Don't known how good these sources are but they're certainly interesting.... Google R1700X (I can't link it properly) And no Turbo apparently so running at 3.4GHz on an A320 board.

Getting so emotional in your argument won't help. These people just share their feelings based on the slow drip AMD has been leaking out.

:infinity:

The rumor says that under special oc mode, X cpus will boost higher than normal boost speed. Which also might explain that previous rumor about elaborate cooling system. Not to mention this presents the oportunity to call these parts 90W when in reality they are built and benchmarked as say 130W. Not that anyone really cares about indicated TDP, thats just my speculation As for normal oc, haven't AMD cpus been unlocked for ages?

Not really a rumour one of the stated features of zen is the XFR tech,which allows the chip to scale its frequencies to the cooling solution, beyond the normal maximum boost clock. http://i.imgur.com/SXDgfY1.png An X version that defaults to this mode paired with a water cooler would make alot of sense. would allow any joe blow to pickup a self overclocking chip that requires no experience to setup and would offer comparable performance to a manually oced chip

Reddit says XFR is "extended frequency range", so yes, it's just binned parts capable of higher frequencies Edit: just saw the post above. Nevermind

Its a shame we have in 21st century an CPU with 140W TDP!!! Whats in Intel mind?OK,for enterprise market should be ok,but for end-user no way!Shame Intel! Maybe they need again to focus on mobile cpu,like Pentium M era. Ryzen should be a great CPU,if will have a great IPC (instructions per cycle).Good 95W TDP for 8c/16t Ryzen CPU. 🙂

If we take on that they have more or less the same IPC, how is an octocore at 3.8GHz slower than a quad at 4.2GHz? Like, seriously, how? Is there any sane person which will chose the 7700k over that?

The same way as current AMD APUs and CPUs where one core is nearly twice as less powerful as one Intel cores. It doesn't matter how much cores. Matter is how big and performant they are. Intel cores simply bigger, as have more transistors.

Yeah, the spare GPU you can get for $50, is a reason to get 4 cores for $400, instead of 8. 🤓

$50 is pretty much a lot. and it's waste of space.

How is 8/16 at ~$400 with basically Intel IPC, "catching up"?

So you do believe yourself that 8-core AMD has basically around same IPC as slightly more clocked 4-core Intel? So, as I said, I won't believe it until i see it in a real action. We've already seen those strong number with Bulldozer that turned to be nothing. In any way I don't need it. Clocked 2500K is still perfectly fine enough.

Its a shame we have in 21st century an CPU with 140W TDP!!! Whats in Intel mind?OK,for enterprise market should be ok,but for end-user no way!Shame Intel! Maybe they need again to focus on mobile cpu,like Pentium M era. Ryzen should be a great CPU,if will have a great IPC (instructions per cycle).Good 95W TDP for 8c/16t Ryzen CPU. 🙂

You do know that TDP is not necessarily real life consumation? And just wait for the reviews to see what an overclocked Ryzen CPU pulls, might be more than you think. Btw. Ryzen won't have great IPC, it will have good IPC, but it will lack behind in years to what Intel offers right now in terms of IPC (if you really fancy just looking at IPC and nothing else).

Ofc I know. 🙂 Remember when Intel sales has grown because of low TDP and ofc low power consumption.

Ofc I know. 🙂 Remember when Intel sales has grown because of low TDP and ofc low power consumption.

I can see why people go for products with better TDP, it's just that usually buying the lower TDP CPU and then overclocking it doesn't make much sense, you lose any advantages you had. Just look at an overclocked Maxwell GPU from Nvidia and it's 'higher' efficiency at stock clocks compared to AMD's by then product makes no comeback once you overclock. That's why we actually need real reviews, not just some leaked benchmarks and some stuff written on a white paper.

The same way as current AMD APUs and CPUs where one core is nearly twice as less powerful as one Intel cores. It doesn't matter how much cores. Matter is how big and performant they are. Intel cores simply bigger, as have more transistors.

Yes, that's why the FX-8350 is $140, and it's most likely a better choice than an i3 in that segment. I don't know where you get from that Intel cores have more transistors. A 6700k is 1.75Bn transistors including the GPU. The CPU itself is less than 0.75Bn transistors. For all we know, Zen cores seem to be a bit smaller than that, but they are all very close (within 10% of the die area).

$50 is pretty much a lot. and it's waste of space.

According to your logic giving $400 for four cores instead of eight is fine, but spending an extra $50 to get a spare GPU when something goes bad (which is already a tall order, but let's keep playing this), is unreasonable. Right...:infinity:

So you do believe yourself that 8-core AMD has basically around same IPC as slightly more clocked 4-core Intel?

Do you even know what IPC means? That's per core instructions per Hz. For all we've seen up to now, Ryzen is more or less a Broadwell-E. Unless they have the same frequency and you only compare one core to another, you can't compare IPC. I also don't know where you see from the charts that the 8 core Zen CPU is comparable in any case with the 7700k. They are literally in different performance thresholds. If the charts are real, the 7700k is basically redundant.

So, as I said, I won't believe it until i see it in a real action. We've already seen those strong number with Bulldozer that turned to be nothing. In any way I don't need it. Clocked 2500K is still perfectly fine enough.

Bulldozer was hyped up, but it's numbers have always been bad as far as I can remember. The 2500k is cutting it close these days, the lack of HT is hurting more than people realize.

Btw. Ryzen won't have great IPC, it will have good IPC, but it will lack behind in years to what Intel offers right now in terms of IPC (if you really fancy just looking at IPC and nothing else).

Intel is lagging years behind Intel as well, so what if AMD does? I don't know what else I could say about Intel when I switched from Ivy Bridge i5k to Skylake i5k and got amazing, mind-shattering 10% more power. 10% in three generations, hooray! Intel has done absolutely nothing but collecting money for the stock owners the past several years. They haven't really bothered to develop anything, aside from the manufacturing process technology, and even that doesn't seem to be progressing so well, based on their 10nm troubles. They have just adjusted the old product a little to be able to release it under a new name to suck more money from people. How hard can it be to compete with a dinosaur like this?

Intel is lagging years behind Intel as well, so what if AMD does? I don't know what else I could say about Intel when I switched from Ivy Bridge i5k to Skylake i5k and got amazing, mind-shattering 10% more power. 10% in three generations, hooray! Intel has done absolutely nothing but collecting money for the stock owners the past several years. They haven't really bothered to develop anything, aside from the manufacturing process technology, and even that doesn't seem to be progressing so well, based on their 10nm troubles. They have just adjusted the old product a little to be able to release it under a new name to suck more money from people. How hard can it be to compete with a dinosaur like this?

No dude, you're unfair. They bought Altera for 17bn, and now they sell McAffee for 3.1Bn, after they bought it for 7.7Bn. They have managed to send away their most experienced staff in an effort to "diversify" the workforce while being total dicks to older people being with them for decades. Truth is that their current CEO is totally below par, and a far cry from Andy Grove or even Paul Ottelini. Their most successful recent product have been the iPhone modems, and even for them there are whole guides online on how to avoid getting a phone with them.

They have managed to send away their most experienced staff in an effort to "diversify" the workforce while being total dicks to older people being with them for decades.

Uhm maybe you should read the first comment. That's click bait article.

With Ibms power9 being on glofos 14nm finfet , Could mean good things for overclocking. Those ibm chips are usually have high tdps.... Zen could have some very interesting top end frequencies with enough power of course.

......

So 1700X is more expensive than 7700K with similar performance...

Please tell us where did you find the benchmarks that clearly put 7700K with 1700X on the same level, on default frequencies? So far, I have seen some chart that show: 1. AMD engineering sample running on low-end A320 board @ unknown clock (possibly inactive boost clock) 2. Using 2400 Mhz memory with very loose timings 3. In spite of everything still managing to beat i7 6900k in some tests 4. Being slower at some tests but still managed to beat i7 7700k (4.20Ghz) 5. Generally in between i7 6900 and i7 6850 in performance I would say pretty good for the announced price, IF the charts are genuine. Looking forward to guru3D testing these new processors

Uhm maybe you should read the first comment. That's click bait article.

Not exactly, because they have been actual cases where people sued for that, and there is also personal testimony of people I know. But I will give you the point that it's hearsay and move on from that completely. Read this though, and tell me that it's a well-run company.

Btw. Ryzen won't have great IPC, it will have good IPC, but it will lack behind in years to what Intel offers right now in terms of IPC (if you really fancy just looking at IPC and nothing else).

Intel's IPC hasn't improved noticably since Sandy Bridge :'(

Its a shame we have in 21st century an CPU with 140W TDP!!! Whats in Intel mind?OK,for enterprise market should be ok,but for end-user no way!Shame Intel!

Ugh what? There are different performance segments that have different power usage, Nobody wants a 30 watt part in a desktop PC because they will be significantly lacking in performance. There will always be high wattage CPUs even 20 years from now..

Not exactly, because they have been actual cases where people sued for that, and there is also personal testimony of people I know. But I will give you the point that it's hearsay and move on from that completely. Read this though, and tell me that it's a well-run company.

Well when 90% (or w/e) of your workforce is over the age of 40 well that's about all i can say. Not saying they are a well-run company. Poor management and practices plague all of these tech companies. At this time only NV seems to be doing really well from current management.

.....