k so hopefully this won't render my CPU obsolete just yet.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 16383
Joined: 2012-05-18
Yes both unlocked, normal I guess up to 4.2-4.3Ghz on avg, better one, well from what I saw how current ES do atm, I would say up to 4.5-4.7Ghz.
They used LN2 @ 5Ghz on early sample that does 3.8GHz with errata on or 4.2ghz with errata off (air).