If the Zen 8 core is anywhere near $800 then I will simply wait a few months for the Skylake 8 core. It will have more IPC, more ram channels, more PCI-E and all the bells and whistles. If I'm spending anywhere near $1000 for a CPU, then I will gladly fork over a few hundred more for the best of the best, especially since these things last forever these days. $800 is way too much for Zen. That just won't do it for me. My current CPU is fast enough anyways. I don't need to buy any of these chips from either company. I'm just doing it for the lolz basically.
4C/4T $100-150, since AMD is already selling 4M/4T Athlons below $100, and there is a Bristol Ridge (Excavator) AM4 Athlon 950...
There might be 8C/8T and lower clocked 8C/16T populating this space, if they have a "full stack". Just one or a few top SKUs might land >$600.Indeed, it makes sense for AMD to address only the $600-$900 and the $150-$300 segments. /s
With that shift from ST to TP it's hard to tell. Might be an 8C/8T SKU then (if planned).What Zen part do you see offering similar performance to i7 7700(K), even with accent on throughput rather than ST performance?
You're right, X1S chip is made by TSMC as I read. Hence the "IIRC". About P4 Slim and Pro I saw sth like 14LPP, but might also just have been a rumour. Not up to date there.Aren't PS4/X1 chips built @TSMC?
If they want to win back some market, given their kind of offer will be very different (8c/16t parts also pitted vs 4c/8t parts) they will have to be aggressive or the inertia will just win.
My guess for a 3.6GHz SKU is 599€ to 699€ EU street price (meaning an MSRP of around 499$ to 599$)
Of course, a gap wouldn't be useful for AMD.Whether it's 6c/12t or 8t/8t, there has to be something in the middle of the Zen sandwich.
BTW, Canard PC Hardware wrote in their article, that we'll see 4C and 8C variants. The recent Chinese forum leak (if true, now deleted btw) said the same.hmmm no 6C 12T SKUs ??
The 4C are tied together in a CCX. Disabling of cores is possible according to The Stilt (IIRC). But wouldn't disabling SMT make an interesting product, too? No SMT penalty for a more important thread (for the "critical timing path") due to a second thread.I would imagine they would take the defective 8C and is there were 6 good cores make a 6C. The same way they made the X3 720 back in the day.
I'm sure, AMD would adjust their prices accordingly. But if money doesn't matter, why bother about Zen anyway?If the Zen 8 core is anywhere near $800 then I will simply wait a few months for the Skylake 8 core. It will have more IPC, more ram channels, more PCI-E and all the bells and whistles. If I'm spending anywhere near $1000 for a CPU, then I will gladly fork over a few hundred more for the best of the best, especially since these things last forever these days. $800 is way too much for Zen. That just won't do it for me. My current CPU is fast enough anyways. I don't need to buy any of these chips from either company. I'm just doing it for the lolz basically.
I am with you there. If I have already opened my wallet, then I'll go the whole way.
Since there is so much speculation on pricing I'll throw in my own guess as to pricing:
4C/4T $100-150, since AMD is already selling 4M/4T Athlons below $100, and there is a Bristol Ridge (Excavator) AM4 Athlon 950...
4C/8T $200 puts it squarely against mid-range i5's
8C/8T $250'ish competing with the 7600K
8C/16T $350 with $500 for the top-end halo SKU
I would imagine they would take the defective 8C and is there were 6 good cores make a 6C. The same way they made the X3 720 back in the day.
...The 4C are tied together in a CCX. Disabling of cores is possible according to The Stilt (IIRC). But wouldn't disabling SMT make an interesting product, too? No SMT penalty for a more important thread (for the "critical timing path") due to a second thread...
Yes. I think they should stick to the more cores idea and leave out the 4c/8t chips.Leaving out the 6c/12t would be a grave mistake IMO.
Yes. I think they should stick to the more cores idea and leave out the 4c/8t chips.
Have 4c/8t be APU only.
Leaving out the 6c/12t would be a grave mistake IMO.
"BAM", "_Y"..Probably a faked/spoofed CPUID Processor Brand String: AMD Ryzen: ZD3601BAM88F4_40/36_Y (but thanks for the laugh, whoever did this)
What's better at $350: 6C/12T 3.3/3.8 or 8C/16T 3.1/3.8?Leaving out the 6c/12t would be a grave mistake IMO.
I think the campaign should be "more cores" are better, and Intel doesn't give you enough cores, and a 4c/8t or less chip would not fit that campaign since that's all Intel gives you in the desktop line.If they have this ready now then i agree, if not though they need a low end to launch with the rest, and the APU can follow.
What's better at $350: 6C/12T 3.3/3.8 or 8C/16T 3.1/3.8?
What's better at $350: 6C/12T 3.3/3.8 or 8C/16T 3.1/3.8?
I don't see why are you making such a big deal out of this. 8C/8T should perform just about the same as 6C/12T in well threaded workloads (maybe a bit better but not by much). OCing wise it is easier to OC 6 instead of 8 cores since you have higher chance of running into "non-cooperative" core beyond some frequency, but Ryzen should be clocking well across the whole range so that shouldn't be a big deal.
Perhaps they could just shut off two cores. But then what about L3? Will it use both or be cut off as well? It's a new design with many fine things to consider.
I think the campaign should be "more cores" are better, and Intel doesn't give you enough cores, and a 4c/8t or less chip would not fit that campaign since that's all Intel gives you in the desktop line.
I would campaign on "more cores for your desktop", and sell 6c and 8c chips that way.
Have the top tier 6c/12t and 8c/16t chips for HEDT competition.
I would market the 4c chips as APUs under an "all in one" general use PC theme.
Exactly, the 8c/8t would play the exact same role as the 6c/12t, only better suited to fight the mainstream i7 in games and other consumer loads.With that shift from ST to TP it's hard to tell. Might be an 8C/8T SKU then (if planned).
Do you really see Intel being able to maintain the $1100 price tag on a 8/16 chip after AMD launches unlocked 6-8 core chips priced bewteen $300-$600? I expect the 6900K to perform a drastic altitude adjustment after Zen launch.So you would roughly see a 35+% discount for something with likely a cheaper platform and likely also beating a $1100 chip in more than just Blender and Handbrake?
BTW, Canard PC Hardware wrote in their article, that we'll see 4C and 8C variants. The recent Chinese forum leak (if true, now deleted btw) said the same.
The 8c/8t option was speculated on the forums but many deemed it unlikely since the 6c/12t variant would be easier to make in the context of salvaging chips with minor defects.The 4C are tied together in a CCX. Disabling of cores is possible according to The Stilt (IIRC). But wouldn't disabling SMT make an interesting product, too? No SMT penalty for a more important thread (for the "critical timing path") due to a second thread.
BIOSTAR AM4 Motherboards Specifications
http://www.zolkorn.com/news/biostar-second-gen-racing-motherboards-launch-event/
lists Mini-ITX boards (X370GTN & B350GTN)
hmmm no 6C 12T SKUs ??
If 8 core Zen is cheap enough I wouldn't be.I would be very disappoint if that is the case.
Assuming it's 8c/8t instead of 6c/12t it will look like this:I guess AMD wants to double up core counts vs. comparable mainstream Intel products.
So 8c/16t vs. i7 (4c/8t)
8c/8t vs i5 (4c/4t)
4c/8t vs i3 (2c/4t)
Intel might adjust prices due to Zen, but would do anyway in the near future due to SKL-X.Do you really see Intel being able to maintain the $1100 price tag on a 8/16 chip after AMD launches unlocked 6-8 core chips priced bewteen $300-$600? I expect the 6900K to perform a drastic altitude adjustment after Zen launch.
So up until 9 January 2017 they had no clear idea on this matter.