Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AMD Ryzen price and release date revealed

pcworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 139 posts

Re: AMD Ryzen price and release date revealed

#41

Post by YSFEJ4SWJUVU6 »

Cyph0n wrote: post #38
tracker1 wrote: post #27

I just have to say, I really hope that this is real. AMD has burned a lot of trust a few times in overzealously stating performance marks in their prior generations of CPUs. I ran AMD for several years until the Core-2 came out from Intel (currently very happy with an i7-4790K). If these comparisons are real, my next build may be AMD again.

Seems like you skipped over the FX series (Bulldozer, I believe). I got a FX-8320 a few years back, and my brother got a FX-6300. Both are capable processors and are MUCH cheaper than their counterparts (i5 and i3, respectively). Heck, if I built a PC in the past year, I would have gone with a FX-8350 just because it's so damned cheap yet very performant. Once Zen is out, it's really a no-brainer for me.

Unless I'm sorely mistaken, Intel's single-core performance was ways ahead of Bulldozer chips.

Re: AMD Ryzen price and release date revealed

#42

Post by mizzack »

wmf wrote: post #39
mizzack wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'll be interesting to see how Vega and on-die HBM ties into all of this with Infinity Fabric. AMD has been laying this foundation for a while. A "Zega" APU would be killer in notebooks as well as HPC...

I think Raven Ridge is what you're looking for.

Yep. In the past their APUs have been mem bandwidth starved. HBM on die changes that. If they can keep TDP in check (Zen is promising so far), then Intel might be in trouble in prosumer notebook space.

Re: AMD Ryzen price and release date revealed

#44

Post by Cyph0n »

YSFEJ4SWJUVU6 wrote: post #41
Cyph0n wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like you skipped over the FX series (Bulldozer, I believe). I got a FX-8320 a few years back, and my brother got a FX-6300. Both are capable processors and are MUCH cheaper than their counterparts (i5 and i3, respectively). Heck, if I built a PC in the past year, I would have gone with a FX-8350 just because it's so damned cheap yet very performant. Once Zen is out, it's really a no-brainer for me.

Unless I'm sorely mistaken, Intel's single-core performance was ways ahead of Bulldozer chips.

True, but the price is a huge differentiator. The primary market for processors is gaming where the bottleneck is generally your GPU and memory. As a software developer, the difference between the two is not noticeable IMO.

Re: AMD Ryzen price and release date revealed

#45

Post by Cyph0n »

RussianCow wrote: post #40
Cyph0n wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like you skipped over the FX series (Bulldozer, I believe). I got a FX-8320 a few years back, and my brother got a FX-6300. Both are capable processors and are MUCH cheaper than their counterparts (i5 and i3, respectively). Heck, if I built a PC in the past year, I would have gone with a FX-8350 just because it's so damned cheap yet very performant. Once Zen is out, it's really a no-brainer for me.

The biggest problem with the FX series, IMO, was the deceptive marketing. The FX-8000 CPUs were marketed as being 8-core, when in reality every pair of cores shared an FPU and cache, so real-world performance was much closer to that of a quad-core for many workloads. Add on top of that the abysmal IPC (compared to Intel's offerings) and high power consumption, and there was very little reason to get an FX-8350 or sim…

Yeah, I would understand going for an i5 if the price difference was insignificant.

Re: AMD Ryzen price and release date revealed

#46

Post by Orangeair »

Cyph0n wrote: post #38
tracker1 wrote: post #27

I just have to say, I really hope that this is real. AMD has burned a lot of trust a few times in overzealously stating performance marks in their prior generations of CPUs. I ran AMD for several years until the Core-2 came out from Intel (currently very happy with an i7-4790K). If these comparisons are real, my next build may be AMD again.

Seems like you skipped over the FX series (Bulldozer, I believe). I got a FX-8320 a few years back, and my brother got a FX-6300. Both are capable processors and are MUCH cheaper than their counterparts (i5 and i3, respectively). Heck, if I built a PC in the past year, I would have gone with a FX-8350 just because it's so damned cheap yet very performant. Once Zen is out, it's really a no-brainer for me.

They're ahead in multi-threaded performance, but as another commenter said, they suffer when it comes to single-threaded tasks, which meant that their gaming performance often suffered (my friend ran into this problem firsthand when he discovered that his FX6300 was bottlenecking his GTX 970).

Hopefully that isn't true anymore, or Intel may still be the superior chip for gaming.

Re: AMD Ryzen price and release date revealed

#48

Post by Asooka »

mrb wrote: post #10

First (amateur) third-party benchmarks confirm a ~$350 Ryzen beats $1000 Intel processors in CPUMARK, 3DMark Fire Strike Physics, Cinebench: https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1706915-1-1.html AMD had said for years their Zen goal was a 40% IPC gain over their previous microarchitecture, but they ended up with a 52% gain: http://www.anandtech.com/show/11143/amd-launch-ryzen-52-more... Today's launch event by AMD's CEO:…

I'm a bit dubious. If they have such an amazing part why is it being sold for so cheap? Why not 80% of the price of the comparable Intel part? Selling it at 50% or even less raises some heavy alarm bells for me.

Re: AMD Ryzen price and release date revealed

#49

Post by snovv_crash »

Asooka wrote: post #48
mrb wrote: post #10

First (amateur) third-party benchmarks confirm a ~$350 Ryzen beats $1000 Intel processors in CPUMARK, 3DMark Fire Strike Physics, Cinebench: https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1706915-1-1.html AMD had said for years their Zen goal was a 40% IPC gain over their previous microarchitecture, but they ended up with a 52% gain: http://www.anandtech.com/show/11143/amd-launch-ryzen-52-more... Today's launch event by AMD's CEO:…

I'm a bit dubious. If they have such an amazing part why is it being sold for so cheap? Why not 80% of the price of the comparable Intel part? Selling it at 50% or even less raises some heavy alarm bells for me.

Probably because of their contract with GlobalFoundries which requires them to pay penalties if they don't move a specific volume.

Re: AMD Ryzen price and release date revealed

#50

Post by masklinn »

Asooka wrote: post #48
mrb wrote: post #10

First (amateur) third-party benchmarks confirm a ~$350 Ryzen beats $1000 Intel processors in CPUMARK, 3DMark Fire Strike Physics, Cinebench: https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1706915-1-1.html AMD had said for years their Zen goal was a 40% IPC gain over their previous microarchitecture, but they ended up with a 52% gain: http://www.anandtech.com/show/11143/amd-launch-ryzen-52-more... Today's launch event by AMD's CEO:…

I'm a bit dubious. If they have such an amazing part why is it being sold for so cheap? Why not 80% of the price of the comparable Intel part? Selling it at 50% or even less raises some heavy alarm bells for me.

> If they have such an amazing part why is it being sold for so cheap?

Because they get exploded in single-threaded performances, so they have to pit their 8-core parts against Intel's 4 cores.

The 1700X will be competing against the $350 7700K more than the $1100 6900K (which incidentally is a Broadwell-E part not a Skylake part despite de 6 prefix)

Post reply on HN