Read more.Quote:
There's been some clear, close-up product photos published too.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
There's been some clear, close-up product photos published too.
One more week until Hexus offers solid evidence on what 1400X, 1600X and 1800X can really do? Or slightly more? Ungh, like breadcrumbs to the starving right now.
Rumours were that the initial launch would only include the 8C SKUs, with the lower end following some time later, so I wouldn't hold my breath for the 1600X and 1400X reviews, personally... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozaron
Hype
AMD need to stop teasing us and lift the NDA already.
:( What rumours giveth, they seem also to take away. (And put 3 inches outside of our reach)Quote:
Originally Posted by scaryjim
I like the idle voltage on the cpu, 0.672V is low in general and exceptionally low for and AMD chip. Gives hope for decent overclocking headroom and lower temps.
Interesting that it beats out the dual CPU X5650 setup (12C/24T)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcwJ6l33ZwoQuote:
Originally Posted by Platinum
Not much to say other than well done to AMD, I may even upgrade sooner than originally planned, that physics test result is lovely!
Just watched that and loved it for some strange reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by sykobeehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcwJ6l33ZwoQuote:
Originally Posted by Platinum
If there benchmarks are true its looking like AMD are on track for something epic, we just need a few confirmations that this is in fact correct.
Something epic? I wouldn't say releasing a new CPU into a market that generally doesn't care too much about CPU performance any more, would class as epic.
It looks good, don't get me wrong.....the funny thing is most people I see saying "I'm going to buy one" are enthusiasts who probably aren't going to notice any difference over their current CPU. Now, if Dell stated "from March we will only carry Ryzen CPUs", that would be epic for AMD.
If Dell decided to carry Ryzen in half their offerings it'd still be epic for AMD. Whether they'll do enough to capture the hearts and minds of big OEMs is a big question though. Enthusiasts and smaller system integrators are an easier sell - more performance for the same money, or same performance for less money == big win. If the rumours are accurate, at £200 - the same price as an i5 7400 (3.0GHz - 3.5GHz) - AMD will have a 4C/8T processor clocked at 3.5GHz - 3.9Ghz+. That's quite a favourable comparison...Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
hmmm those opengl frame rates seem a bit low, sure my 1060 6gb and i7 4790k got around 150fps...and that's a 1080...
That multi threading score though is looking very promising for me personally (3D rendering), it's basically double my i7 4790k (around 850-900 which is lower than shown on chart...hmm, they must be overclocked) which considering mine is faster clock it looks like the multi threading by amd is pretty good again (they did it better when dual cores were first out)
Obviously this depends on if it's accurate etc but if it's true it's looking like a good chip for the money for my needs.
If it weren't for the fact most people have a sandybridge or newer CPU and aren't fully utilising it.....so whats the point of upgrading?Quote:
Originally Posted by scaryjim
Yes, some people upgrade for the sake of it and some systems die and that will always be the case but there is a reason PC sales are slowing......AMD needed this out 1-2 years ago IMO (at least if they aren't going to sell loads via OEMs). We've now had years of very little choice due to AMD not pulling their weight and CPU requirements aren't what they used to be (relatively speaking). The last 2-3 gens of Intel CPUs have soaked up a lot of AMDs potential audience IMO :(
Unless of course, they can talk programmers into utilising their CPUs better.....but we\'ve seen how good they are at getting developers on board in the past and what programmer is going to take extra time to add AMD features with such a huge number of Intel users out there?
I just have a feeling this may end up being a great product with poorer-than-needed sales. Which would be a shame and ultimately screw us all over further down the road. Its great news if your one of the few people left that actually needs a CPU upgrade though......
I doubt AMD could find enough production capacity to feed companies like Dell without crippling other commitments.Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
Nevertheless, I do think this is epic. Lots of people run software that scales well with core count but cannot afford or easily justify Intel's HEDT prices. Now they have an option that offers 95-99% of Intel's performance for probably a third of the platform cost on current prices.
This is massive for my old stomping ground of research chemistry, where Intel's HEDT would offer a massive quality of life improvement but could not be justified when there are expensive chemicals to buy. I am sure similar stories abound in physics and engineering, not to mention home and small business users doing rendering or video transcoding.
Furthermore, plenty are sitting on old quad core chips unable to justify the cost of an upgrade for minor speed gains, and now they have good single threaded speed gains and extra cores and good prices.