AMD Presents New Horizon

Discussion in 'AMD Processors' started by HardOCP News, Dec 13, 2016.

  1. Ieldra

    Ieldra I Promise to RTFM

    Messages:
    3,543
    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2016
    Yeah I know what neural nets are, and i respectfully disagree I really don't see how conflating this with neural networking is acceptable in this context. it's bs
     
  2. Presbytier

    Presbytier [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,058
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Stop with the mindshare nonsense. If AMD chip is genuinly competitive they don't have to undercut by a massive amount. The chip will sell.
     
    N4CR and Vercinaigh like this.
  3. billabong132

    billabong132 Gawd

    Messages:
    765
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001

    and yet...
     
  4. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice Moderator

    Messages:
    17,755
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    Blender Render: 1:14:51 so 1 minute and 14 seconds, almost 1 minute and 15 seconds time to complete on my i7 4770K @ 4.6GHz / DDR3 1600
     
    Ieldra likes this.
  5. Presbytier

    Presbytier [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,058
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    It doesn't have to be faster and a Titan X is the best you can get so showing it does not slow it down is all they have to do especially if the chip is much cheaper.
     
    nepenthe likes this.
  6. thesmokingman

    thesmokingman [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,925
    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Hey Z what was your memory speed there?
     
  7. KazeoHin

    KazeoHin [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,858
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011

    Not really.

    First off: You didn't answer my question. How would YOU show off that your chip is faster? and if it's NOT faster, why are you excited? A 6700K is already faster than the 6900k for every type of gaming workload, and AMD did not show their chip against the 6700k. In other words,

    Why are you excited for AMD showing off a chip 'making no difference' against a less-than-optimal CPU in a GPU-bound gaming workload?


    also:





     
    Armenius and Syntax_Error like this.
  8. Shintai

    Shintai [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,691
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2016
    A PCB teaser of Gigabyte GA-AX370 Gaming K3.

    [​IMG]
     
  9. aztekk

    aztekk Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    166
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2014
    I assume you're running the 64-bit benchmark? Well my Ivy Bridge i5-3350p at stock speeds finishes the render in 02:37.58 on Windows XP x64 and 32-bit Blender binary! (64-bit Blender wouldn't run for some reason, should be a lot faster on x64):

    blender.PNG

    A CPU with twice less cores running at stock speeds and on a 32-bit binary instead of 64-bit beats yours, I think you sir, need an upgrade. :)
    My OS choice probably makes a difference, but it shouldn't be that much faster than newer Windows versions.
     
  10. kac77

    kac77 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,205
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    That's a Quad. We are finally getting to the point were more cores are better generally, especially if you run a lot of stuff. So far my pick for more cores (Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4930K over here) has paid off big time. I'd gladly give up 5 FPS here or there in return for more programs / more VMs.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2016
    cageymaru likes this.
  11. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] Official Forum Curmudgeon

    Messages:
    28,417
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    1866Mhz I think?

    I haven't messed with it in a while. I believe that's where I've been running it.

    I've had difficukty overclocking the RAM on this chip and I didn't find that it made much of a performance difference in any of my normal tests, so I just left it at 1866 last I recall.
     
  12. thesmokingman

    thesmokingman [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,925
    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    It seems to make a big difference in blender?
     
  13. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] Official Forum Curmudgeon

    Messages:
    28,417
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000

    I've never run blender before :p

    I just loaded it up and ran it in my current settings.

    It is a quad channel chip though...
     
  14. kac77

    kac77 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,205
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    For a press release? 1 or 2. I can't remember anyone doing an entire suite during a press release. The only time that has happened is when the product has been otherworldly like Westmere or the Athlon 64. Zen doesn't need to be Athlon 64 is just needs to be actually competitive more often than not. If that happens it will be good enough. This isn't the GPU market. In the CPU market every time Intel releases a new product it inevitably means a new motherboard, a new socket, which almost always means new cooling. People are much more apt to switch when they have to throw out what they have anyway when they want to upgrade. If this chip is competitive in perf/$ and perf/w they will do it.
     
    N4CR likes this.
  15. Frito11

    Frito11 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    280
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2016
    I get 1:04-1:05 on that benchmark on my 6700K @ 4.7 ghz ram is still at 2133, might get faster if i turn on xmp and run the ram at 2666
     
  16. Lurkingmoar

    Lurkingmoar n00b

    Messages:
    20
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2016
    I am still rocking an I7 920@3.8 DDR3 1600 X58evga mobo and I got 1:59, 2:01, 1:59, and 2:00. Fun stuff.
     
    Armenius and FrgMstr like this.
  17. Darkswordz

    Darkswordz Gawd

    Messages:
    563
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2016
    Another data point for you to compare:

    6800K @ 4.3GHz = 52.23 seconds

    [​IMG]
     
    razor1 likes this.
  18. tybert7

    tybert7 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007

    Lisa is, by FAR, the best presenter AMD has.
     
    N4CR, muxr, jeremyshaw and 3 others like this.
  19. GMcDougal

    GMcDougal Gawd

    Messages:
    922
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    I learned with the Fury launch that AMD is crafty at using the smoke and mirrors approach. Ill wait for HardOCP to review it thoroughly before i order.
     
  20. tybert7

    tybert7 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007


    People think I am crazy for thinking this but... I think AMD should price this chip at 350-399. Precisely so that it WILL blow out sales for them and get them some much needed revenue and profit. A fast nickel is better than a slow dime. They need the word to get out in a BIG way that the AMD chip is the way to go, and being similar to an intel part for 15% less is not going to cut it with the massive mindshare intel has. Relatively low pricing will amplify the success of this chip and help cut through YEARS of negative press and word of mouth regarding amd cpus.
     
  21. spydermonkey

    spydermonkey 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,936
    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Just for shits and giggles, and since I can't test my 6600k at home and my work PCs i5 650 would be pitiful, I tested this out on my server I keep here at work, running a Xeon e5 2670 running at stock speeds.

    Not too shabby for something from around the Sandy Bridge era.

    Blender bench.png
     
    Armenius, KazeoHin and Darkswordz like this.
  22. kac77

    kac77 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,205
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    [​IMG]
    Not bad for stock ATM.
     
  23. Frito11

    Frito11 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    280
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2016
    nope increasing ram speeds didn't change my result so forget that idea.
     
  24. Brackle

    Brackle Old Timer

    Messages:
    7,228
    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Hmmm would LOVE to see what my Xeon X5670 @ 4.6ghz could do.....blah would have to wait until I get home.
     
  25. tybert7

    tybert7 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007

    Fear not Arthur Pendrag, your loyalty to AMD will finally be rewarded with a real upgrade path now.
     
    pendragon1 likes this.
  26. HybridHB

    HybridHB [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,248
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2002
    My 3770k@4.5 did it in 1:32. My friends 6900k stock did it in 45.6s.
     
    Armenius likes this.
  27. kac77

    kac77 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,205
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    Hmmm .... work = powerful servers = fun.. hmm i know what I'm doing at least once tomorrow.
     
  28. Quix

    Quix 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,707
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    I wonder when samples will ship to reviewers, if AMD actually has a good product on their hands they'll want to get them out as soon as they're stable.

    The fact that they're not proactively backpedaling like they did with Polaris is a good sign (RX480 was meant to compete with GTX 1080 and missed that mark by a mile).
     
  29. FrozenSun

    FrozenSun [H]Lite

    Messages:
    110
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    While there's probably some spin on this, the 3.4 clock speeds are encouraging (that's pretty darn good for an 8 core). At the very least, there appears to be little evidence of a bulldozer sized fail this time around. I'd be pretty surprised at this point if it doesn't at least match the 6800k in real world threaded tasks. Considering bulldozer at launch couldn't match the 2600k at anything, and struggled to separate itself from the 2500k even in threaded tasks, things look a lot better for Zen.

    What I'm really interested in is what clocks the 4 and 6 core chips are going to run (if they even exist, I assume so). Let's be honest, even if the 8 core matches a 6900k, it's still not a chip the majority of us need. Most of us aren't sitting around encoding all day long hammering on 8 cores. We're much better served by higher clocked chips with lower core counts. The 6700/7700k still will likely be the best gaming + all around usage chip, barring some higher than expected clocks on the 4 or 6 core Zens.

    My curiosity is definitely piqued.
     
  30. pendragon1

    pendragon1 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,905
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    yeah that was 64bit and kinda made me said then I decided to try the 32bit:

    32bit run 1
    32.PNG

    32bit run 2
    32_2.PNG

    32bit run 3
    32_3.PNG


    then I reloaded 64 bit and got this:

    64bit run 1
    Capture2.PNG

    WTFMFFF?!!?!
    So my cpu barely beat yours in 32bit which I kinda expect being a FX and all but what the hells wrong with my 64bit?!
     
    JustReason likes this.
  31. bpizzle1

    bpizzle1 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    4,094
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Hmm, there's definitely something odd about the times they're getting in their bench. Even their 6900k put up a way faster time than people here are getting on similar chips. Well, considering AMDs history, I guess I shouldn't be surprised if there's some misdirection going on here. That said, she definitely did seem to very confident when saying thier new chip was a match for Intel's offering. I'm lowering my enthusiasm to "cautiously optimistic" until we get some real silicon reviewed in a month or two.
     
  32. ///AMG

    ///AMG 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,158
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Well we will see if this is all smoke and mirrors when we get the review. I am looking for similar to 6900k performance at 2/3 the price or less. I dont even play games anymore but my workload really benefits from more cores and threads, wouldnt mind buying AMD again if its really competitively priced.
     
  33. kcthebrewer

    kcthebrewer [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,728
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    My 6820HK OC at 4ghz got 77.48
    That is a mobile chip btw
     
  34. KazeoHin

    KazeoHin [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,858
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    This is reminding me all too much of the bulldozer launch. They spent all their marketing effort trying to show how the 8150 'kept up' with the 980X in gaming, and how AMD was offering a '$999 chip for less than $400' forgetting to mention that the 8150 could hardly keep pace with a (then) current generation i3 2100 in gaming.

    Deja bullshit.
     
    Armenius and larspassic like this.
  35. OmenemO

    OmenemO Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    129
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2016
    my 5660 @ 4.2 did it in 1:15
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Dec 13, 2016
  36. lucidrenegade

    lucidrenegade Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    385
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2011
    Somebody let Roy create the slides again...
     
    Armenius and razor1 like this.
  37. pendragon1

    pendragon1 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,905
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    hahahahahaaaaa oh ummm like my chip.... :( oh well I don't use it for any of that shit anyways. I game and it games just fine for now and I surf, watch movies and that aboot it. so its fine for that. but yes anything rendering or very cpu intensive and the poor thing just crumbles.
     
  38. Ultima99

    Ultima99 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,890
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Please let this chip not be a dismal failure.

    It would be great to see Intel get a good swift kick right in the ass.
     
    Scizyr likes this.
  39. razor1

    razor1 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,155
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2005
    Pin compatibility is actually easy for them to do, the reason why Intel didn't do pin compatibility with their higher core chips was to increase margins by making those people that wanted more cores to buy more expensive motherboards.
     
    Armenius likes this.
  40. Brackle

    Brackle Old Timer

    Messages:
    7,228
    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Could be unstable overclock. Was that with HT turned off?