• 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)

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
I edited my post to clarify what i meant by before then. I'm only 20, I was in first grade when I got that computer lmao. My furthest back experience with tinkering with other PC's was socket AM2, because after the eMachines I had a Phenom X4 9850 in an AM2+ mobo so he'd occasionally give me CPU's from the AM2 and AM2+ socket era to bench.
 
AM2 was about the time that AMD started the downslide. Intel had released C2 by then. That was the turning point.
 
I honestly wish I could get my hand on some of those older CPUs just to see what was high end back then. I've tested numerous Core 2 Duos, one Core 2 Quad, a Phenom 2 955, 965, Athlon Triple Core, my 9850, the Celeron in my eMachines (actually how that thing died, heatsink was so damn clogged with dust the CPU overheated, it was also old), a Pentium D, and an FX 4350. Oh, and the GPUs were fun as well. Good times. :D
 
You would want to try the 939 A64's then. They were AMD's top dog when they had Intel by the nuts.
Very fun overclocking platform also.
 
Windsor and Brisbane cores were behind Intel, but not as drastically as we see today. De lidded two Brisbane CPUs and a Windsor as well, and had a lot of fun overclocking those. Yeah they weren't quite as good as Intel, but it was alot closer than today with FX vs i-series. I skipped the 939 days, went from a Barton core to Windsor, then onwards.

 
My old rig (FX 6350) doesn't have any noticeable disadvantages to my new build in 95% of what I do. The only times I noticed the FX build running "slow" was when I was lazy. 20 crapware programs starting at boot, 30 unused browser tabs open-in two different browsers, a bazillion junk files, etc.. Since that wasn't a common situation, and was easy to fix, I didn't really "need" a Skylake, certainly not a 6700k. But I wanted one, so there you have it. As behind the curve as the FX is at present I'd bet that 90% of home PC users would be satisfied with the performance of a 6 or 8 core FX for the next 3 years for what they do. Email, Facebook, and forum browsing just aren't that demanding. Honestly, how many cores does Reddit use?
 
I had 2 issues which made me to sell FX. One was too much heat and too much noise. The other issue was related to performance in mmo games. I clearly saw screen tearing, random performance drops etc when I had FX8320. I guess it's not happening in all games and for most users FX will be good enough but at least for me it was big issue which I haven't seen on i3, not to mention about i5/i7.
 
Alaric said:
My old rig (FX 6350) doesn't have any noticeable disadvantages to my new build in 95% of what I do. The only times I noticed the FX build running "slow" was when I was lazy. 20 crapware programs starting at boot, 30 unused browser tabs open-in two different browsers, a bazillion junk files, etc.. As behind the curve as the FX is at present I'd bet that 90% of home PC users would be satisfied with the performance of a 6 or 8 core FX for the next 3 years for what they do. Email, Facebook, and forum browsing just aren't that demanding. Honestly, how many cores does Reddit use?
Click to expand...

Wife's FX-4300/660ti (with a decent overclock) still does a perfect job of day-to-day and moderate gaming, so much that she doesn't see the point of upgrading any time soon :rain:
 
Kenrou said:
Wife's FX-4300/660ti (with a decent overclock) still does a perfect job of day-to-day and moderate gaming, so much that she doesn't see the point of upgrading any time soon :rain:
Click to expand...

If you want her to upgrade, Secretly underclock her system ;)
 
Kenrou said:
Wife's FX-4300/660ti (with a decent overclock) still does a perfect job of day-to-day and moderate gaming, so much that she doesn't see the point of upgrading any time soon :rain:
Click to expand...

Mines running a 955 @ 3.6 and a 6970. She is in the same boat - I just need to get her an SSD in that computer. She complains about applications loading slowly. (I'm just lazy....) Maybe when Zen has been out for a bit I'll give her the gift of my old computer parts and I'll need to build a new computer because I'm such a swell guy... :)

I also like to point out on this topic that when you start playing at 1440 and 4k the CPU plays a much smaller part. I never see my 1070 below 99-98% when I'm play graphically intensive games (Witcher, BF4, FarCry ect...). However, I do concede that MMOs play better on intels and Blizzard games in general have a heavy favoring to intel. I've found it in the past, but it's hard to find benchmarks on CPUs above 1080 in games. There is a clear advantage to Intel at 1080 but once you go above that it diminishes quite a bit. Glad I listened to the community and went for the GPU upgrade over the CPU upgrade a few months back.
 
True i suppose, the little bugger does 4.9ghz 1.368v and 5ghz ~1.44v (maybe better depending on cooling), might get a few bucks out of it :rofl:
 
I should probably mention I added an OCZ SSD for the OS to my old rig, along with a new Phanteks case, and my daughter is happily using it to this day with zero complaints. I could swap out the old R7 GPU and give her my RX 480 and I'll bet it will be years before she even notices it's old. It looks great, loads Windows 7 in under 30 seconds, and web pages magically appear instead of "loading" and it still storms through everything she does with a $20 USB wifi adapter. And it's going on five years old now with the minor upgrades listed. :thup:
 
Been thinking.

My i5 4690K right? RYZEN performance around here. BUT Quadruple the thread count.

However, I'm cheap father of 3, wife cars, insurance for everything ect. ect.

This would be a good Side/Upgrade just to gain thread count, but the pricing is going to be high on a fresh release. Sell the i5 system and make the RYZEN purchase a little more doable financially. Would be going from DDR3 to DDR4 and new instruction sets I'll likely never use hah!

This above actually doesn't sound too bad. Wouldn't need a new system for at least couple years right?
 
This above actually doesn't sound too bad. Wouldn't need a new system for at least couple years right?
Click to expand...

If the current stall of IPC continues, and it looks to since nobody seems to have any big leaps in the pipeline, plus developement time if they find something, a couple years seems conservative.

AMD expects the unified AM4 platform to last until 2020, representatives told us. AMD’s Jim Prior told me that the idea is for AM4 to last until DDR5 and other futuristic technologies hit the streets. That’s consistent with AMD’s history of long-term platforms. The difference with Ryzen and AM4? As we touched on before, AMD’s new chips are more like systems-on-chips than traditional CPUs, with all the basic technology support they need baked right into the processors themselves. The AM4 motherboard’s various chipsets simply provide extra capabilities—a flexible approach that gives AM4 room to grow in the years to come.
Click to expand...
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3155...s-7-all-new-details-revealed-at-ces-2017.html
 
Saul Goodman said:
Is the 4690K a problem at the moment? I won't be buying a Ryzen system till prices come down myself, maybe even when Zen+ drops.
Click to expand...

For gaming, light prod (adobe CS/CC), it is more than enough for a year or two to come at least.

It is more a matter of platform than pure CPU perf (ddr3 v ddr4, m2...) that makes the difference.
 
I used to run the 8350 til the itch got too great and I ended up with the 5960x, but I hope to god AMD come back with a bang, even if they get within 5% of Intel's top performers, this will be epic for ALL consumers of PC hardware, it'll drive Intel prices down and force them to innovate with more speed. It doesn't matter which side of the fence you're on ultimately, AMD doing well is a massive benefit for everybody. I see so much fighting over the two, I can never figure out why, I used to love AMD but I didn't hate Intel, now I like Intel but I don't hate AMD. My Mrs runs my old 8350 today and games just as well as I do, the 5960x benefits come in mainly for my work and multi tasking.
 
I guess the reason I'm hesitant to be an early adopter is pricing, I got my 3570K for $225 and 6 digital phase sli capable motherboard for $145 (Australian dollars)

The 7700K is $499 (AUD) for the cpu alone............not to mention needing new ram etc. I can afford an upgrade right now but doesn't mean I'm going to due to dignity and pride and all that (reality - entitled and stubborn lol)


Tír na nÓg said:
For gaming, light prod (adobe CS/CC), it is more than enough for a year or two to come at least.

It is more a matter of platform than pure CPU perf (ddr3 v ddr4, m2...) that makes the difference.
Click to expand...

True.

DWTech said:
My Mrs runs my old 8350 today and games just as well as I do, the 5960x benefits come in mainly for my work and multi tasking.
Click to expand...

Yep and the games it doesn't run well on (looks at Arma and MMOs) are basically non-optimised piles of junk by today's standards.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mackerel
HEDT is back - Zen 4 TR pro and non-pro
Replies
7
Views
478
TerranBrackiatt
TerranBrackiatt
magellan
Low core count Rome gen. AMD EPYC CPU's: some questions
Replies
9
Views
1K
EarthDog
EarthDog
Overclockers.com
FRONTPAGE AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and 7700X Review: The Dawn of ZEN 4
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
108
Views
6K
TerranBrackiatt
TerranBrackiatt
Zerileous
Ryzen 5500 OC Potential
Replies
6
Views
5K
freeagent
freeagent
D
Recommended memory for AMD Zen 2/3
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Woomack
W
Back