Fudzilla: New AMD Zen APU boasts up to 16 cores (plus Greenland GPU with HBM)

[Fjodor2001]

Assuming AMD releases an 8 core Zen at $300 or so, do you think Intel will follow suit and do the same?

Or will Intel give up the high performance mainstream segment to AMD, in order to try to protect their margins in the server segment?

 

[scannall]

Assuming AMD releases an 8 core Zen at $300 or so, do you think Intel will follow suit and do the same?

Or will Intel give up the high performance mainstream segment to AMD, in order to try to protect their margins in the server segment?

Intel won't care at all. Almost everything they sell is to OEM's anyway. The enthusiast market is pretty small compared to that.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Intel won't care at all. Almost everything they sell is to OEM's anyway. The enthusiast market is pretty small compared to that.

I don't think that you can say with a straight face that Intel doesn't care about the enthusiast market, or that they are willing to cede it to AMD. After all, if Intel didn't care about the enthusiast market, why do we have unlocked "K" CPUs, and the Pentium AE CPU? Clearly, they do see it as a significant enough market to create specific SKUs for it. (When was the last, or even first, time that you've seen an OEM box with an unlocked "K" SKU, other than maybe an AlienWare?)

 

[Sequences]

I don't think that you can say with a straight face that Intel doesn't care about the enthusiast market, or that they are willing to cede it to AMD. After all, if Intel didn't care about the enthusiast market, why do we have unlocked "K" CPUs, and the Pentium AE CPU? Clearly, they do see it as a significant enough market to create specific SKUs for it. (When was the last, or even first, time that you've seen an OEM box with an unlocked "K" SKU, other than maybe an AlienWare?)

There did not used to be "K" SKUs - they were all unlocked. If Intel cared about chip enthusiasts, they wouldn't have locked almost all of their chips.

 

[coercitiv]

There did not used to be "K" SKUs - they were all unlocked. If Intel cared about chip enthusiasts, they wouldn't have locked almost all of their chips.

They don't care as long as enthusiasts have no other option. Give them one, and Intel will suddenly cater to their needs in previously unexpected ways. In this domain, word of mouth can be a mighty weapon.

 

[VirtualLarry]

There did not used to be "K" SKUs - they were all unlocked. If Intel cared about chip enthusiasts, they wouldn't have locked almost all of their chips.

Yeah, back in what, the Pentium II days?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Assuming AMD releases an 8 core Zen at $300 or so, do you think Intel will follow suit and do the same?

Or will Intel give up the high performance mainstream segment to AMD, in order to try to protect their margins in the server segment?

AMD released an 800$ 8 core FX that quickly went down to 230$. Didnt change anything if the performance isnt there.

The C2730 and C2750 can be had for 150$ and 170$ if you just want 8 cores.

 

[Fjodor2001]

AMD released an 800$ 8 core FX that quickly went down to 230$. Didnt change anything if the performance isnt there.

The C2730 and C2750 can be had for 150$ and 170$ if you just want 8 cores.

Ok, so now e.g. FX8350 is 8 core. Funny since you've been arguing for so long it's actually more like 4C/8T!

And regarding the 8 core Atoms (C2xxx), they are irrelevant. As I said I'm talking about 8 core mainstream performance CPUs. Zen clearly will be belong in that segment. The question is whether Intel will release anything to match it on price, core count, and performance-wise?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Ok, so now e.g. FX8350 is 8 core. Funny since you've been arguing for so long it's actually more like 4C/8T!

And regarding the 8 core Atoms (C2xxx), they are irrelevant. As I said I'm talking about 8 core mainstream performance CPUs. Zen clearly will be belong in that segment. The question is whether Intel will release anything to match it on price, core count, and performance-wise?

Its sold as 8 core isnt it?

And I never claimed 4C/8T. At best I have said 4M/8T.

Well Zen better live up to your expectations then.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Its sold as 8 core isnt it?

And I never claimed 4C/8T. At best I have said 4M/8T.

Ok, so you do not consider FX8xxx to be 8 core at least. Then why did you just say they were 8 core 2 posts ago?

Anyway, back to the main question: Do you think Intel will release any 8 core mainstream CPU that will match Zen performance and price-wise?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Ok, so you do not consider FX8xxx to be 8 core at least. Then why did you just say they were 8 core 2 posts ago?

Anyway, back to the main question: Do you think Intel will release any 8 core mainstream CPU that will match Zen performance and price-wise?

Doesnt matter what I think it is. Its sold as 8 cores, its software licensed as 8 cores. Its 8 cores. While it would have passed much better as 4 with CMT is another thing. And while it performs as...well 3-4.

But who cares about performance, higher number is what counts. 8>4! Thats why all you focus on is 8 cores.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Doesnt matter what I think it is. Its sold as 8 cores, its software licensed as 8 cores. Its 8 cores. While it would have passed much better as 4 with CMT is another thing. And while it performs as...well 3-4.

But who cares about performance, higher number is what counts. 8>4! Thats why all you focus on is 8 cores.

Whatever.

I'll rephrase the question: Do you think Intel will release any 8 core CPU that will match AMD 8 core Zen in MT performance and price-wise?

 

[krumme]

AMD has had decent turbo core tech since the original Bulldozer. See the Anandtech review for details. In fact, this is one of the few things it did right with BD.

Its relative far less agressive than Intels implementation. Especially if we look at low power / low freq envelopes. I think zen ipc will be at least ib level but the last thing amd can do as effective as Intel its the turbo implementation. I am under the impression it demands tight control of process and tight synergy between design and process. Amd is in no position to do that the same way as Intel. And they lost that opportunity years back. But hey who gives - they dont have the r&d to do it anyway. As i said; The way i look at it the low r&d is not a burden its talked up to be. Amd can not follow the expensive road anyway. And imo the entire idea that there can be variants with less hdl is damn crazy.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Whatever.

I'll rephrase the question: Do you think Intel will release any 8 core CPU that will match AMD 8 core Zen in MT performance and price-wise?

Why would they release an 8 core in your desired price range if the question is, will it even compete with quadcores? And for hexcores they are already sold below 400$. Tho its obvious also above your desired price range.

 

[krumme]

Its important to notice Bd was not just a failure as an arch but as a concept. If eg the ipc had been 20% better it wouldnt have made a difference: Still no good match of desing and future processes and no good match of design and customer need. Eg. Who needs througput if servercost tco is defined by either license per core cost or just sheer efficiency? What desktop user could actually use that bd? (The 1% that do eg video editing)

 

[krumme]

My prediction is that when excavator hits with extensive hdl and low freq but low power we will see that even if the design is based on an old failed arch, and even if 28nm is old as hell too (and worse as 32nm soi for perf!), amd will be able to sell a few devices. It goes to show how idiotic as a concept bd was. Now imagine what amd can sell with a normal solid desing on a modern process? It all depens on how well thought out the entire product is.

Lots of r&d brought bd. Little r&d brought bobcat and jaguar and consoles that amd entire business is dependent on today.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Why would they release an 8 core in your desired price range if the question is, will it even compete with quadcores? And for hexcores they are already sold below 400$. Tho its obvious also above your desired price range.

Ok, so your answer is No, Intel will not release any CPU to match 8 core AMD Zen in MT performance and price-wise.

Thanks for confirming that Intel will hand over the mainstream MT performance crown to AMD in 2016.

 

[dahorns]

Ok, so your answer is No, Intel will not release any CPU to match 8 core AMD Zen in MT performance and price-wise.

Thanks for confirming that Intel will hand over the mainstream MT performance crown to AMD in 2016.

I guess Intel will just deal with having a 4 core part that exceeds MT performance of Zen and costs slightly more. You know, since we're just making things up.

 

[erunion]

Ok, so your answer is No, Intel will not release any CPU to match 8 core AMD Zen in MT performance and price-wise.

Thanks for confirming that Intel will hand over the mainstream MT performance crown to AMD in 2016.

Were you not around in 2011 or something? Man, deja vu all over again!

 

[cbn]

Lots of r&d brought bd. Little r&d brought bobcat and jaguar and consoles that amd entire business is dependent on today.

Regarding those consoles, I do have to wonder if Xbox One will be the last MS console.

Here are my reasons:

1.) desktop hardware just doesn't age like it used to (ie, even today older x86 desktop hardware works well for most gaming)

2.) MS is building Xbox features into Windows

3.) DX12 is bringing new low level optiimzation to PC

Commodity off-the shelf PC hardware, it will probably be the next Xbox. So AMD needs to be ready for this in a realistic way. (IMO this means AMD need to very carefully consider the value of CPU + dGPU vs. APU on the desktop)

 

[frozentundra123456]

My prediction is that 8 core Zen comes out in late 2017 (only a year late, pretty good for AMD) will match 4 core icelake, which intel brought out early because of how afraid they were of Zen. As long as we are making stuff up lets go with it.

If you want to make reasonable assumptions, I will be surprised if 8 core zen really does come out before early 2017, and I expect it to at best be competitive with hex core intel. And there is already a hex core intel under 400.00, and it will be more price competitive once DDR4 becomes mainstream.

And unless AMDs marketing is even more incompetent than generally assumed, *if* they can come out with an 8 core zen as fast as 8 core intel, they will be fools to price it at 200 or even 300 dollars. I dont think they would though, as the exorbitant price they tried to charge for the overclocked 8350, i.e. 9590, shows that AMD is equally willing to put the screws to the consumer as intel is accused of being if they have a product they think can back it up. Unfortunately for them the performance and power usage did not back it up, and they had to quickly back off on the price.

 

[JDG1980]

Assuming AMD releases an 8 core Zen at $300 or so, do you think Intel will follow suit and do the same?

Or will Intel give up the high performance mainstream segment to AMD, in order to try to protect their margins in the server segment?

Intel generally doesn't get into price wars. They didn't do so even when they were getting beaten outright in both raw performance and perf/watt by AMD back in the Netburst days. Intel's culture is 60%+ gross margins on everything - with the notable exception of ultramobile Atoms, which they're willing to literally give away if that's what it takes to score design wins.

What you're suggesting here is AMD releasing a part with similar market positioning and appeal to Thuban. Remember when that was released back in 2011? You had to pay $999 for a six-core Intel SKU (the i7-980X), but AMD provided six full cores for $199-$295. The most popular Intel chip at that time for enthusiasts was the i5-750 (Lynnfield Nehalem). Thuban fell behind i5-750 in single-threaded performance, while defeating it in most multi-threaded benchmarks. You can see Anandtech's review results here. The important thing is that even though it did fall behind Intel's competing products in single-thread, it didn't do so by anything like the ridiculously embarrassing margins we've seen with Bulldozer and its progeny. Thuban was also only 904 sq. mm., less than a billion transistors, and was far more energy-efficient than Bulldozer (though not quite as much so as Intel's Nehalem-based products). I think we're going to see similar market appeal with Summit Ridge as we did with Thuban. For $299 or so, you'll be able to get 8 full cores, with each core having similar IPC to Sandy Bridge: basically the equivalent of a Xeon E5-2687W, though with less cache and memory bandwidth. In benchmarks using four or fewer threads, a traditional i7-4770K will beat it (though it will still provide reasonably competitive performance), but in multi-threaded applications, Summit Ridge will have a substantial edge.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Regarding those consoles, I do have to wonder if Xbox One will be the last MS console.

Here are my reasons:

1.) desktop hardware just doesn't age like it used to (ie, even today older x86 desktop hardware works well for most gaming)

2.) MS is building Xbox features into Windows

3.) DX12 is bringing new low level optiimzation to PC

Commodity off-the shelf PC hardware, it will probably be the next Xbox. So AMD needs to be ready for this in a realistic way. (IMO this means AMD need to very carefully consider the value of CPU + dGPU vs. APU on the desktop)

I doubt that off the shelf hardware will replace the consoles. One big advantage of consoles is that they are standardized hardware, so the devs know exactly the hardware target they are shooting for. I do think though that AMD should be very afraid the consoles will go ARM next time around though. Imagine being able to play games on your console at home, and continue playing on your phone just by turning down the graphics settings. I sincerely hope this does not happen, but I see it as a serious possibility.

 

[Fjodor2001]

What would be the point of releasing an 8 core Zen at $1000? It will not sell, just like Intel's 8 core $1000 CPUs do not sell in any quantities worth mentioning.

Far better to sell it at a lower price, and sell more but with less profit on each CPU sold. The total profit will be higher that way. The reason Intel does not do it is because they do not want to canibalize on their high margin server CPUs. But AMD is in another position.

I think an 8 core Zen is more likely to be sold at $300 or so. It has no iGPU, so the die area and production cost will not be that big.

 

[cbn]

I doubt that off the shelf hardware will replace the consoles. One big advantage of consoles is that they are standardized hardware, so the devs know exactly the hardware target they are shooting for.

I'm sure the standardization helps, but just look how well even a four+ year old Sandy Bridge quad core does for gaming.

Then factor in DX12 and Vulkan low level optimizations further enhancing those used CPUs potential for gaming in the future.

Then remember Microsoft loses money on consoles.

Do you see where this is going?