AMD's Ryzen CPU lineup has been leaked

[AlienALX]

I have no problem with the naming scheme as long as the specification differences are distinguishable. Some of these CPU's could be specifically targeting at system builders or laptops while the others are aimed at enthusiasts.

I don't know if Intel will lower their prices if RyZen beats Kaby Lake. I think they'll just make better CPU's.

This should be perfect for enthusiasts. They will buy whatever chip is the cheapest and overclocks the most offering the most bang per $. It's always been like that with enthusiasts. A real enthusiast does not buy the most expensive hardware. They buy whatever is the cheapest for the performance it gives and then overclock it, squeezing every last ounce of performance out of it.

I think over the years the word enthusiast has been confused with poser.

 

[Dark NighT]

Well it's not 2006 any more.

If only intel saw that and not be this crazy to sell a 180 quid i3.

Anyway...

 

[AngryGoldfish]

This should be perfect for enthusiasts. They will buy whatever chip is the cheapest and overclocks the most offering the most bang per $. It's always been like that with enthusiasts. A real enthusiast does not buy the most expensive hardware. They buy whatever is the cheapest for the performance it gives and then overclock it, squeezing every last ounce of performance out of it.

I think over the years the word enthusiast has been confused with poser.

This is true. £500 ASUS motherboard, £1000 Intel CPU, £1000 Nvidia Titan - enthusiast bro!

 

[haxomg]

By the looks of it, AMD needs twice the cores to compete with the intel? So... single core performance is still that bad?

 

[AngryGoldfish]

By the looks of it, AMD needs twice the cores to compete with the intel? So... single core performance is still that bad?

Until we see benchmarks that heavily rely on single core performance we won't know whether having more cores is compensating for the lack of single core performance. I know it doesn't strictly work that way, but for simplicity sake we'll say it does.

 

[WYP]

No dual cores!!! Amd is doing it right!

As for the naming scheme, yeah it looks a lot like intel, but it has also worked very well for intel, given time and I hope a lot of success, it will work for AMD as well.

TBH AMD is doing a great thing by removing dual cores from the lineup, though there will likely be dual-core APUs with Raven Ridge.

APUs will be made for laptops and low powered sytems, as well as basic gaming systems, so here dual cores will be acceptable for low costs.

Let's be honest, what system integrator wants to make a system with a dual-core CPU without an integrated GPU?

 

[Bagpuss]

When they list the 6c 12t r5 1600X as being in competition with the 7600K, I hope they mean in terms of price rather than performance.

...because if it's performance, I find it a tad worrying that they need 6cores and 12 threads to compete with just 4 Intel i5 cores.

 

[WYP]

When they list the 6c 12t r5 1600X as being in competition with the 7600K, I hope they mean in terms of price rather than performance.

...because if it's performance, I find it a tad worrying that they need 6cores and 12 threads to compete with just 4 Intel i5 cores.

I am imagining that is is pricing, likely prompting Intel to reduce their prices. Hard to know where these comparisons come from, or what exactly they refer to.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

When they list the 6c 12t r5 1600X as being in competition with the 7600K, I hope they mean in terms of price rather than performance.

...because if it's performance, I find it a tad worrying that they need 6cores and 12 threads to compete with just 4 Intel i5 cores.

Yeah, I know what you mean. But imagine a 6c/12t CPU for €250 that competes with a 5820K. That's what I'd grab myself.

 

[Shingara]

There can be quite a large difference tbh. AMD have been binning forever now, especially when they were doing their Centurion FX chips. Remember, that the CPU overclocks itself with Ryzen by heat and volts. So basically the better your cooler the higher the CPU will auto overclock itself. And some will run cooler than others etc, so the boost clocks will probably be the biggest difference between SKUS. Obviously when you manually overclock that all goes out of the window but lots of people don't overclock so that is probably why the amount of different CPUs.

The smart money will probably be on the cheapest in each category and then learning how to overclock them. Just like with the FX series now. There was a large difference for example between the FX 8320E and the FX 8370 yet still plenty of people bought the latter.

I got 4.9 and 5.1ghz out of my two 8320s.

Ye i know binning can make a difference, but for 4 varients. And amd is dif to intel in the fact amd have all unlocked, intel bin and lock unless its a k series so justifies so many simply because so many of there cpus are binned and locked.

And these things are meant to auto clock, obviously we can get more manually but the type of cooling on them i think is going tobe the major factor. So on that stance what justifies so many of basically the same cpu.

And i know we are basically saying the exact same thing, but unless the bottom binned can do a max of 3.6-3.9 and the max binned can do 3.6 - 4/5 then its mainly going to come down to the cooling.

 

[AlienALX]

This is true. £500 ASUS motherboard, £1000 Intel CPU, £1000 Nvidia Titan - enthusiast bro!

Totally. Money does not buy enthusiasm !

I've been around on various internet forums enthusing about PC gear for over a decade. I've only ever once built an expensive rig and tbh? was probably one of the biggest mistakes I have ever made. Money doesn't buy you stature, that's for sure.

 

[AlienALX]

By the looks of it, AMD needs twice the cores to compete with the intel? So... single core performance is still that bad?

Intel fan much?

Until we see benchmarks that heavily rely on single core performance we won't know whether having more cores is compensating for the lack of single core performance. I know it doesn't strictly work that way, but for simplicity sake we'll say it does.

For both of you. AMD ran their Ryzen CPU with lower clocks against Broadwell E using Blender. A totally normal benchmark that will thread properly, ETC. Ryzen was ever so slightly faster than Broadwell E.

Since then AMD have divulged the exact settings they used for the benchmark and numerous people including a few websites have ran it for themselves and compared the results.

So it's fact, Ryzen is bloody quick.

That we know, that has been proven, that is fact. Now we can speculate about the models (as we are doing here, no hard proof of that yet) and the price (same, no concrete info).

But yeah, when Lisa Su did the unveil she also fired some pretty serious shots.

 

[RobM]

For both of you. AMD ran their Ryzen CPU with lower clocks against Broadwell E using Blender. A totally normal benchmark that will thread properly, ETC. Ryzen was ever so slightly faster than Broadwell E.

Since then AMD have divulged the exact settings they used for the benchmark and numerous people including a few websites have ran it for themselves and compared the results.

So it's fact, Ryzen is bloody quick.

That we know, that has been proven, that is fact. Now we can speculate about the models (as we are doing here, no hard proof of that yet) and the price (same, no concrete info).

But yeah, when Lisa Su did the unveil she also fired some pretty serious shots.

Indeed correct and I also think there is a difference between very competitive and very very competitive.
I cannot remember the last time I was actually exited over IT stuff, think it was when the Athlon 2500 released so a long time ago.

 

[dabar_šolta]

settings on blender file are updated and who wants to check now that file is good and one used in video where ryzen beats i7 , it was 150 samples that was problematic setting if i remember good.

there should be 8t/8c zen parts as source that stated that was clear that would be natural and relative easy to bin 8c8t parts. not saying that it was right but makes sense that it should be better bin than disable half cores and make 4c8t cpu from that 8c16t.

 

[NeverBackDown]

settings on blender file are updated and who wants to check now that file is good and one used in video where ryzen beats i7 , it was 150 samples that was problematic setting if i remember good.

there should be 8t/8c zen parts as source that stated that was clear that would be natural and relative easy to bin 8c8t parts. not saying that it was right but makes sense that it should be better bin than disable half cores and make 4c8t cpu from that 8c16t.

It makes no sense to make an 8C 8T CPU for the sake of "binning". You act like the thread is a physical core. It's not. When you drop a core, you lose a thread. So when they are binning, it makes more logical sense to drop to 6C 12T.
Threads are products of Cores. You Bin the cores. Not the threads.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

For both of you. AMD ran their Ryzen CPU with lower clocks against Broadwell E using Blender. A totally normal benchmark that will thread properly, ETC. Ryzen was ever so slightly faster than Broadwell E.

Since then AMD have divulged the exact settings they used for the benchmark and numerous people including a few websites have ran it for themselves and compared the results.

So it's fact, Ryzen is bloody quick.

That we know, that has been proven, that is fact. Now we can speculate about the models (as we are doing here, no hard proof of that yet) and the price (same, no concrete info).

But yeah, when Lisa Su did the unveil she also fired some pretty serious shots.

Yeah, it's easy to forget that RyZen has been proven to be very fast and highly competitive in CPU-laden tasks. The issue I think the user was referring to was maybe the performance in gaming, not CPU-specific tasks. Joker recently posted a YouTube video comparing an overclocked 7700K to an overclocked 6800K and the 7700K won in 95% of the titles. If RyZen can't keep up in IPC's or raw clock speeds then maybe it won't be an ideal gamers chip when compared to the competition. That's something we have yet to see benchmarks for.

 

[NeverBackDown]

The biggest issue for gaming is since intel has dominated for sooooo long, many of the games just might inherently prefer Intel CPUs since 99% of the optimization probably went to them.

 

[dabar_šolta]

It makes no sense to make an 8C 8T CPU for the sake of "binning". You act like the thread is a physical core. It's not. When you drop a core, you lose a thread. So when they are binning, it makes more logical sense to drop to 6C 12T.
Threads are products of Cores. You Bin the cores. Not the threads.

read again please, sry if my english is a bit bad.
"..makes sense that it should be better bin(8c8t) than disable half cores and make 4c8t cpu from that 8c16t."
and also it makes more sense that it is easier to bin half of 16 times cache that works than 14/16 cache that works.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

The biggest issue for gaming is since intel has dominated for sooooo long, many of the games just might inherently prefer Intel CPUs since 99% of the optimization probably went to them.

I don't know anything about CPU optimisation, but it makes sense that likely 90% of the games if not more were built using Intel systems.

 

[NeverBackDown]

read again please, sry if my english is a bit bad.
"..makes sense that it should be better bin(8c8t) than disable half cores and make 4c8t cpu from that 8c16t."
and also it makes more sense that it is easier to bin half of 16 times cache that works than 14/16 cache that works.

Again you are not understanding what binning is.
It makes NO SENSE to disable threads when you have perfectly working cores.
When 2 CORES fail, you get a 6C 12T.
When 4 CORES fail, you get 4C 8T.
To save on some power and hit ultra low price points, you disable threads on the cheapest CPUs, that is the smartest way to do it. Which is the 4C models. So 4C 4T is the only logical place to disbale cores.

You do not bin for threads, makes no sense.