The same exact Ryzen vs Intel systems running at AMD's conference are live at their CES booth. The two systems are there running for anyone to check, inside the case and inside the OS. The AMD Ryzen CPU is running at identical speed with a $1,000 Intel 6900K CPU, and all of Ryzen's extra performance boosting features were disabled and clock speed lowered to match Intel's in the hands on demo to show clock for clock performance.
youtube.com
ITS HAPPENING
Other urls found in this thread:
Okay but prices when?
Intel completely and utterly btfo
I mean, actual prices.
Shame you had to show a video sponsored by amd. :(((((((
/Thread
but they're sponsored by Intel
Nice, Samsung's new processors look great! *cough* I meant AMD *cough*.
...
so is ryzen the next 6700k or the next 6900k?
as far as prices and stuff go?
because a person can get a 6700k for $350 and a 6900k for $1100.
so where does this fit between the two?
and, does this test take a max o/c from the 6900k into play?
it's nice to see amd running with some respectful pieces
I bet on 500 bucks for 8core Ryzen.
The shilling begins..
Remember when Linus did pretty much the same thing with the RX launch ? and how did that turn out...
>Linus gets paid to do a commercial for AMD
fixed the title for you
From what is speculated;
Quad cores will be about 150-300. Eight cores will be 450+
All Ryzen CPUs will be unlocked for overclocking
He didn't say anything about raw performance for the RX 480, and to be fair, it did stir up the mid tier market pricing.
You forgot 6-core.
We don't really know where that will fit.
Maybe ''''''''''''''leaks'''''''''''''' were true and the pricing would be THAT aggresive.
What is the leak?
no itx, no buy
There are already at least one ITX mobo.
AMD has no reason to push exotic prices for exotic parts because they don't have the Xeon line. Intel risks cannibalizing their Xeons by pricing the 6900 series much lower than their Xeons.
For AMD, volume of sales is more important than profit margins, so they should price high end Zen parts within reach of us mere mortal consumers.
AMD will have Naples.
Yes, but that's different silicon with much larger caches and more cores, not to mention architectural optimization for server use. Intel extreme are cut down Xeons at higher clocks.
>Yes, but that's different silicon with much larger caches and more cores
Naples are going to be 8-core Zen chips put into MCM. AMD are quite literally producing 1 (ONE) SKU for the entire current Zen lineup till the Raven Ridge.
Naples and Zen also target different market segments. Have you ever seen someone running an opteron at home, or an FX on a commercial server?
>using an nvidia gpu to demo their cpu
lel
No.
AMD has one Zen die called Zeppelin.
Summit Ridge/Ryzen is a single Zeppelin die.
Naples is a 4 die MCM. There is no difference architecturally at all. Stop pulling things out of your ass.
Lol so much bullshit. The AMD hype train is so ridiculous. Running at identical speed? Do you even understand CPUs?
Fuck AMD is such an embarrassment. Can't wait until this comes out and fails just like they always do.
No consumers or professionals will buy Naples for their workstations. The case for Xeons and Extreme edition is different. If the 6900k was cheaper, you would see people buying it over Xeon for production workstations.
AMD does not have this problem.
How much is known about yields yet? My guess is that that is a large factor in pricing. I.e. if yields are bad (most chips with only 4 or 6 usable cores), you'd expect lower prices for quad/hex but high prices for octacores.
>Intel risks cannibalizing their Xeons by pricing the 6900 series much lower than their Xeons.
Yeah let's go with some consumer level garbage that doesn't support ECC ram, only has 4 slots, and lots of other deficiencies over proper server hardware.
It's one ~170mm^2 die.
Because those things matter in production workstations for small businesses...
well eight core AMDs currently compete with i5's.
how would that work out in the future?
?
Bulldozer is old..
Nothing in your post is relevant. At all.
GloFo already has a couple 14nm LPP parts running for AMD, and they're delivering them in extremely high volumes, die size up to 232mm2. The process is mature, and going by the size of the memory PHY, the Zeppelin die is probably in the neighborhood of 200mm2. Others have estimated it a bit smaller, but for sure its smaller than the die used in the RX 480.
Knowing amd they're going to fuck the pricing up severely.
true. but with this pricing/performance, do you guys think that AMD and Intel are eye-to-eye?
the only thing Intel has a monopoly on for now, is the max-tier CPU market. talking 16+ cores
Somebody buy my Fury X ?
What, currently? Only in specific workloads. In Vulkan, AMD wins handily for price/performance. In most other tasks, an i3 or i5 at the same price is better.
Back in the first FX days AMD rebranded server chips as consumer parts, and I've seen both things happen
>do you guys think that AMD and Intel are eye-to-eye?
AMD can't afford to undercut intel forever, they will need to raise their retail prices.
AMD really needs ryzen to be a hit and to raise prices too.
The Zeppelin die is smaller than any Intel dies, they can easily afford to undercut Intel
Unless Intel memes AVX512 performance into the mainstream they are in serious disadvantages
For multiple generations now the only difference between a server candidate and a consumer candidate is that server dies were the cream of the crop for binnings.
They didn't fab separate dies for each market segment. One design fitting multiple segments.
The've done the same thing with their APUs in having a single die scale from mobile TDPs all the way to 95w/100w desktop parts.
AMD doesn't need intel level pricing to radically increase revenue. Trying to go toe to toe with them on price point would be a mistake. Intel has the marketing presence, and market share to command a premium price. Intel has prime time broadcast network TV commercials, they have super bowl ads, they have the jingle. AMD does not.
>Unless Intel memes AVX512 performance into the mainstream they are in serious disadvantages
Also how's new hot Intel meme called Optane?
This would be pretty hilarious since it would end up putting their Xeon and Extreme chips well above their mainstream line, and, hilariously, would also make them draw such an absurd amount more power than them they might become non-economical.
That 140W TDP for the 6900K is only for the AVX-512 operations, otherwise it runs in a 95-110W envelope.
I heard Itanium is the shit.
Considering I can buy a brand new Fury for $240 after rebate, I'll buy it for $200.
>AMD doesn't need intel level pricing to radically increase revenue.
Their negative profit ratio says they do.
AMD will price their cpus a little less than comparable intel cpus cost.
what if AMD spent hundreds of millions of dollars on these things, they finally get some samples to work with
and then find out that the cpu they wanted to sell for ~$300 to compete against an i7 only beats it things that are heavily threaded.
And that in fact in performs closer in line to an i5 that costs $200.
That kind of situation would basically put them back where they are now.
AMD can't beat out intel in performance, only in value at the expense of their own profits.
they can easily lock both cpu's at the exact same clock...
i wonder if it's just an i7 with a faceplate over it that says 'ryzen'
they might go with competitive pricing for this launch and readjust it on the next iterations.
There's a new interview with Raja where he was casually talking about his goal to have [real] 4k gaming at the 1000 dollars mark for the entire system. He was saying that it was his personal goal, but maybe there's at least some to try bringing the prices down on the corporate elvel.
Starting off with a pathetically retarded fallacy isn't a good way to make a point, user.
AMD is selling relatively low margin high volume semi-custom parts to prop up their CPU business. They don't have a high end CPU on the market at all, and the Zambezi, and Vishera platforms had weak sales to begin with. They're not turning a profit because they don't enough substantial revenue stream, they don't have anything in the enterprise market right now apart from thin clients.
AMD does not need a $1100 nor a $1700 CPU. This is beyond fucking retarded to argue.
honestly would not be shocked if that was real or close to it, remember, the base 8 core will be the worst binned version of the chip, the 6 core and 4 core could be higher binned parts that just have a fuck up that takes cores out entirely.
if nvidia fucks up, its 100% on them, it gets all eyes on the cpu only, and showing off the cpu against known hardware.
if samsung bought amd you would never have another cpu to buy in a computer again, it would be intel and intel only, as samsung would really only use the cpus in their own devices and nothing else.
> AMD finally gets at high end i7 performance
This kills the i5.
No laptop ryzen cpus though?
Not until the Raven Ridge APUs launch, which will be later in the year.
Like I said many times, zen will be, at 350$ a 300-400% uptick in profit per unit sold over a 8350 that sold at 200$ at proffit.
If amd wants to price shit like intel, they they have to perform like intel, and they fucking dont.
people keep saying amd will have 8 cores be 500$, well you just killed the entirety of the cpu line because intel has a 6 core for cheaper, and is guaranteed 100% 100% of the time while amd only hits 100% 80% of the time in their own words. you are paying 500$ for the worst binned chips amd has to offer, and then some people thing the better ones will be 700-900$, welp, now you are in may as well go intel territory because they are not an unknown.
amd needs an upset, at the very least it would be a massive short term grab, as in, they price their base 8 core at 350, a 6 core at 250 and a 4 core at 150, with that price, you negate any reason or want to go with the i3 and i5, possibly some people would go i7 because higher overall clocks, but not if they were smart, you then throw a punch at intel's 6 core's, its 8 core, and even its 10 core.
why the 10 core?
because, you could build an entire amd 8 core system in the cost of that 10 core, and that 8 core could be a dedicated render box, and probably still have room left over for a very good 4 or 6 core build. if you are getting intel 10 core, you are getting it because you don't have the money for a dedicated render box, but have use for one. what amd does with the opteron lines will likely throw just as big of punches at intel where amd does not have a clear advantage, and will just flat out stomp intel where they do, see naples 32 core 8 channel memory.
they have a chance to hit everything hard, and it all comes down to price, they would be stupid to price close to intel
There was a retarded slide a while ago that said naples would have 256/512mb l2 or l3 cache,
>while amd only hits 100% 80%
What the fuck are you even trying to say, is English not your native language?
Do you think that the intel cpus are really worth what they cost? we have had how many die shrinks and no price reductions, intel has pretty much not made a lower costing cpu because they didn't have to. amd doesn't need to undercut intel, they just need to bring intel back down to reality, and if they net themselves some more consumer install base along with some enterprise contracts all the better.
intel is 100% power,
amd can only hit 100% of the power 80% of the time. It's what zen was made to do, hit almost every area hard and good and just concede to the few areas where they would need to either bloat the die to compete or really put in fuck loads of engineering dollars.
When are they speculating all of this will be released? Planning on buying a PC soon
Has anyone really been far as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
Capitalize the first word of every sentence. Make concise coherent statements.
The only time AMD has mentioned 80% in any context is when Su said that their upcoming parts would address 80% of the market.
80% of the server market is X86, the remainder is POWER, SPARC64, MIPS, and ARM. Su was saying that Zen based enterprise parts were going to compete everywhere in the X86 space.
Speak English or don't post here.
Soon©®™
No, dude, this is totally different than the last time AMD posted unbelievable benchmarks prior to launch! It definitely won't be a repeat of literally every single AMD CPU launch in the past decade. No sir.
just because reading comprehension isn't your strong suit doesn't mean you need to prove to use you can string a sentance together.
looking at how the chip was designed, unless amd has magic in their chip, i take it as they are only an option for 80% of the x86 market, not 80% of the entire market. i just find it to hard to believe that intel doesn't have clear advantages somewhere otherwise this would be the second coming of jesus.
why don't you 100% go fuck yourself 80% of the time?
>dismissing all his arguments because of some dodgy syntax
I hope you do have the education to be so disdainful.
It would be a shame if you happened to be an AMD-worshipping sysadmin.
that's what my right hand is for.
> doesn't mean you need to prove to use you can string a sentance together.
I'm sorry, what?
I have to take that back.
>unless amd has magic in their chip, i take it as they are only an option for 80% of the x86 market, not 80% of the entire market.
This is inane.
He isn't making arguments, hes asserting that his delusions are factual.
How fucking stupid are you? Go outside and get killed. The world doesn't need you making it worse.
What the fuck did I read.
The only thing AMD won't be on par with Intel is AVX512, but literally nobody uses it.
Huh, you doubt my intelligence and think I should "get killed".
That's pretty mean.
we know enough about the chip that unless amd is doing something completely new that we don't fully understand yet, amd is not able to compete with intel in fpu heavy loads, and if amd can do it on dies that are as small as they are, would mean intel royally fucked up. as much as i don't like intel i cant bring myself to think that bad again.
hence, i don't believe she was referring to amd was a great option for the entire x86 market, but that they were a great option for 80% of it.
they made a cpu that can hit as many areas as possible while keeping it as small and simple as possible. do they want to bloat the cpu size out to hit everything intel does, or would they rather forgo that 20% and make something absolutely tiny in comparison they could sell at a cheaper price, produce more of, and have a valid sku for almost the entirety of the pc/server market?
we'll see, would love it if amd is actually able to hit the entirety of the server market, more chances for my stocks to go up, but i still doubt it.
>amd is not able to compete with intel in fpu heavy loads
source?
blender disagrees btw
People that use blender with Intel aren't relying on iGPU, they use Nvidia.
Relying on heterogenous compute shit that was never adopted in the mainstream that only works on custom builds of blender with custom libs to beat a system configuration that nobody uses is typical AMD marketing.
Blender may be FPU heavy, but the mainline build does not employ AVX512.
Zen also has 2x128 bit FPUs.
ryzen doesn't even have an iGPU, what difference would it make? who could possibly be this du-
>beawesome
oh, you.
>custom builds of blender
nope
>custom libs
nope.
back to the filter.
>to beat a system configuration that nobody uses is typical AMD marketing.
What the fuck are you talking about?
AMD used the mainline blender build directly from their website.
Do NOT reply to tripfags.
>AMD will price their cpus a little less than comparable intel cpus cost.
they can leech off the debt for another 5 years if they'd wanted to, AMD BANKRUPT is a meme, it's not that easy to kill 10B corporation with just a debt
They could've made profits tomorrow if they stopped investing into R&D, for a little while, and then would actually be dead and bankrupt next year.
Why am I arguing business 101?
AMD has simple strategy product they can make margins off at low cost to invest from into R&D => market share=>higher stock=more investment=> decent share=> uplift margins
people keep saying 480 was a failure, no it wasn't it gave them 10% of market back and another billion to invest, they cost now more than they did in 2008 when things were decent
First thing they must do is return to market with CPUs, nobody but most desperate buys AMD now.
You can't do that with $800 CPUs.
> nobody but most desperate buys AMD now.
That's not really true, sometimes it's just because it's cheap for what you actually need.
This summer I updated my aging home server.
AMD A8-7600 APU, $82
A88X motherboard with *8* SATA ports, $110
32 GB DDR3 RAM, $150
That's about the price of a Intel Core i7-6700, and just that - no RAM, no motherboard. All the 1151 motherboards have maximum 6 SATA ports and those in the comparable price-range only have 4.
that falls into thin client territory where amd has 90% share
it's a niche of a niche
If you want i7 just get it.
If you want i5 or you are poor, wait for ryzen.
I know you not want to hear this but its the truth because I say so.
What if the main game I play is battlefield witch takes advantage of 8 cores, I'll go out on a limb and say ryzen will blow kaby out of the water even if it's a i7 OC to 5ghz
>AMD using Nvidia GPU
Lel.
> end of the video
> this video sponsored by amd
kek
Partners mean he gets free parts to review from said companies. Or was given free parts for serves, for whatever. Not that he is on a payroll by Intel.
do people actually think a company in billions of dollars of debt can actually bring down these monster companies which are 10x the size?
this hype is fundamentally flawed. they don't have the money or resources to rise above intel.
AMD only made one die for Bulldozer and then Piledriver. So essentially yes, you do see Opterons in home PCs and FX in servers. Phenom i/ii had a few more die layouts, but the Opteron versions are still just multiple dies on a single package with ECC RAM support.
I'm really concerned that the single core performance might not be there. I play World of Warcraft a lot, which, iir, can only utilize 4 cores, and in raids it can get fairly cpu intensive. When I was running fx 8350 + gtx 960, my CPU usage would spike to 99% on boss pulls, with GPU like 60%.
retard. end of video says sponsored by amd
convinently when he literally is suggesting that he and possibly you will be buying amd.
Shills. Everyone is a fucking shill. Trust no one. Fuck consumerism.
$800
I understand why they used a an Nvidia GPU for it, but this does reflect insanely badly on them
The whole idea of using your competitors card because you've yet to launch a product even remotely competitive with their high end products is hialrious
I don't seem why they didn't just use a Radeon Pro Duo. Sure it's niche and widely impractical, but it will certainly be good enough for bf1.
It's also there at the beginning of the video.