Editorial: AMD Zen is now RYZEN processor

Humanoid_1

2016-12-14 00:06

That's some really good stuff in there, AMD are hard at work which is what we need. Obviously it wouldn't have been the same without some monkeys from their marketing dept. doing some hilarious shenanigans: http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=27248 :D TIL 8 > 100

Seemed straight up and simple to me 🙂 Don't feel mislead at all, the %'s are very clear, made to feel smaller with the explanation.

#5370680

SSD_PRO

2016-12-14 00:28

I see only positive speculations in this article. All of this is good news for competition. What I don't see is prices on AMD side. The price of chip "A" is given in the title but no comparative data in the article. Odd to make a comparison in the headline without reference.

#5370738

stereoman

2016-12-14 03:05

It's nice to see AMD beat Intel finally but I need to see them beat Intel in game perf then we are talking, stuff like handbrake and blender that's multithreaded is going to be faster the more cores you throw at it but we're not at that point with games yet although it is getting better, but yeah if they can beat intel in the game performance then I'll definitely consider making the switch next year, I love AMD chips, I've had Bulldozer, Piledriver, Phenom, Athlon, K6-2, really I am rooting for AMD to pull this off.

#5370799

Daftshadow

2016-12-14 08:24

It's nice to see AMD beat Intel finally but I need to see them beat Intel in game perf then we are talking, stuff like handbrake and blender that's multithreaded is going to be faster the more cores you throw at it but we're not at that point with games yet although it is getting better, but yeah if they can beat intel in the game performance then I'll definitely consider making the switch next year, I love AMD chips, I've had Bulldozer, Piledriver, Phenom, Athlon, K6-2, really I am rooting for AMD to pull this off.

Used to be AMD user both cpus and gpus way way back but have since switched to Intel and Nvidia and never looked back. You know by the time AMD releases these cpus to the public, Intel will have something newer and better to counter this. As the cycles continues on... The way I see it, you will never win the war when you're fighting on two fronts simultaneously against two enemies.

#5370818

xIcarus

2016-12-14 09:34

Seemed straight up and simple to me 🙂 Don't feel mislead at all, the %'s are very clear, made to feel smaller with the explanation.

So those graphs are fine to you. It's perfectly normal to see a >100% improvement at fist glance, then to read and realize that it's not true. Isn't that right? You know, mentalities like yours make me understand why companies keep doing stuff like this - no offense. Companies have always been shamed for presenting inaccurate graphs just to catch the eye, cheap marketing tricks fool more people than you think.

#5370822

Raider0001

2016-12-14 09:51

It's nice to see AMD beat Intel finally but I need to see them beat Intel in game perf then we are talking, stuff like handbrake and blender that's multithreaded is going to be faster the more cores you throw at it but we're not at that point with games yet although it is getting better, but yeah if they can beat intel in the game performance then I'll definitely consider making the switch next year, I love AMD chips, I've had Bulldozer, Piledriver, Phenom, Athlon, K6-2, really I am rooting for AMD to pull this off.

U did not watch live show didn't U ? There was a Battlefield 1 running on both platforms and 1 guy told the audience that ryzen was a bit faster with GTX 1080, all of the benchmarks were done with unfinished ryzen without boosted clock speeds so it just might get a bit faster even but I don't think it is going to be a big boost because I think ryzen was running at 3.4Ghz only which means it will loose some milliseconds for boosting clocks but also lowering it down below 3.4Ghz mark. But the tech they used for sensing many parts of the cpu and IQ for managing it properly is something I admire, finally 🙂

#5370841

moaka

2016-12-14 11:04

It's nice to see AMD beat Intel finally but I need to see them beat Intel in game perf then we are talking, stuff like handbrake and blender that's multithreaded is going to be faster the more cores you throw at it but we're not at that point with games yet although it is getting better, +1

#5370967

Humanoid_1

2016-12-14 16:17

So those graphs are fine to you. It's perfectly normal to see a >100% improvement at fist glance, then to read and realize that it's not true. Isn't that right? You know, mentalities like yours make me understand why companies keep doing stuff like this - no offense. Companies have always been shamed for presenting inaccurate graphs just to catch the eye, cheap marketing tricks fool more people than you think.

I am no fan of misleading graphs either and have seen some Really misleading ones in the past for PC hardware ! First thing I read was the title of the slide, followed by the %'s. Absolutely clear and to the point. When taught mathematics at school / college they teach you to show a "zoomed in" portion at the top of the bar graph when representing Small changes to make it clearer in the display of those changes in respect of the overall figure's baseline. Without doing this there would be little point using a graph as the changes are so small.

#5370977

Noisiv

2016-12-14 16:33

When taught mathematics at school / college they teach you to show a "zoomed in" portion at the top of the bar graph when representing Small changes to make it clearer in the display of those changes in respect of the overall figure's baseline.

I would hope not. Because it's got nothing to do with mathematics. Maybe in a community college PowerPoint class

#5370987

Humanoid_1

2016-12-14 16:46

Talk about being difficult lol -_-" I would think they teach most kids how to represent numbers in graph form during mathematics classes, there was no such thing as PowerPoint when I was at school anyways...

#5371149

Clouseau

2016-12-14 22:13

...The way I see it, you will never win the war when you're fighting on two fronts simultaneously against two enemies.

During World War II the US fought on more than one front. Business is no different. Just depends on the resources available. Concerning the graph: The reference points were all there. The scale used after the 100% mark was just different. The 4% bar is half the height of the 8% bar and the 6% bar sits in the middle between the 4% and 8% bars. The application of the exaggerated scale was consistent in its application across the whole slide. It's not like they utilized a unique set of scales for each point on the horizontal axis. What's not understood?

#5371226

PrMinisterGR

2016-12-15 02:45

Those resources are not infinite. There is a very small amount of people who can design GPUs/CPUs that can compete on this level and you can't magically make more appear by giving more money.

#5371297

xIcarus

2016-12-15 09:06

Let me wrap my head around this because I seriously can't believe there are people defending that graph. Even Hilbert had a jab at that graph and he's one who makes a lot of graphs: http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_crimson_driver_december_2016_performance_analysis,5.html

First off, we do not normalize results to say a minimum 40 FPS for the axis, hence the results are what they are and do not show limiting x-axis results to a starting point of say 40 FPS like some websites do (it clouds the picture of the actual real performance). Our charts start at a proper 0 FPS, not 40 or whatever to make the perf scaling look bigger.

#5371334

slyphnier

2016-12-15 10:24

The only way I see AMD failing is if 1.)Milk the price. 2.)Don't sell it in quanity or only to businesses like HP, Dell first. 3.)Intel drastically lowers their price. I have an overclocked Phenom 4.1GHZ on air and would like an AMD ZEN asap. The 7790 2GB seems to be hitting its age on Hitman and GTA at max settings or maybe it's the 8GB ddr2 on my old Gigabyte that's finally bottlenecking my PC at super high settings. I hope AMD does well question is how will Intel attack. AMD was clever to fool us and Intel by claiming awhile back it won't focus on high end cpu's but that was AMD's trick to lie and fool Intel and Intel was caught off guard and made the TOO COMFORTABLE.

dont think off guard... i mean their enthusiast class (skylake-x) is Q3 2017 which almost a year, i bet intel can tweak it to perform better than what top Zen cpu ... and like always they can play with "% numbers" to magically make it performance like 100% better But the news telling good things for AMD, it can selling like cakes now it depends on amd pricing + supply... hope amd can fill the demands before people get tired waiting for stock

#5371458

PrMinisterGR

2016-12-15 14:39

Let me wrap my head around this because I seriously can't believe there are people defending that graph. Even Hilbert had a jab at that graph and he's one who makes a lot of graphs: http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_crimson_driver_december_2016_performance_analysis,5.html

The ~20% greater draw call performance is quite tangible in actual usage though. It's a pity that AMD never recognized that issue, because they have made tremendous strides on it the last couple of years.