Who's planning to buy Zen?

[noko]

Yes and 7700K got 44 PCIe 3.0 lanes with Z170 as well, right?

Oh wait, that's right, it got paired with a chipset so those lanes vanished and it ends up as 40!

Users dont have 32 lanes to work with on Ryzen, they have 26 or 28 with X370 depending on SATA configuration. And 8 of those are PCIe 2.0.

Is the I/O options on Ryzen really so bad that we have discuss this crap and make up numbers just to make it look better? Just accept it and get a PLX chip if you feel you miss some lanes. Its not something new and have been done for ages on both Intel and AMD.

What´s next. Are we going to count the 4 lanes to the CPU on the chipset as well? Then Ryzen can have 36 lanes!

For one who gives a shit? Ryzen has 24 pcie 3 lanes from the cpu - get it? 7700K has how many pcie 3 lanes from the CPU? Just numbers. Nothing about users getting to work with BS criteria. You can Google it and find many references and facts about the number of pcie 3 lanes. No one making up shit other then you.

To me the platform looks limited for multi-GPU usage of future GPU technology. Only thing that would stress 8x/8x PCIe 3 today are two Titan X Pascals. A year or more I see it more restrictive.

 

[os2wiz]

Wow man 28 threads lol... thats gonna be one heck of a productivity chip!

Not an 8 core rival of 6900K for less than $400. You must be joking. $500 is a damn good price if they bring it in at that level.

 

[Dayaks]

In Overwatch? Do you have benchmarks to share? What clockspeeds are we talking?

If all cores are in use, the 5960X only goes up to 3.3ghz boost, not 3.5ghz, making it 600mhz slower than an all core boosted 6600K at stock if I'm reading things correctly (3.9ghz all core boost limited).

You really need to compare OC to OC because we're at [H] here.

My daily 5960x OC is 4.6Ghz and I ran it at 4.8Ghz for a few months.

To me the platform looks limited for multi-GPU usage of future GPU technology. Only thing that would stress 8x/8x PCIe 3 today are two Titan X Pascals. A year or more I see it more restrictive.

Well, multiGPU sucks regardless if you have 2x16 or 2x8 PCIe 3.0. . I personally see nothing wrong with AMD's lane counts for 99% of users.

 

[noko]

You really need to compare OC to OC because we're at [H] here.

My daily 5960x OC is 4.6Ghz and I ran it at 4.8Ghz for a few months.



Well, multiGPU sucks regardless if you have 2x16 or 2x8 PCIe 3.0. . I personally see nothing wrong with AMD's lane counts for 99% of users.

Yes, but I am that 1% user - we do exist

For a SFF system though - Ryzen maybe the best high performance option coming up and the limited PCIe lanes would not be a factor (except for the .01% of the 1%, not me though, that would be Kyle)

 

[Shintai]

I thought you did that when you kept posting that benchlife FM3 picture which you knew was not accurate .

Tell me how they wasn't accurate. Dont they match both the I/O options on Bristol Ridge and Summit Ridge perfectly? Looking forward to your differences

 

[Shintai]

For one who gives a shit? Ryzen has 24 pcie 3 lanes from the cpu - get it? 7700K has how many pcie 3 lanes from the CPU? Just numbers. Nothing about users getting to work with BS criteria. You can Google it and find many references and facts about the number of pcie 3 lanes. No one making up shit other then you.

To me the platform looks limited for multi-GPU usage of future GPU technology. Only thing that would stress 8x/8x PCIe 3 today are two Titan X Pascals. A year or more I see it more restrictive.

When you claim or report that it got 32 lanes you are making up or reposting shit

And again if you think it got 24 useable PCIe 3.0 lanes from a users perspective.

Nobody claims a LGA11xx chip or a FM1/FM2(+) chip got 20 PCIe lanes either. Or that a HEDT CPU got 32/44 lanes. Because it would be complete idiocy to do so when you cant use them. You could just as well report that Ryzen ships with 2 GMI links too.

 

[os2wiz]

When you claim or report that it got 32 lanes you are making up or reposting shit

And again if you think it got 24 useable PCIe 3.0 lanes from a users perspective.

Nobody claims a LGA11xx chip or a FM1/FM2(+) chip got 20 PCIe lanes either. Or that a HEDT CPU got 32/44 lanes. Because it would be complete idiocy to do so when you cant use them. You could just as well report that Ryzen ships with 2 GMI links too.

There will be boards with pcx chips added that will provide additional lanes for the few like you who may need it. Probably the ROG Crosshair 6 Formula board will have that optionl It is a stupid option only required for the juvenile few who need bragging rights on synthetic benchmarks.

 

[Luka]

My feeling is that it will beat a 5960X on IPC, and use additional clockspeed(3.6-4) to match the 6900(3.3/3.7). Per Cinebench a [email protected] scores 151/1547 assuming the presumption on the data leaked is correct a Ryzen at 4ghz would score 159/1533,. That is maybe the sales pitch but a very interesting one.

i7 5960k can run at 4.4Ghz easily, it is not going to beat anything.

 

[Luka]

What do you need 40 lanes for? The days of 4x sli and xfire are long over. Even add in cards dont use that many lanes.

For two video cards to run in 16x plus additional stuff. Anything < 40 is not enough, heck i could use more than 40

 

[Luka]

Not an 8 core rival of 6900K for less than $400. You must be joking. $500 is a damn good price if they bring it in at that level.

$500 is a horrible price if it ends up slower than 7700K in the gaming and you bet it will by a good margin and that's why AMD did some testing against LGA 2011-3 which perform slower not due being worse chip than 7700K but having lower frequency. Well AMD forgot that LGA 2011-3 CPUs can be overclock the shit out of them too. Official comparison is going to be default clock vs. clock and Ryzen has nothing against Kaby Lake which would at that point be $150 cheaper. Again, AMD purposely didn't compare Ryzen against Skylake and if Ryzen was any that good AMD would have shit load of performance graphs already.

Ryzen is going to be a disappointment just like RX480 was but at least RX480 is not $500. I can't wait to get this baloney out of way.

 

[drescherjm]

$500 is a horrible price if it ends up slower than 7700K in the gaming

I don't hold this opinion. What does that say about Intel's 8C / 16T that is also slower than the i7 7700K in gaming?


There will be lower core count Ryzen CPUs that will have a lower price than the 8C / 16T and I expect them to have a higher stock clock as well. These will compete against the i7 7700K in gaming and other tasks where you don't benefit from 16 threads.

 

[JustReason]

$500 is a horrible price if it ends up slower than 7700K in the gaming and you bet it will by a good margin and that's why AMD did some testing against LGA 2011-3 which perform slower not due being worse chip than 7700K but having lower frequency. Well AMD forgot that LGA 2011-3 CPUs can be overclock the shit out of them too. Official comparison is going to be default clock vs. clock and Ryzen has nothing against Kaby Lake which would at that point be $150 cheaper. Again, AMD purposely didn't compare Ryzen against Skylake and if Ryzen was any that good AMD would have shit load of performance graphs already.

Ryzen is going to be a disappointment just like RX480 was but at least RX480 is not $500. I can't wait to get this baloney out of way.

seriously you are comparing 8-4 cores. It's just asinine. 4 cores generally are clocked higher to begin with. Your ignorance and obvious bias make every statement of yours laughable.

 

[Riptide_NVN]

To me it is going to boil down to the performance/$ of the 6c Ryzen model vs. the 6800/6850K.

 

[noko]

When you claim or report that it got 32 lanes you are making up or reposting shit

And again if you think it got 24 useable PCIe 3.0 lanes from a users perspective.

Nobody claims a LGA11xx chip or a FM1/FM2(+) chip got 20 PCIe lanes either. Or that a HEDT CPU got 32/44 lanes. Because it would be complete idiocy to do so when you cant use them. You could just as well report that Ryzen ships with 2 GMI links too.

Well you don't have to stumble over the toilet. The cpu has 24 PCIe lanes. How used and if you can configure them is something else. Supposedly the 4 pcie 3 lanes talking to the X370 chipset can be configured by the board manufacturer for other uses - not sure what uses you can use it for since of the limited number of lanes to begin with. I suppose board manufacturer could PLX the 4 pcie lanes going to the chipset to get more PCIe 3 to a storage device - not sure how well that would work with mixed workloads.

Now just a matter of time to see how well or not everything works together. I hope HardOCP really gets down and push the tests and up the tests using a more user experience type test. As in virus scan, download in progress and then a game bench. Stuff that happens routinely but not really looked at. Video playing on one monitor, Steam game download while rendering would be another good one. Normal workloads in other words.

 

[os2wiz]

$500 is a horrible price if it ends up slower than 7700K in the gaming and you bet it will by a good margin and that's why AMD did some testing against LGA 2011-3 which perform slower not due being worse chip than 7700K but having lower frequency. Well AMD forgot that LGA 2011-3 CPUs can be overclock the shit out of them too. Official comparison is going to be default clock vs. clock and Ryzen has nothing against Kaby Lake which would at that point be $150 cheaper. Again, AMD purposely didn't compare Ryzen against Skylake and if Ryzen was any that good AMD would have shit load of performance graphs already.

Ryzen is going to be a disappointment just like RX480 was but at least RX480 is not $500. I can't wait to get this baloney out of way.

That is nonsense. You do not need 7700K single thread performance to run ANY game. If it is 85% of Kaby Lake at Haswell or Broadwell IPC, that is more than good enough not to cause cpu throttling if graphics. Where do you get yor ideas from??? Do you care about game performance, or abstract synthetic single thread benchmarks. Imaginary world performance of a cpu means nothing unless it is correlated to real world performance. You obviously do NOT need or want an 8 core chip as you are a one dimensional computer user. For streaming you can NOT beat or meet Ryzen. For databases it will kick your 7700K to the curb, for video encoding your 7700k is in the garbage heap compared to Ryzen. For gaming they are equals, not by a benchmark but by visible performance. Stop ranting and start thinking please. I do not mean this as an insult but merely it is time you wake up and use your brain power instead of throwing out a lot of rote mutterings. I understand your concerns, but Ryzen will be a very respectable performer.

 

[os2wiz]

$500 is a horrible price if it ends up slower than 7700K in the gaming and you bet it will by a good margin and that's why AMD did some testing against LGA 2011-3 which perform slower not due being worse chip than 7700K but having lower frequency. Well AMD forgot that LGA 2011-3 CPUs can be overclock the shit out of them too. Official comparison is going to be default clock vs. clock and Ryzen has nothing against Kaby Lake which would at that point be $150 cheaper. Again, AMD purposely didn't compare Ryzen against Skylake and if Ryzen was any that good AMD would have shit load of performance graphs already.

Ryzen is going to be a disappointment just like RX480 was but at least RX480 is not $500. I can't wait to get this baloney out of way.

If you are strictly a gamer than you are not a computer user to me. I like to work and accomplish real things in a real world. You are nto going to do real work with your toy 4 core 7700K. Ryzen may not be the winner on your silly synthetic single thread benchmarks, but it can play every single game on the market without a hiccup. Your gaming will NOT be throttled with Ryzen. That is all that matters.

 

[tangoseal]

If you are strictly a gamer than you are not a computer user to me. I like to work and accomplish real things in a real world. You are nto going to do real work with your toy 4 core 7700K. Ryzen may not be the winner on your silly synthetic single thread benchmarks, but it can play every single game on the market without a hiccup. Your gaming will NOT be throttled with Ryzen. That is all that matters.

 

[Shintai]

Well you don't have to stumble over the toilet. The cpu has 24 PCIe lanes. How used and if you can configure them is something else. Supposedly the 4 pcie 3 lanes talking to the X370 chipset can be configured by the board manufacturer for other uses - not sure what uses you can use it for since of the limited number of lanes to begin with. I suppose board manufacturer could PLX the 4 pcie lanes going to the chipset to get more PCIe 3 to a storage device - not sure how well that would work with mixed workloads.

Now just a matter of time to see how well or not everything works together. I hope HardOCP really gets down and push the tests and up the tests using a more user experience type test. As in virus scan, download in progress and then a game bench. Stuff that happens routinely but not really looked at. Video playing on one monitor, Steam game download while rendering would be another good one. Normal workloads in other words.

Ryzen doesn't do anything new in these matters that haven't been done for a long, long time. You just add a PLX chip to the 16 CPU lanes and be done with it. It doesn't limit you and its a practice that's been done for ages. Anything else is just plain silly. How many boards since PLX style chips got into boards have you seen with one on the chipset link? There is a reason why you haven't.

 

[Shintai]

More leaks seems to indicate there is only 8C/16T, 8C/8T (SMT disabled) and 4C/8T (Entire CCX disabled) as SKUs.

Also a Biostar boards:

 

[realworld]

SR3 with 4c8t going against i3? If so that's a game changer.

 

[buttons]

For two video cards to run in 16x plus additional stuff. Anything < 40 is not enough, heck i could use more than 40

What do you need 40 for? Besides synthetic benchmarks i have wait to find a compelling reason to crossfire or SLI. I have 14 Video cards right now, i still have not seen a game i want to play support or a game i do play benefit from it. Benefit meaning the quality of the gameplay is improved.

 

[drescherjm]

SR3 with 4c8t going against i3? If so that's a game changer.

There is a rumor that the next gen i3s will be 4C / 4T. i5s will be 4C / 8T and i7s will be 6C / 12T.

I do expect the 4C Zen to be $1XX US so this would overlap with the current i3 pricing.

 

[Magic Hate Ball]

You really need to compare OC to OC because we're at [H] here.

My daily 5960x OC is 4.6Ghz and I ran it at 4.8Ghz for a few months.

I was talking about results within a specific benchmark test of Overwatch, comparing how different core count chips run at stock. We have no idea how well the Ryzen will OC, so yes OC vs OC is a yet to be seen result.

You can't say "I run at 4.6ghz, therefore my chip is better" when you can't say the Ryzen won't clock equally well. It is an unknown variable yet to be determined, and I look forward to knowing how it turns out.

 

[Dayaks]

I was talking about results within a specific benchmark test of Overwatch, comparing how different core count chips run at stock. We have no idea how well the Ryzen will OC, so yes OC vs OC is a yet to be seen result.

You can't say "I run at 4.6ghz, therefore my chip is better" when you can't say the Ryzen won't clock equally well. It is an unknown variable yet to be determined, and I look forward to knowing how it turns out.

I'm just saying don't use 3.3Ghz or 3.5 Ghz... not sure if I've seen anyone run under 4.4 Ghz on here. I never said anything about it being better, just compare apples to apples, which for us is OC vs OC. Anyone that believes anything from AMD is a fool anyways.. so of course you have to wait.

 

[Magic Hate Ball]

I'm just saying don't use 3.3Ghz or 3.5 Ghz... not sure if I've seen anyone run under 4.4 Ghz on here. I never said anything about it being better, just compare apples to apples, which for us is OC vs OC. Anyone that believes anything from AMD is a fool anyways.. so of course you have to wait.

My point was people saying more than 4 cores is pointless for gaming need to look at the AAA title benchmarks like Overwatch where 6+ core i7's are beating significantly higher clocked 4c/4t chips in that particular benchmark.

 

[variant]

My point was people saying more than 4 cores is pointless for gaming need to look at the AAA title benchmarks like Overwatch where 6+ core i7's are beating significantly higher clocked 4c/4t chips in that particular benchmark.

People and benchmark websites have a habit of living in the past and look at games released years ago.

 

[Bandalo]

What do you need 40 for? Besides synthetic benchmarks i have wait to find a compelling reason to crossfire or SLI. I have 14 Video cards right now, i still have not seen a game i want to play support or a game i do play benefit from it. Benefit meaning the quality of the gameplay is improved.

I don't know if I need 40, but you need more than 20. And the big reason is m.2 drives. As they get more popular, you're going to need more dedicated lanes. Right now most board/CPU combos will limit you to one 16x video card and one 4x SSD...What if I wanted to add another SSD? Or two? Or maybe upgrade to a 10G network card?

 

[buttons]

We all know going from a platter drive to an SSD makes a big difference. But is it a tangible difference going from a good quality ssd to a m.2? I don't have an m.2 installed so i cant comment, but does the computer boot faster, are the load times better or feel about the same -- unless your doing a copy / paste 10gb file from to another?

 

[Shintai]

We all know going from a platter drive to an SSD makes a big difference. But is it a tangible difference going from a good quality ssd to a m.2? I don't have an m.2 installed so i cant comment, but does the computer boot faster, are the load times better or feel about the same -- unless your doing a copy / paste 10gb file from to another?

SSD and M.2 as such is the same. You can also have an external SSD via a U.2 link (M.2 with cable). And M.2 can be a SATA based SSD too.

I guess what you ask is if there is a big difference between a 600MB/sec SATA drive and a 2GB/sec PCIe drive? No (Besides copy etc), but there is a difference if the NVME one is 3DXpoint(Optane/QuantX) based due to seek times going down with a factor 10 or more.

In the far future it may change tho, as applications and games etc gets designed for faster storage as the lowest denominator. But that's not anytime soon. In the future SATA is gone too in favour of PCIe.

The big move was when we left the incredible slow HDs. This Gigabyte presentation is a good example of it.

 

[noko]

SSD and M.2 as such is the same. You can also have an external SSD via a U.2 link (M.2 with cable). And M.2 can be a SATA based SSD too.

I guess what you ask is if there is a big difference between a 600MB/sec SATA drive and a 2GB/sec PCIe drive? No (Besides copy etc), but there is a difference if the NVME one is 3DXpoint(Optane/QuantX) based due to seek times going down with a factor 10 or more.

In the far future it may change tho, as applications and games etc gets designed for faster storage as the lowest denominator. But that's not anytime soon. In the future SATA is gone too in favour of PCIe.

The big move was when we left the incredible slow HDs. This Gigabyte presentation is a good example of it.

Interesting, I put a NVMe M.2 Intel 1tb in the I7 rig, didn't expect to see a performance difference but that is exactly what I saw. Previously was a 512gb Samsung 850 EVO SATA3. Anyways I installed a fresh copy of Windows and let Steam find all the old game data files that I copied to the new drive. That is where I saw a huge difference, I say about 3x+ in getting the game ready to play with the game files already on the computer. Now it also boots up noticeably faster but that maybe due to the new installation of Windows. So for fast access of files, it is definitely faster than SATA

 

[noko]

More leaks seems to indicate there is only 8C/16T, 8C/8T (SMT disabled) and 4C/8T (Entire CCX disabled) as SKUs.
View attachment 15512

Also a Biostar boards:
View attachment 15513
View attachment 15511

Good find there on the CPU's, could just be the initial bios limitations though. Now I've havn't bought a Biostar motherboard in ages. These look nice though and hopefully they get tested here.

 

[Shintai]

Interesting, I put a NVMe M.2 Intel 1tb in the I7 rig, didn't expect to see a performance difference but that is exactly what I saw. Previously was a 512gb Samsung 850 EVO SATA3. Anyways I installed a fresh copy of Windows and let Steam find all the old game data files that I copied to the new drive. That is where I saw a huge difference, I say about 3x+ in getting the game ready to play with the game files already on the computer. Now it also boots up noticeably faster but that maybe due to the new installation of Windows. So for fast access of files, it is definitely faster than SATA

Nobody never questioned the raw speed. But the usage of said speed is very limited for regular usage. What gives the SSD night and day experience is the seek time.

Good find there on the CPU's, could just be the initial bios limitations though. Now I've havn't bought a Biostar motherboard in ages. These look nice though and hopefully they get tested here.

BIOS limitation? How so?

 

[noko]

Nobody never questioned the raw speed. But the usage of said speed is very limited for regular usage.

I think it backs up the data you linked to on seek timings - basically Steam was finding already existing files way faster with the NVME drive. Did same process a number of times previously and also with the 850 EVO drive when first installed on the same build. As for game loading I am not noticing that much difference or for other stuff. Windows 10 does boot up faster is the only other noticeable difference.

Oops, I linked your CPU chart with the Biostar motherboards. We just have to wait and see what is initially launched and then what is later launched.

 

[Jedibeeftrix]

At the price it is likely to sell for 24x PCIe 3.0 lanes is perfectly acceptable.
16x for the GPU
4x for the chipset
4x for M.2

 

[Bandalo]

We all know going from a platter drive to an SSD makes a big difference. But is it a tangible difference going from a good quality ssd to a m.2? I don't have an m.2 installed so i cant comment, but does the computer boot faster, are the load times better or feel about the same -- unless your doing a copy / paste 10gb file from to another?

Well, speed isn't the only advantage of M.2. They're lower power, 2 fewer cables needed, smaller, etc. PLUS they're faster, and the price difference between that an SSD is becoming negligible. The only reason SSDs use SATA still is backwards compatibility, it's a huge bottleneck to their capability.

 

[noko]

Forbes has some pricing for Ryzen:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/antonyl...s-release-date-and-motherboards/#9e42e83a9549

Looks there will be two 8c/16t parts under SR7, one for $580 and the other $720. The other skews the pricing is ?

 

[Shintai]

Forbes has some pricing for Ryzen:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/antonyl...s-release-date-and-motherboards/#9e42e83a9549

Looks there will be two 8c/16t parts under SR7, one for $580 and the other $720. The other skews the pricing is ?

That's just a blatant copy of what's already posted a week ago

https://hardforum.com/threads/whos-planning-to-buy-zen.1917972/page-8#post-1042768051

 

[/usr/sbin]

Forbes has some pricing for Ryzen:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/antonyl...s-release-date-and-motherboards/#9e42e83a9549

Looks there will be two 8c/16t parts under SR7, one for $580 and the other $720. The other skews the pricing is ?

From that Article:
.....I've seen rumors of 6-core parts with 12 threads, similar to Intel's $600 Core i7-6850K retailing for around $250 and the SR3 - potentially a 4-core part with 8 threads has been rumored to land at around $150....

If that turns out to be true and has Haswell IPC, I'll be grabbing that 6 core unit.

 

[Nirad9er]

From that Article:
.....I've seen rumors of 6-core parts with 12 threads, similar to Intel's $600 Core i7-6850K retailing for around $250 and the SR3 - potentially a 4-core part with 8 threads has been rumored to land at around $150....

If that turns out to be true and has Haswell IPC, I'll be grabbing that 6 core unit.

If the six core part really is $250 then why should the 8 Core parts be double and triple the price. The 8 core variants should be $350-500 if you ask me otherwise they'd be acting just like Intel.

 

[Shintai]

From that Article:
.....I've seen rumors of 6-core parts with 12 threads, similar to Intel's $600 Core i7-6850K retailing for around $250 and the SR3 - potentially a 4-core part with 8 threads has been rumored to land at around $150....

If that turns out to be true and has Haswell IPC, I'll be grabbing that 6 core unit.

All that is homemade fiction and not from the original rumours. The Baidu rumour where it all comes from said 3999-4999RMB for the top Ryzen SKU(1 SKU, not 2). That means between 580 and 720$