| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| Initial D World - Discussion Board / Forums > Computers and Technologies > AMD Zen CPUs |
| Posted by: Yosako Aug 24 2016, 03:11 AM |
| AMD wants to catch Intel at their own game like back on the old days. |
| Posted by: Sensation! Aug 24 2016, 03:26 AM |
| No benchmarks, no real discussion about competition regarding its performance. The concept for zen is how modular it will be, this way, the fabs can quickly tailor CPU's in bulk to specific applications with minimal R&D needed on AMD's end. Knowing this, I'm not expecting performance near Intels modern prosumer '-e' CPU's, nor should anyone. AMD has no intention of taking the performance crown nor do they need to, though it would be nice if I'm proven wrong. I'd say the concept is likely a win for AMD if there arent crippling bugs (Phenom I) or scheduler bottlenecks (FX), the big thing for Zen needs to be its power consumption. Companies vying to adopt the CPU for portable, server, or embedded devices wont consider it if it has poor performance per watt. The entire point to its core modularity will be ignored if its too power hungry. Though Jim Keller is at the helm of the project after all, certified shit wrecker etc etc |
| Posted by: Yosako Aug 24 2016, 03:41 AM |
| http://www.anandtech.com/show/10585/unpacking-amds-zen-benchmark-is-zen-actually-2-faster-than-broadwell |
| Posted by: Sensation! Aug 24 2016, 03:58 AM |
| Press event benchmarks should be taken with a grain of salt, the article nails this to your head a few times, its all for marketing purposes. But at least what was shown looks promising. |
| Posted by: Yosako Aug 24 2016, 07:39 AM |
| They should do fine if they keep specs around those of Intel's processors while keeping ECC RAM support; AMD has an habit of supporting it while Intel keeps that for Xeon CPUs. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Aug 24 2016, 08:17 AM | ||
http://ark.intel.com/search/advanced?ECCMemory=true&MarketSegment=DT Wait until the chip is actually out and benched properly by everyone. Don't buy the hype when it comes to AMD. Don't you remember Bulldozer? |
| Posted by: Yosako Aug 24 2016, 01:09 PM | ||
Bulldozer had a crappy architecture, Zen has a brand new one which supposedly increases IPC by 40% and improves single core performance. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/08/amd-zen-performance-details-release-date/ |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Aug 24 2016, 06:30 PM | ||
"supposedly" Bulldozer did have a crappy archetecture, but we didn't find out about that until after it was released and people started getting their hands on it. It didn't perform like AMD said it would, sucked more power, ran hotter than it should, didn't overclock nicely, and did I mention the SATA bugs in the motherboards that were associated with those chips? All of which was completely unknown until the chips and motherboards got out into the wild. Before normal people (and hardcore tech review sites) got their hands on actual retail hardware, people were saying how Bulldozer was gonna be their chance to get back at the Core 2 series. So what I'm telling you is, when it comes to AMD, don't hype anything. Sit back, relax, grab a cold brew and wait for it to come out before you go getting excited. |
| Posted by: Sensation! Aug 24 2016, 06:52 PM | ||
This. It actually hurts the company more. Their modern products are actually quite solid and perform incredibly well for what they are, both GPU and APU's. It just that people hype them up to be game changing beasts. Always. And it will never live up to that hype. Most recently, people were doing it to the RX480. AMD wasnt going to make the low end GPU perform as well as the GTX1070. It didnt make sense from a market standpoint, it involves a ton of R&D only to price itself out of a profit range? not to mention questionable yields? Instead, we got something akin to a mix of a GTX970 and 980 for 200 bucks and people cried going WAHH, IT DIDNT SOLIDLY BEAT THE 1070 FOR 200 DOLLARS, I HOPE AMD DIES!! Granted, the RX480 does posses incredibly solid Vulkan and DX12 performance, performing better than the Fury X through those API's for a low end card is mad impressive, but the majority of games at the moment are still DX11, AMD clearly had zero intention of upping their tessellation performance because of said APIs. Alot of people think that AMD wants to compete directly with Intel or Nvidia. That's not the case. Where possible, each company will exploit the gaps left in the market by the other to maximize sales. In AMD's case, they want the multithreaded, portable multimedia audience. When Nvidia releases high end, AMD starts with low, and vice versa. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Sep 2 2016, 01:50 AM |
| http://m.slashdot.org/story/315705 RIP Zen [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: Yosako Sep 2 2016, 02:35 AM | ||
It's not even a problem. The article states BOTH Zen and new Intel chips will require at least Windows 10, but that's because Microsoft wants everyone to upgrade to W10 from W7 or W8 in order to lower software manteinance costs. Why bother purchasing a new CPU to run an outdated OS? ...and Post Count +1   |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Sep 2 2016, 06:28 AM | ||
7 isn't outdated, it was placed into planned obsolescence. But yes, you're so right, clearly I only posted that to bump my post count, because I so desperately need one more post on the forum. Ever heard of pissing into an ocean, newbie? Come back when you're not such a cuck. [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: Yosako Sep 2 2016, 08:38 AM | ||
Why do you consider it as planned obsolescence? W10 upgrade was for free for those that had a W7 or W8 license; the difference between releasing a security patch and a brand new OS becomes irrelevant as long as they don't force you to spend extra money for the upgrade. BTW LOL, the +1 post count joke was about me, by placing it in the same post as the reply.  Don't you see I'm still under 100 posts? That's 'cos need a few more to M.O.V.E. some albums to my hard drive.  |
| Posted by: Shirogane Sep 2 2016, 09:01 AM | ||
I can't see it being an upgrade if it had a slew of problems at launch - some of which could be remedied, yes, but why did they include such an eyebrow-raising issue (Privacy, if memory serves me right)? That's how I see 10, and that's why an old build (one month old) is running 8.1. Edit: Oh, I forgot. Forced Updates unless you're running something like Enterprise. ?????? |
| Posted by: xiao Sep 2 2016, 01:23 PM |
| ★ Here's the http://forum.frontrowcrew.com/discussion/comment/546097/#Comment_546097 for everybody not fluent in CPUnese and why Yusaku is wrong and Nomake & Sensation! are right → • AMD is Corvette at best. • Intel is Ferrari 100% of the time. ✝ AMD sells fast processors at cheap'o prices for laptop media-majors on a budget on the go. ✝ Intel makes perfect-grade blazing processors at Intel prices - take it or leave it - you get what you pay for → ie. a CPU LaFerrari. ～ Someone at AMD's Public Relations department said: "Hey let's make a chip called Zenigata that can out-Lupin-the-IIIrd best Intel chip ~ and we'll sell it at our usual cheap'o prices ~ then we'll win!!" ～ Then the janitor at the Intel bunny-suit lab said "pffft good luck AMD ~ we're Intel ~ your chip is probably gonna disconnect and self-destruct in 2 seconds ~ then we'll 1up you guys in 2 months." ★ Corvette will never be Ferrari ☆ and ☆ AMD will never be Intel. Any questions?  |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Sep 2 2016, 01:25 PM | ||
I consider it planned obsolescence because the kernel is still solid--the same core components from 7 are still present in 8, 8.1 and all versions of 10. Hell, 10 couldn't even manage to do away with 7's control panel for chrissake, one of my huge complaints about 8. 10 was free not as a gesture of goodwill, but to get people into their OS-as-a-service philosophy in a way that makes them unable to back out. Hardware lockouts are just one more way to enforce this worldview and it's sad to see companies that make OS-agnostic hardware break their implementation on purpose so that it only runs on a service-based system. If you cannot see Windows 10 for what it is, then we aren't even having this discussion on the same planet. Shirogane, don't forget that these forced updates included hardware-breaking ones (see: graphics driver 'updates') as well as their shit-show of an anniversary update (breaking SSDs, BSODing when connecting Kindles, breaking a wide swath of webcams, etc etc). But yes, please continue to shill about Windows 10 being the best OS on the planet and how 7 is antique and not placed into planned obsolescence as yet another way to force people into the OS-as-a-service ecosystem. As for the post thing, when you quote someone and say that, it's generally understood that the reply is directed at the person you quoted and not yourself unless explicitly stated. [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: xiao Sep 2 2016, 02:37 PM | ||
This times 1000x. Windows 10 is a virus, and Microshaft won't kill Win 7 until Windows 11 (ie. Windows 7 2.0 or XP 3.0 - take your pic in semantics) is launched. MircoSoft knows Win10 sucks. They listen to the feedback just like Google does. But they're just gonna ride it out until the fat lady fall over in the Nostradamus river & they release their next OS; which may or may not be called Windows 11 ~ but it sure as hell better be Windows 7 2.0 ~ r'else... welp hopefully Google OS saves us by then. |
| Posted by: Yosako Sep 2 2016, 03:21 PM | ||
So far W10 is doing fine for me, although it has some bugs to fix such as that randomly, Start Menu doesn't appear, in that case I've got to right-click on the Windows icon to display a menu which allows me to reboot. Rebooting fixes the problem until it gets silly again. |
| Posted by: Nerubian Sep 2 2016, 04:15 PM |
| I think Microsoft offers hardware manufacturers a large amount of money to make their products work with 10 only. I don't understand why Microsoft wants a monopol of 10 users instead of leaving the OS choice to the users but I hope they will shoot themselves in the foot because of their retarded dictatorially behaviour. Looks like I will stick with 7 for the rest of my life. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Sep 2 2016, 05:57 PM |
| Or until 2020 when they cut off patching OS vulnerabilities, anyway. Yosako, the takeaway here is that whether it works for you or not is not isn't a valid defense of the OS. Neither would 'it works for me' be a valid defense of 7. That's nothing more than a single anecdote, irrepresentative of the operating system as a whole. The point here is that Intel (and AMD's Zen platform, which is why this discussion is relevant here) artificially cutting off any OS that isn't Windows 10 is anti-competitive at best and anti-consumer at worst. [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: Yosako Sep 3 2016, 02:02 AM | ||||
Simple. The "monopoly of W10 users" is because it's cheaper for Microsoft to mantain development upgrades for a single OS than for several versions.
Perhaps those new CPUs won't have any trouble with recent Linux distros, 'cos if they did, hell would break loose. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Sep 3 2016, 02:39 AM |
| The point is they're not issuing drivers for anything other than Windows 10. It stands to reason that they'll 'work' on anything, but won't work well, or rather, as well as they otherwise would. It's a blatant shill in Microsoft's favor to once more artificially pump up the 'usefulness' of Windows 10. That is, something that isn't inherent to Windows 10 at all. This has nothing to do with ease since the kernels are so damn similar (if not the same, wouldn't shock me in the least). It has everything to do with forcing the Windiws install base into the OS-as-a-service model I mentioned earlier. [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |