Pricing will be the key factor.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
FEATURED AMD ZEN Discussion (Previous Rumor Thread)
- Thread starter Johan45
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2004
Nobody buys an 8+ core CPU for an email machine, anyway. Don't build straw men. Plenty of "mainstream" users do a bit of video editing, though, or video chat, either of which will easily take advantage of multiple cores for encoding. With Steam Link, you might have the computer being used as an email/web machine at the same time as somebody is playing a game. Then you've got several cores used between sandboxed browser tabs and email client, some for encoding the Steam stream, some for the game, etc. This idea that "software can barely utilize" mutli-core systems is ridiculous. You're never running one element of "software". At the moment on my desktop, running nothing but Pale Moon, there are 74 processes (and that just processes; any of those might be running more than one thread). Anybody with OEM bloatware installed is going to be running a lot more than that.
I know this is overclockers.com, but clock speed hasn't been king for a decade. Read the previous few sentences above. The more cores you have available, the less power the you lose from the OS doing the heavy lifting of "multitasking".
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2012
Couldn't have said it better myself PetteyG' !
I mean cell phones are up to 8 cores/threads now. Soon 16c 32t counts will be desktop norm.
Server 2P and 4P boards are not for desktop. You can't even fit these in your case. Still running old HT 3.1 technology. This G34 socket is and has been history.
i7 is probably overkill for most users. And then most average joes look at more is better. Selling point of 32 threads is going to be rather large over anything else you'll see advertised.
3.5ghz on FinFet should be an easy accomplishment. No faster or slower than what's released now. The difference is (talked about) 2x performance per watt on top of quadruple the thread count.
I mean cell phones are up to 8 cores/threads now. Soon 16c 32t counts will be desktop norm.
Server 2P and 4P boards are not for desktop. You can't even fit these in your case. Still running old HT 3.1 technology. This G34 socket is and has been history.
i7 is probably overkill for most users. And then most average joes look at more is better. Selling point of 32 threads is going to be rather large over anything else you'll see advertised.
3.5ghz on FinFet should be an easy accomplishment. No faster or slower than what's released now. The difference is (talked about) 2x performance per watt on top of quadruple the thread count.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
You are wrong there. The 40% IPC difference may be largely negated by ZEN being released at a lower frequency than current chips. This came from The Stilt himself. So take it fore what it's worth
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2004
40% over BD/SR at 4GHz is still 20% at 2 GHz. Then, there are 100-200% more cores depending on how you quantity SMT, so you'd still have 40-80% even at 2 GHz. Again, multitasking is context switching and cache invalidation, and the more cores you have to spread threads over, the fewer times that happens, and the faster things are even without a clock speed increase. Assuming no I/O bottleneck, every doubling of core count is literally a 100% performance increase, because threads of X priority are running 100% longer before they get switched for some other thread.
Exactly! this industry is very clever at whipping up a storm and getting the net to run the brain washing show...
The reality, I'm sure will be close to it albeit with the challenges of 'real world computing'...
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
This is total nonsense and what got AMD in the fix they are in with the cpu's they currently are trying to sell to no avail except to hobbyist and gamer's. No oem will touch them with a ten foot pole.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2015
I doubt most people would even notice any significant performance increase. I ran my Win 8.1 64-bit with five of my X6 1090T's six cores disabled and noticed no significant change in boot time or sluggishness in basic use even though the single core had to handle about 60-70 processes / 1000+ threads. Sure, trying to start two programs simultaneously did take longer than with all cores enabled, but for light multitasking one half-decent core is enough. Running the OS and Firefox or some office software just isn't very demanding, even if the number of threads is quite high. Even my old netbook with an Intel Atom N550 (dual-core, 1.5 GHz) can handle Windows 7 and light office work. Although it's quite sluggish, that's partly due to the awfully slow hard drive.
has everyone seen this yet.
http://hexus.net/tech/news/mainboar...ource/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
http://hexus.net/tech/news/mainboar...ource/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2004
It's total sense, and it's why AMD GPUs kick the collective *** of nVidia GPUs in DX12. It's also why both Sony and Microsoft chose them for their game consoles. Are you going to claim you know better than all of them?
Eight months earlier release is fine by me
Alaric
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2011
- Location
- Satan's Colon, US
Umm , gamers are a "thing". They buy computers. Maybe not the biggest market share , but far from inconsequential. And hobbyists (Us) have influence far greater than our numbers. People look to them for the breakdown on the state of the art and the most for the least. When Joe Customer balks at the price of a "big" Devil's Canyon CPU and the salesman needs to close the deal , AMD is a nice ace in the hole. "Eight cores , 4.x GHz , handles all your games , and only $xxx."
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2004
When my main rig eventually craps itself I'll move across to Intel simply because their systems boot faster. It has nothing whatsoever to do with performance once started. My HTPC is running a current gen Pentium chip, my main (signature rig) is 2-3x slower on startup despite running exactly the same model Samsung SSD's, and the HTPC having less RAM etc etc
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2013
Sounds more like an OS issue than hardware.
HTPC vs Daily driver... Daily driver will have more programs and junk to load vs an HTPC...
Just my .02 on it.
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
Are you on UEFI or BIOS?
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
It's total sense, and it's why AMD GPUs kick the collective *** of nVidia GPUs in DX12. It's also why both Sony and Microsoft chose them for their game consoles. Are you going to claim you know better than all of them?
Eight months earlier release is fine by me
Sony and Microsoft went with AMD because it was one stop shopping and most of all it was very, very cheap. Its common knowledge that AMD makes very small margins on the consoles. AMD needs high margins. AMD needs OEM design wins. Companies like Apple and Intel basically print $100 bills. AMD mints pennies. They need good, fast processors that the OEM's will build decent pc's around. Not laptops with 1024 x 768 resolution garbage.
fasontales
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2015
Who else is excited for AM4 APUs and that sweet DDR4?
I've got a miniITX build all planned out, just waiting for Zen to come out in a couple of months. Really really can't wait. Also here's hoping to picking up last-gen chips and hardware for dirt cheap with blowout sales.
I've got a miniITX build all planned out, just waiting for Zen to come out in a couple of months. Really really can't wait. Also here's hoping to picking up last-gen chips and hardware for dirt cheap with blowout sales.
Don't hold your breath on that until Zen shakes out or not.
Alaric
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2011
- Location
- Satan's Colon, US
If Zen can't at least kick hell out of the FX chips , Team Red is in a world of hurt.
Similar threads
