We don't know anything about the performance characteristics about the Zen CPU core besides a "40% IPC over XV" claim. We need to see how this thing performs.
Also, Zen is ~1 year out, so if you need to buy today, Zen is a non-starter.
Yes, or buy an 8 core AMD Zen when it's released. As you said, any of them will give you massively better MT performance, and come close to Intel quad core ST performance. But the anti-MT crowd just aims at max ST performance no matter what, and a 4 core 4790K/6700K is faster than 5960X/Zen in ST performance.
Yes, of course we won't know everything for sure until it is released. But already now we know it has ~40% higher IPC than XV, it's on 14 nm instead of 28 nm as for current AMD CPUs, it'll have 8 cores, and it has a completely new and improved uArch. So based on that we can at least make some rough guesstimates. And I'd be very surprised if 8 core Zen doesn't outperform 4 core 6700K in MT-performance. Do you even think they'd bother releasing it then?We don't know anything about the performance characteristics about the Zen CPU core besides a "40% IPC over XV" claim. We need to see how this thing performs.
Also, Zen is ~1 year out, so if you need to buy today, Zen is a non-starter.
^upto 40%...Yes, of course we won't know everything for sure until it is released. But already now we know it has ~40% higher IPC than XV, it's on 14 nm instead of 28 nm as for current AMD CPUs, it'll have 8 cores, and it has a completely new and improved uArch. So based on that we can at least make some rough guesstimates. And I'd be very surprised if 8 core Zen doesn't outperform 4 core 6700K in MT-performance. Do you even think they'd bother releasing it then?
Also, I'm not looking for a new CPU today anyway. I'm on a 3570K currently that serves me well. Next upgrade will not be until 1-3 years from now I think. And if anything I need more MT performance, so I'll probably opt for AMD Zen or Intel HEDT (or mainsteam Intel if they up the core count in Cannonlake). But my comment wasn't really about my personal buying plans, but more in general.
In the graphics IP? Because it isn't in x86.
AMD is worth peanuts and you see buyouts and mergers left and right. But nobody touches AMD.
Nobody tries to buyout AMD because it would start a bidding war. There are many companies that would gain a big advantage with AMD's IP alone, but the cost would be very high in the end.
Nobody tries to buyout AMD because it would start a bidding war. There are many companies that would gain a big advantage with AMD's IP alone, but the cost would be very high in the end.
Nobody tries to buyout AMD because it would start a bidding war. There are many companies that would gain a big advantage with AMD's IP alone, but the cost would be very high in the end.
In the totally unrealistic scenario of a bidding war breaking out for AMD, companies can just not bid beyond a certain amount and they are then no worse off than they are today.
Right, what does Sony and Nintendo do if e.g. MS buys AMD?
Not likely to happen so why bother thinking about it?
There have been many rumours of MS buying AMD as I'm sure you are aware.
Rumours believed by and spread by AMD supporters only.There have been many rumours of MS buying AMD as I'm sure you are aware.
MS already blew it by not buying AMD during the Mantle phase. Had they done that, Vulkan would never have existed. Now they are set to lose billions in future revenue.
ROFL, do explain!
There's a big reason (other than their abysmal market share and terrible cost structure) that no one wants to buy AMD for their graphics IP:
Why pay for a failing company and assume an additional $2 billion in long-term debt when you can pick up the IP for much less (and with no strings attached) after AMD's inevitable Chapter 11 bankruptcy?
If I need to explain that to you you've got a problem.
Never read so much crap in all my life. You guys have no idea about how business works.
Its you making up utter bollocks claims. And now you put the burden of proof on someone else?
So either you admit its your own BS and settle the score now or come up with some proof.
The issue seems to be you, rather than the rest of us.
Only proves you have absolutely no idea about businesses
However your blind faith in something is huge.
There was also a PDF link BTW. I could see 2 of 3 pics. Interestingly, why does the most DX11 load run on the same core as the most loaded game threads? Possibly due to necessary communication and DX calls done by these threads? In such a scenario these threads (or better: jobs) pull the DX11 API and driver load to a core which already has some load (in the example the most game related load).You pictures dont work. And DX12 wont change game logic.
The beating is simple, as I explained before: with weak performance of a single core, the game thread + 80% DX11 or 13% DX12 related load (8c) still creates a bottleneck.Hence why an i3 beats a FX8350 in AOTS. And how was Fable? Oh right, same thing.
So the challenge is up to you, show me a DX12 game where your dream comes true.
Not likely to happen so why bother thinking about it?