Who's planning to buy Zen?

Straight up! Are you buying a Zen?

  • Total voters
    415
tangoseal said:
I get so tired of people comparing productivity processors to gaming processors.

a Quad core running at 4.0ghz is going to perform better by far, pound for pount, than a 16 core at 3.4ghz. Stop the lame and idiotic comparison.

Don't buy the damn octacore if you don't want a powerhouse multithreaded productivity platform. Go for the fastes core clocked processor you can get for gaming. But please above all else stop with the fucking I7 quad is much faster in gaming thus the ZEN is a piece of shit argument.

I as well as probably 90% of others are sick and tired of this crap.
Click to expand...

This, and it's what I'm waiting for as well. I want something new that is highly threaded and affordable to replace my workstation.
 
There is a middle ground. To me that is what a 6c would represent. Not clocked as highly as the 4c but not as low as the 8c. Kind of a compromise between the two.
 
As far as pricing is concerned, if anything, I think they should err on the high side for what the performance warrants. They need Ryzen to improve their bottom line and it won't help them if they get into a price war with Intel. Additionally, it is always easier to lower prices if they aren't selling well than it would be to increase prices if they are selling out (if priced too low initially). While I would love to pick up an 8C/16T Ryzen at bargain prices I don't think it will happen (unless performance is crap).

I also don't think AMD should concern themselves so much about growing market-share at the cost of leaving money on the table. They need to get back to profitability ASAP.
 
Well it depends on volume of sales really plus customers that buy your 8C16T cpu are not likely to go shopping for a new one any time soon. That would also be better for brand recognition if AMD is selling their product like crazy.
 
well if AMD demoed this chip right this 8 core is beastmode and I have a date with Microcenter in the next few weeks once the reviews start rolling out. Reviews should release as soon as NDA is lifted days or perhaps a week in advance.
 
I wonder if AMD is making a mistake releasing Ryzen and Vega at separate times. If I was going back AMD, would be nice to get a CPU/GPU combo, especially since AMD has hinted theres some tweaks to make them perform better together.

I know two launches at once might not be easy, but I'm getting the feeling Ryzen is going to be easy to get soon at release and it will be a while for Vega.

Probably sticking with Intel/Nvidia for this reason, but will wait for the Ryzen benches first.
 
Schmave said:
As far as pricing is concerned, if anything, I think they should err on the high side for what the performance warrants. They need Ryzen to improve their bottom line and it won't help them if they get into a price war with Intel. Additionally, it is always easier to lower prices if they aren't selling well than it would be to increase prices if they are selling out (if priced too low initially). While I would love to pick up an 8C/16T Ryzen at bargain prices I don't think it will happen (unless performance is crap).

I also don't think AMD should concern themselves so much about growing market-share at the cost of leaving money on the table. They need to get back to profitability ASAP.
Click to expand...
tangoseal said:
well if AMD demoed this chip right this 8 core is beastmode and I have a date with Microcenter in the next few weeks once the reviews start rolling out. Reviews should release as soon as NDA is lifted days or perhaps a week in advance.
Click to expand...

That is illogical. They have to get into a price war with Intel. If the ryzen 8 core is close to 6900K price NO ONE would buy it. You not only want to capture Intel 6900K customers you want to widen the userbase and customer demand to triple or quadruple the number of potential customers for this high end product. It has to come in below $600 or it will not grab enough market share. No use selling it for the highest marginal rate of profit unless you can sell a whole lot of them, not just a niche amount. Remember it is INtel who has to be careful here not AMD. If Intel undercut AMD's price with their 6900K they would be violating anti-trustlaws for monopolistic predatory behavior. Foregoing profit to drive the competition out of business is illegal under current antitrust statutes. The question is would they enforce the law since Intel greases a lot of palms of politicians.
 
Last edited:
os2wiz said:
That is illogical. They have to get into a price war with Intel. If the ryzen 8 core is close to 6900K price NO ONE would buy it. You not only want to capture Intel 6900K customers you want to widen the userbase and customer demand to triple or quadruple the number of potential customers for this high end product. It has to come in below $600 or it will not grab enough market share. No use selling it for the highest marginal rate of profit unless you can sell a whole lot of them, not just a niche amount. Remember it is INtel who has to be careful here not AMD. If Intel undercut AMD's price with their 6900K they would be violating anti-trustlaws for monopolistic predatory behavior. Foregoing profit to drive the competition out of business is illegal under current antitrust statutes. The question is would they enforce the law since Intel greases a lot of palms of politicians.
Click to expand...


Why did you quote me? All I said was I have a date with microcenter to buy one.
 
frunction said:
I wonder if AMD is making a mistake releasing Ryzen and Vega at separate times. If I was going back AMD, would be nice to get a CPU/GPU combo, especially since AMD has hinted theres some tweaks to make them perform better together.

I know two launches at once might not be easy, but I'm getting the feeling Ryzen is going to be easy to get soon at release and it will be a while for Vega.

Probably sticking with Intel/Nvidia for this reason, but will wait for the Ryzen benches first.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately as buttery and tasty as Vega looks to me to couple with my future 8c Zen, I have an Acer X34 GSync panel.... sigh.... I could always just forgo using Gsync and still use the Vega card at 100hz. Byt Gsync so so buttery smooth. I have a 980ti and thus far it can push this screen pretty good and smooth. But I am going to re-buy my previously returned Oculus Rift and get back into VR gaming so Vega is sure to be a powerhouse for VR where Gsync has no form or function or freesync for that matter.
 
os2wiz said:
That is illogical. They have to get into a price war with Intel. If the ryzen 8 core is close to 6900K price NO ONE would buy it. You not only want to capture Intel 6900K customers you want to widen the userbase and customer demand to triple or quadruple the number of potential customers for this high end product. It has to come in below $600 or it will not grab enough market share. No use selling it for the highest marginal rate of profit unless you can sell a whole lot of them, not just a niche amount. Remember it is INtel who has to be careful here not AMD. If Intel undercut AMD's price with their 6900K they would be violating anti-trustlaws for monopolistic predatory behavior. Foregoing profit to drive the competition out of business is illegal under current antitrust statutes. The question is would they enforce the law since Intel greases a lot of palms of politicians.
Click to expand...
How is that illogical? I'm talking about using the optimal "pricing curve" to maximize their profits from Ryzen. I'm not saying they should charge the same price as Intel for equivalent performance, but I'm also saying they shouldn't undercut Intel by 50% just to gain market share. Remember, you can't lose money on each sale but make it up in volume...

Something like this:
gabor_granger.gif
 
Last edited:
I think, I'm going to wait to see performance comparisons and temps.
No matter what, AMD should offer cheaper CPU's than Intel's. There is no way I could buy one that is more expensive. Doesn't matter if it's a little bit faster.
 
I would like to use Corsair h115i cooler but they haven't made any announcement on AM4 compatibility. If you buy now there probably won't be any bracket included for it.
 
Gideon said:
Oh so that is why cpu sales have been way down, cause it's optimal.
Click to expand...

Even if a 7700K was 100$ it wouldn't change volume for more than a year or 2 at best. Then it would be lower than original again.

You must have missed the reason why volume goes down.
 
Shintai said:
Even if a 7700K was 100$ it wouldn't change volume for more than a year or 2 at best. Then it would be lower than original again.

You must have missed the reason why volume goes down.
Click to expand...

Nope volume goes down when it's over priced compared to what you already have. 5% gain or less in a cpu generation is a joke. Intel knows this so they keep the price high to keep the ASP's up where investors like it. They keep their dual cores low priced cause they know they will sell the volume there. Intel killed their own assured market by not making a chip that was much better then the current ones and people just dont feel the need to upgrade for the tiny amount they will gain. Make a crap product you get crap sales, nothing new, in the automotive world is called stretching a product. You know it's long in the tooth and offers no real improvement but you roll it out anyway and say it's new and improved, even tho it's the same crap with a new wrapper. You do this when you just want to milk the market for a bit more cash before you invest in a new platform and frankly that is what Intel is doing and why volume is way down.
 
Gideon said:
Nope volume goes down when it's over priced compared to what you already have. 5% gain or less in a cpu generation is a joke. Intel knows this so they keep the price high to keep the ASP's up where investors like it. They keep their dual cores low priced cause they know they will sell the volume there. Intel killed their own assured market by not making a chip that was much better then the current ones and people just dont feel the need to upgrade for the tiny amount they will gain. Make a crap product you get crap sales, nothing new, in the automotive world is called stretching a product. You know it's long in the tooth and offers no real improvement but you roll it out anyway and say it's new and improved, even tho it's the same crap with a new wrapper. You do this when you just want to milk the market for a bit more cash before you invest in a new platform and frankly that is what Intel is doing and why volume is way down.
Click to expand...

Why isn't AMD selling a countless CPUs? Its just a different tier but the same applies.
 
Shintai said:
Why isn't AMD selling a countless CPUs? Its just a different tier but the same applies.
Click to expand...

Who cares if AMD is selling countless CPUs at all. Their existing architecture is old in computer years, they are releasing something entirely new very shortly and what they are releasing is considerably faster than what they are selling right now. Facts are pesky little things, they do not change just because you do not believe them.
 
ManofGod said:
Who cares if AMD is selling countless CPUs at all. Their existing architecture is old in computer years, they are releasing something entirely new very shortly and what they are releasing is considerably faster than what they are selling right now. Facts are pesky little things, they do not change just because you do not believe them.
Click to expand...

So the market volume is the issue not the price. Thanks for confirming it :)

When you just check email or facebook you dont need a PC.
 
Shintai said:
So the market volume is the issue not the price. Thanks for confirming it :)

When you just check email or facebook you dont need a PC.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? I have no idea what you are getting at nor will I be caught up in you BS political process. Enjoy you lonely echo chamber.
 
This price/demand/profit curve only works in a monopoly situation. Intel was/is in a monopoly in x86 CPUs.

Even if AMD have a winner with Ryzen, they would need to be able to produce enough CPUs in order to change this. Which is not at all given if you look at the company history.
 
chithanh said:
This price/demand/profit curve only works in a monopoly situation. Intel was/is in a monopoly in x86 CPUs.

Even if AMD have a winner with Ryzen, they would need to be able to produce enough CPUs in order to change this. Which is not at all given if you look at the company history.
Click to expand...

It works fine in competition as well. Smartphones is a class example. Nobody is going to price their product lower than they have to.
 
Shintai said:
It works fine in competition as well. Smartphones is a class example. Nobody is going to price their product lower than they have to.
Click to expand...

Why don't you tell that to people that live in areas where they have Comcast and AT&T and or several of the other of these so called Internet "service" providers.

Smart phones are overpriced to begin with and tend to start sucking badly if you have problems with them.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
Why don't you tell that to people that live in areas where they have Comcast and AT&T and or several of the other of these so called Internet "service" providers.

Smart phones are overpriced to begin with and tend to start sucking badly if you have problems with them.
Click to expand...

I think you confuse product groups (utility) and isolate it to a single country.

It doesn't matter if you think its overpriced or not. They sell for what they sell at due to the graph shown.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
Why don't you tell that to people that live in areas where they have Comcast and AT&T and or several of the other of these so called Internet "service" providers.

Smart phones are overpriced to begin with and tend to start sucking badly if you have problems with them.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure what you are talking about, but in NYC, Manhattan, you can't even get comcast here, you need to stick with timewarner (now spectrum), if you want the fastest available connection. You are stuck with regional services everywhere with utilities, that is kinda different than the cell phone market.
 
Shintai said:
Why isn't AMD selling a countless CPUs? Its just a different tier but the same applies.
Click to expand...

Umm gee I don't know , maybe cause their main cpu is older then dirt and competes nowhere anymore. I mean that was not even a good answer to what I wrote which was focused on Intel for a reason.
 
Gideon said:
Umm gee I don't know , maybe cause their main cpu is older then dirt and competes nowhere anymore. I mean that was not even a good answer to what I wrote which was focused on Intel for a reason.
Click to expand...

Yes, because you wished to do it one sided because else your argument wouldn't hold.

PC volume declines for natural reasons. And it declines far more in the lower end than in the top. You know, the range with APUs, Celerons, Pentiums and perhaps a few i3. So you are saying these parts are overpriced, while K parts makes record volume sales that contradict your statement.

So reality is:
PC segment shrinks.
PC buyers move up in SKUs.

Nothing will magically change this.
 
Shintai said:
It works fine in competition as well. Smartphones is a class example. Nobody is going to price their product lower than they have to.
Click to expand...
Actually, smartphones is an example of monopoly vs. competition.
Apple has a monopoly on iOS smartphones so can price them in a way which maximizes profits at the expense of unit sales.
Samsung and other Android vendors are seeing their high-end business under pressure from mid-range phones that are "good enough" for most customers. Add to that the move away from carrier subsidies which hide the true cost of smartphones in developed markets. Smartphone ASP is approaching $250.
 
chithanh said:
Actually, smartphones is an example of monopoly vs. competition.
Apple has a monopoly on iOS smartphones so can price them in a way which maximizes profits at the expense of unit sales.
Samsung and other Android vendors are seeing their high-end business under pressure from mid-range phones that are "good enough" for most customers. Add to that the move away from carrier subsidies which hide the true cost of smartphones in developed markets. Smartphone ASP is approaching $250.
Click to expand...

How much is Samsungs profit on smartphones again? Even just after the "note" they made 2.1 billion profit from the quarter on smartphones alone.
 
chithanh said:
This price/demand/profit curve only works in a monopoly situation. Intel was/is in a monopoly in x86 CPUs.

Even if AMD have a winner with Ryzen, they would need to be able to produce enough CPUs in order to change this. Which is not at all given if you look at the company history.
Click to expand...

With GF#8 foundry available, AMD can easily triple their market share to 30% of market or more if they can sell them.
 
Shintai said:
How much is Samsungs profit on smartphones again? Even just after the "note" they made 2.1 billion profit from the quarter on smartphones alone.
Click to expand...
Apple now owns around half of the high-end smartphone market, despite declining unit sales.
Samsung declines too, but is hit much harder by people opting for mid-range over high-end smartphones.
The rest of the Android makers lives mostly on slim margins.

In economic terms, the mid-range Android smartphone is a substitute of the high-end Android smartphone. With iOS, there is basically no mid-range substitute, except older models.

os2wiz said:
With GF#8 foundry available, AMD can easily triple their market share to 30% of market or more if they can sell them.
Click to expand...
Only if we assume that AMD can have that foundry's capacity at will, and it wasn't yet assigned to other customers.
I understand that when Brazos/Zacate was released, in the first months TSMC did not make enough of them to satisfy demand. This is why I am not completely optimistic that AMD can avert a repeat of the previous time they had a successful CPU.
 
ManofGod said:
Who cares if AMD is selling countless CPUs at all. Their existing architecture is old in computer years, they are releasing something entirely new very shortly and what they are releasing is considerably faster than what they are selling right now. Facts are pesky little things, they do not change just because you do not believe them.
Click to expand...

Clearly you don't work for Donald Trump :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top