are you going to abandon intel for ryzen?

Trimlock

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
15,174
The only computer I'm thinking of upgrading in the near future is the one I'm typing on, a cheap put together machine that I can drop a quadcore i5 or i7 in for a few hundred bucks. If Zen doesn't beat that, or if its going to cost me and arm and a leg to build a whole Zen system I won't be switching.
 

CaptNumbNutz

Bulls[H]it Master
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
20,685
The temperature reported had nothing to do with reality. So no, the limit wasn't 65C. Just as you can find them long under ambient temperature or a heatsink with a higher temperature than the chip. They use uncalibrated sensors that could just as well show the value in bananas. However they do the job perfectly for what they should, the delta towards the max. Sensor location is also different for that matter.
I'm aware of this. The problem was that 65C was the number you had to look for when overclocking because it was a "soft" limit. 65C, wherever that sensor was uncalibrated or not, meant that certain parts of the chip were nearing their temperature limit (presumably around 100C). This was all anecdotal and varied, but the general rule of thumb through trial and error was around 65C.

What I wasn't aware of that it was measuring the Delta, and not just the temp of that particular spot. I guess that makes sense that if the chip was idling in the 30's-40's, then 60C+ would put it near 100C.
 

PliotronX

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 8, 2000
Messages
2,072
I don't look at it so much as abandoning Intel as gravitating towards the better product for my money. I have been so brand agnostic since building in the mid 90s that I was never blindly in any camp. Brand fanboys are apt to waste money in blind preference.
 

evilsofa

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
10,078
So when upgrading processors on intel, you need a new mobo sometimes from what I hear. Does AMD do the same? If Zen and Zen+ can retain compatibility I would be pretty happy. But I would still want to upgrade to amd if worth it, or perhaps Zen+ if it ain't worth it.
Zen is a new microarchitecture that uses the new AM4 socket, so you are absolutely guaranteed to be required to buy a new motherboard for Zen.
 

Morphy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
261
Cant believe I'm on the AMD CPU section nevermind contemplating buying an AMD processor but here I am!!
Been running this same intel system for 8 years (i7 920) and was finally going to do the upgrade this winter to either 5820K or 6800K and lo and behold whats this..AMD coming out with a new cpu and it actually might be decent for a change?!

Ok this I have to see...holding off upgrade for now. After 8 years a couple mths aint gonna kill me :D.
I don't need it to match intel performance wise but if its close (good clocks, OC'able) and price is reasonable I'd jump ship in a heartbeat.
 

noko

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
4,616
I wonder if ASUS will make a white Sabertooth version for the X370 - kinda like that line of motherboards plus the 990FX R1 motherboard I bought before even Bulldozer came out is running flawless today with a FX 9590 OC. ASUS seems to hit it out of the gate better then anyone else, we will see.
 

SighTurtle

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
1,412
Zen is a new microarchitecture that uses the new AM4 socket, so you are absolutely guaranteed to be required to buy a new motherboard for Zen.
Tbh, what I wrote was a bit garbled so my bad, basically if Zen is less than or equal to my i5-4690k, i'll wait for Zen+, if better than that, with a decent pricing, I might switch (if simply to build something new). But yeah I understand AM4 requires new mobos.

If this ends up being 6900k at that price I'll be fucking amazed. Give me a good ocer and mitx and i could be sold.
Wccftech is something to take with lots of salt. Right till launch AMD might change pricing, and frankly this could be fake from the get go.
 

DejaWiz

Oracle of Unfortunate Truths
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
19,521
I'm still on the only Intel processor I've ever owned...3770K.

When I'm ready to upgrade, whichever brand offers the best performance while using the least amount of power that $350-400 can buy is what I will go with.
 

GiGaBiTe

Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
988
If Zen still uses the dumb CMT that faildozer used then the only reason I'd get one of them is for an HTPC or low budget office machine. Another negative is it looks like Zen is a SoC and motherboards are basically just a backplane with limited customization options, so another reason I'd not invest heavily into the platform. Back in the mid 90s to 2005, I almost exclusively used AMD hardware because it was cheap and performed well, but they've just made a series of poor choices over the years to make me avoid them.

I'm not sure how I lose you at saying "wide open"...yes, you have the best security XP can buy. But it's inherently LESS secure than a fully-patched modern OS. So perhaps it's a bit much to say you're wide open, but you're no where near what you could be, and you're never going to improve from your current security with XP.
Did you seriously compare XP to a modern OS like Windows 10 and make the comparison that W10 is more secure? Haha.

Windows 10 has purpose designed backdoors, spyware all over the OS and pushes 3rd party programs onto your machine without your consent. Hackers don't even need to bother, you're already bent over a barrel and getting rammed. You don't even have control over the update process anymore without resorting to registry hacks and aftermarket tools. We've already seen plenty of fucked updates and bad drivers that are a PITA to remove and keep from coming back.

Modern OSes like W10 are not secure at all. Nothing is sacred there, everything is fair game and you're just along for the ride. As much as I dislike Apple, them and *nix are the final frontier in regards to privacy and security.
 

Shintai

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,691
If this ends up being 6900k at that price I'll be fucking amazed. Give me a good ocer and mitx and i could be sold.
People also thought AMD would sell 650$ performance for 250$ with Polaris. AMD isn't a charity company. If Ryzen is 6900K performance at 95W. Price would be much higher.

Fiji was to be 850$. The famous FX that sold at 800$ and then all the past history.
 

AbRASiON

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2004
Messages
352
If this ends up being 6900k at that price I'll be fucking amazed. Give me a good ocer and mitx and i could be sold.
^^^ (I see another ITX fan - we're starting to get common)
This bullshit about AMD insisting "ITX users get a crappy chipset" is ridiculous, let's hope it doesn't pan out that way.


Anyhow,....



I want it to be no slower than 15% of Kaby Lake (overclocked,.....) when it's overclocked.
If it can do that, but 8 cores, cheap as heck (under $399 US) with all the modern trimmings (m.2 4 channel, PCI-e 3.0, USB 3.1 / USBC, very fast DDR4 support, etc)

Well I'll seriously consider it.
MUST be able to go in an ITX board.



EDIT: Option 2.
Zen 8 core max OC is 35% slower than Kaby Lake max OC - no problem if the 6/12 core version is CHEAP ($249? $199?) and supports good low power scaling.
I'll put one in my next FreeNAS machine
MUST have Asrock (??) WSI boards or some company releasing 6 SATA ITX boards so I can make a Node 304 FreeNAS beast.
 

NKD

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,785
why would you dump intel for ryzen. I am glad amd is catching up if those numbers are good across the board or within 20 to 10% of intel. Still a good product compared to how far behind they are.

Got a 6850k for 230 after tax and shipping from retail edge. So Even though I would love to support AMD but I am putting together a decent rig with a rx 470 because I don't game that much anymore.

My whole computer is costing my around 750-800. Now even though I would love to support underdog but I have no need for it.

Now if I paid 600 for 6850k then ofcourse if Ryzen is comparable for 400 or so I would rather go that route for those who are buying at retail prices.

anyone considering a build at this point owes it to themselves to hold off a little to see the benches. But every buying scenario is different. I already have mine set, only thing for me is waiting for the processor, but I don't mind for the price I paid for it.
 
Last edited:

{NG}Fidel

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
6,287
People also thought AMD would sell 650$ performance for 250$ with Polaris. AMD isn't a charity company. If Ryzen is 6900K performance at 95W. Price would be much higher.

Fiji was to be 850$. The famous FX that sold at 800$ and then all the past history.
Hence the if.
 

ManofGod

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
11,524
People also thought AMD would sell 650$ performance for 250$ with Polaris. AMD isn't a charity company. If Ryzen is 6900K performance at 95W. Price would be much higher.

Fiji was to be 850$. The famous FX that sold at 800$ and then all the past history.
Ah, I see we are back to this now. Nothing new to bash AMD with for your hopeful downfall of AMD, eh? It has already been explained why you are wrong, there is no need to go back to it because you will not listen to common sense and basic business logic. Oh well, I will be enjoying Ryzen, you will be left bashing AMD, good luck.
 

spoki0

n00b
Joined
Feb 14, 2016
Messages
19
The IGP in the future Ryzen APU may actually be Vega based.
Even better if that is the case. Though what kind of performance could be expected from a APU with Vega?


^^^ (I see another ITX fan - we're starting to get common)
MUST have Asrock (??) WSI boards or some company releasing 6 SATA ITX boards so I can make a Node 304 FreeNAS beast.
Another ITX fan here, also happen to plan on making a Node 304 NAS.
 

Shintai

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,691
Even better if that is the case. Though what kind of performance could be expected from a APU with Vega?
Dont expect much different than today. Maybe 10-15% faster due to better compression. Current APUs are memory bandwidth starved.
 

4330thgink

Gawd
Joined
Mar 8, 2001
Messages
650
I dont "abandon" as such.

I ran AMD processors from 1999 to this year(still have AMD systems running), and I had some Intel systems from 1994'ish, even in the '99-'16 span of years.

However, after just switching from a Phenom II 945 to a 5820K main system, I'm not going to dump a wad of cash on an AMD Ryzen when the 5820K is already overkill for my immediate needs.
 

britjh22

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
384
Probably won't change from my 5820k, as it wouldn't be a major change. I might change my GF's build from an e5-2670 setup if it continues showing strange issues, but would probably go to the 4c/8t or 6c/12t, not the 8c/16t. I am eagerly awaiting Vega, as the 290x is starting to show it's age some.
 

AbRASiON

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 28, 2004
Messages
352
Even better if that is the case. Though what kind of performance could be expected from a APU with Vega?



Another ITX fan here, also happen to plan on making a Node 304 NAS.

Yeah my next NAS is looking like $1300 AUD if it's intel, Xeon chip, Asrock WSI board (so great) - ECC support, 32GB DDR4, nice and quiet components inside (as humanly possible)
I'd much prefer AMD, as long as many aspects of FreeNAS are coded for multi core situations. (I REALLY hope so)
I'd love to use a slightly weaker, 8 core CPU which still, overall delivers a more consistent experience and my jails (containers, soon - under docker) can do their thing, including transcoding, without impacting the whole thing too much.
Be lovely if a CPU could scale from say 15 to 25w up to 95 - that'd be nice.
Fingers crossed, really don't wanna buy a 65W Xeon.
 

efishta

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
182
I'm not going to be "abandoning" anything. Since Intel hasn't brought anything to market since my OC'ed i7-2700K that makes the platform upgrade cost effective (mobo, cpu & RAM), I haven't had a reason to upgrade.
I purchased AMD procs before because they provided the best bang for the buck prior to Conroe. Sandy Bridge's generation was a huge jump forward, so that's when I switched to team Intel. Now I'm hoping AMD will do the same, to spur competition and help my wallet out.

I've been running my OC'ed 290 for a while (bought here from another member) and I'm frankly amazed that it can still push so many games at eyefinity resolutions (3x1080p, nothing crazy). Because AMD has given me such a good value over the years, I do wish for them to be successful and I will be supporting them if this CPU & GPU tech is competitive.
 

Peter2k

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 25, 2016
Messages
309
If this ends up being 6900k at that price I'll be fucking amazed. Give me a good ocer and mitx and i could be sold.
mmm
I don't think so though

If AMD could clock Ryzen high they would

I'm also surprised people think AMD would just sell Ryzen at cost or something

Aside from the fact that the don't have to but just beat Intel by say 30% or so in price (which would still be expensive for a gaming rig), I'm confident that a 8 core/16 thread cpu just isn't easy enough to make (yield for instance) to sell them very lowly priced

I'd rather AMD makes a profit again
They can certainly use it


More interested on price and clock on 4/6 core Ryzen


But if someone actually works with a computer then a 30% cheaper 6900k alternative would surely be welcomed anyway


AMD has already said that the main CPU used in the demo will be $499 and the next one down will be $349.

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-desktop-zen-cpu-xfr/
All I see for prices are rumors

Not a single quote from AMD regarding price

Also notice in the list there's no difference between SR7 and the black edition
Since no one actually has specs on hand

A quick look and I'd think that a 6 core Ryzen for the listed 349$ is more realistic
As it undercuts Intels offer by a high enough margin (~100€)
 
Last edited:

pendragon1

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
15,821
Not a single quote from AMD regarding price
yeah there was that pic from china going around a couple weeks ago with prices but I'm pretty sure you are right and that it was not official and I don't recall Su mentioning price.
 

{NG}Fidel

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
6,287
mmm
I don't think so though

If AMD could clock Ryzen high they would

I'm also surprised people think AMD would just sell Ryzen at cost or something

Aside from the fact that the don't have to but just beat Intel by say 30% or so in price (which would still be expensive for a gaming rig), I'm confident that a 8 core/16 thread cpu just isn't easy enough to make (yield for instance) to sell them very lowly priced

I'd rather AMD makes a profit again
They can certainly use it


More interested on price and clock on 4/6 core Ryzen


But if someone actually works with a computer then a 30% cheaper 6900k alternative would surely be welcomed anyway




All I see for prices are rumors

Not a single quote from AMD regarding price

Also notice in the list there's no difference between SR7 and the black edition
Since no one actually has specs on hand

A quick look and I'd think that a 6 core Ryzen for the listed 349$ is more realistic
As it undercuts Intels offer by a high enough margin (~100€)
I don't know why people keep quoting me lol. I said i would be fucking amazed if that happens. That is me implying high levels of skepticism.
 

scoobert

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
265
Hell yes I will (IF) they build a proc in the same price range as a i5 6600K that will game as well. I was with AMD since the early CPU wars back in the days of Athlon vs Pentium. All the way up to this 4690K I am on now. I absolutely hated switching to this i5, which will instantly become my wife's facebook bingo game playing machine the second AMD releases a comparable performance/price combo.
 

Guarana [BAWLS]

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Messages
1,796
To each their own. Personally running NT6+ on anything for longer than an hour drives me insane. When I need to access a control panel item for example I have to click through 20 times more than on XP and have to use my brain to figure out which exact link I need to click, since apparently icons are no longer fashionable. It wastes my time I could be using doing something important, maybe you say that one time doesn't make a difference but in a day those times get compounded and it ends up making a difference. XP just works and it works the way a desktop OS is intended to, without the quirks without the bloat.

I don't understand you guys who have gotten used to it, maybe you have forgotten how good an OS was and you accept your NT6+ as optimum... in that case I feel sorry for you, I really do.
Heh, lemme tell you, running IT for a company whose primary user desktops are still Server 2003, it's a pain in the ass.
Browser compatibility died already, so that's a major issue right there...
 

aztekk

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2014
Messages
166
Heh, lemme tell you, running IT for a company whose primary user desktops are still Server 2003, it's a pain in the ass.
Browser compatibility died already, so that's a major issue right there...
Firefox's latest version still works on XP/2003... although I use Firefox 28 because I don't like the changes they made after 29 with the Aurora GUI and default font changes. If browser compatibility ends and I need a new browser, I'll just compile Firefox myself, no big deal.
 

ebduncan

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
2,005
I'm still on a FX 8320, granted I'm at 5ghz.

My next upgrade I will be strongly considering Zen, but the 6800k, or skylake-e around the corner may get the nod instead. We've still yet to see actual reviews and overclocking performance.
 

DeathFromBelow

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
Messages
7,316
If Zen still uses the dumb CMT that faildozer used then the only reason I'd get one of them is for an HTPC or low budget office machine.
Can we stop with the 'Faildozer' nonsense? I have an FX 8320 and an i7 4930k. I can't tell the difference between the two in 1080p games other than one made my wallet a lot lighter. The FX series was a great value, ''good enough' IPC for single-threaded programs and it's a beast for multi-threaded workloads, i7-level performance for less than the price of an i5.

I'm also rather annoyed that the POS ASUS x79 Deluxe I bought is dying already. My 5-year-old Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 AM3+ board was 1/3 the price and is still going strong with a 4.8 GHz overclock on the FX 8320.
 

Shintai

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,691
Can we stop with the 'Faildozer' nonsense? I have an FX 8320 and an i7 4930k. I can't tell the difference between the two in 1080p games other than one made my wallet a lot lighter. The FX series was a great value, ''good enough' IPC for single-threaded programs and it's a beast for multi-threaded workloads, i7-level performance for less than the price of an i5.

I'm also rather annoyed that the POS ASUS x79 Deluxe I bought is dying already. My 5-year-old Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 AM3+ board was 1/3 the price and is still going strong with a 4.8 GHz overclock on the FX 8320.
Even AMD said it was a failure. There are also people who cant tell the difference between an Atom and an i7 Core CPU. Doesn't mean there isn't any difference. Seems like you can avoid upgrading for a few more years.

Let me quote a VP and General Manager from AMD:
"Bulldozer was without doubt an unmitigated failure. We know it. It cost the CEO his job, it cost most of the management team its job, it cost the vice president of engineering his job. You have a new team. We are crystal clear that that sort of failure is unacceptable"
 

Comixbooks

Ignore Me
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
14,438
1- post here what processor brand/model you have now?
i have an intel i7-4770k that i have been stone waiting for some better to come to replace it with something faster for almost 2 years i think. i must say guys jumping from a 4770k to a 6900k to me is just amazing.

2- and how soon will you do it and for what price do you think the ryzen cpu is worth?
honestly!? for me, 5-6 months i'll have enough money to buy the mobo+cpu+memory.
i think $350 is reasonable or maybe $50 more is not too much to ask, say $400 for the cpu.

you guys?

AndreRio where have you been

What country are you from I always wanted to ask....
 

noko

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
4,616
For those that know what they are doing, put in the leg work and with some luck can get good performance from AMD FX line of processors. That being said, I can't wait to get rid of one of mine with a true upgrade.
 

jhatfie

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 19, 2003
Messages
1,461
I'm 99% sure be picking at least one up. Have several computers in my house and I think I can find an excuse good enough to convince myself that it could use an upgrade. ;)
 

Hagrid

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Nov 23, 2006
Messages
8,640
The Naples looks interesting. Dual cpu, 64 cores and 128 threads. Wonder what the price starts on a cpu....
 
Top