Details leak out on AMD’s first Zen-based desktop CPUs

We’ve known for some time that AMD is cooking up a revamped x86 architecture. That architecture is code-named Zen, and the folks at SweClockers have dug up some dirt about the first desktop chips based on it.

Those chips will belong to a family called Summit Ridge, SweClockers says. They’ll be fabbed on a 14-nm process, and they’ll pack as many as eight cores inside thermal envelopes ranging up to 95W. The site also brings up a DDR4 memory controller, integrated PCI Express 3.0 lanes, and a new FM3 socket that will apparently succeed FM2+.

By the way, while that socket suggests a consumer focus, SweClockers says “nothing so far is mentioned about the integrated graphics parts of the processor.” Hmm.

There’s no word on a launch schedule for Summit Ridge. If I’m not mistaken, though, both Zen and its ARM-based K12 sibling are on track for a 2016 release. That means Summit Ridge may be a ways off still.

Comments closed
    • AJSB
    • 5 years ago

    My take on this (read: PURE speculation) is that there will be two basic types of ZEN:

    1) 8 CPU cores capable of high frequencies, 95W TDP and NO iGPU or a 128 shaders iGPU (i.e. “successor” of AM3+ kinda of CPUs at most with a AM1 “basic-level” iGPU).

    2) 8 CPU cores with lower frequencies, 45/55W(?) TDP and iGPU of at least 512 shaders w/new colour compression (i.e. PC version of PS4 APU).
    This version could be also 95W with a iGPU of 1024 shaders or something like that.

    All using of course FM3 socket to “standardize” the socket.

    • ronch
    • 5 years ago

    8 cores built on 14nm sucking 95w.

    Either those cores are gonna be frickin’ awesome or AMD isn’t done making Prescotts yet.

      • BaronMatrix
      • 5 years ago

      I believe ALL future AMD CPUs will have graphics… That means that there will be less sockets for more SKUs… One socket for Carrizo, one for FX and one for Opteron…

      I don’t mind having a GPU on the CPU if it does desktop well and can switch to the dGPU… All of Intel’s chips now have graphics…

    • ronch
    • 5 years ago

    I’ll say what’s probably on everyone’s mind but are probably cautious to do so: I really don’t care which socket these Zen chips will use or which type of memory they’ll support or whether or not they’ll have built-in PCIe controllers. They’re no doubt important to achieving more performahce, but what everyone wants to see are real-world benchmarks and efficiency graphs. Specs are cool but the implementation is even more crucial.

    • d0g_p00p
    • 5 years ago

    Is this a real 8 core CPU or that shared 2 core thing that did not seem to work very well for AMD? I’m hoping it’s a real 8 core CPU, I would love to see AMD back in the game.

      • ronch
      • 5 years ago

      I would think they’ve had enough resource sharing with the Bulldozer lineage and have gone back to full cores. Otherwise, they’re deliberately driving themselves into the ground.

        • destroy.all.monsters
        • 5 years ago

        That was a nifty piledriver reference. +1 πŸ™‚

    • Vergil
    • 5 years ago

    Why would anybody want a CPU when APUs/SOCs can do way more…. Weird.
    Anyhow, can’t wait for the K12 APUs, so hyped for that Glorious ARM-RADEON beast, hope my body can handle it.

    On the topic of AMD’s upcoming SOCs, really curious to see how the upcoming Amur Tablet from AMD will fare against iPad Air 2 and Nexus 9 2014.

    Sincerely…

    Vergil the BADA$$

      • ronch
      • 5 years ago

      You should meet Adi.

      • maxxcool
      • 5 years ago

      Hahahah.. oh, your serious .,…

    • maroon1
    • 5 years ago

    Funny how many people here are comparing the TDP of this to Intel 8 cores, as if it the two performs equally. Do people know how these upcoming 8 cores will perform ?

    If you think 95w for 8 cores is insane then look at ARM 8 core cortex A7, the TDP is way below 95w TDP but the performance sucks, and it performs worse than Apple dual A8 or nvidia dual Denver cores.

    It is not number of cores that matters. You should look at performance. I doubt these AMD 8 cores will match future intel 4 cores, let alone intel 6 cores or 8 cores.

    It also worth to mention that Intel have 12 cores Xeon with 65w TDP
    [url<]http://ark.intel.com/products/81903/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2650L-v3-30M-Cache-1_80-GHz[/url<] And there is noting insane about this because it has low clocks, and performs worse than i7 5960X

      • BaronMatrix
      • 5 years ago

      You all suck… I have used i7s at work and it NEVER performs as good as my 8350 when loaded down…

      Jim Keller kicked them in the nuts with Hammer and he’s doing Zen…

        • chuckula
        • 5 years ago

        Well of course not Baron! You see, i7 processors don’t generate anywhere near as much heat as the FX parts, so clearly the hot air baloons that use waste heat from the i7 systems can’t carry anyhwere near as much load as the FX powered hot air balloons!

        P.S. Would you like directions to a homeless shelter? I see those amazing FX server chips still can’t seem to get amdzone working straight.

        P.P.S. How many processors does a McDonald’s really need to operate?

        • JumpingJack
        • 5 years ago

        There is an easy explanation … you are not using them right.

        • raddude9
        • 4 years ago

        That’s weird, I’m in the same situation, my work i7 performs worse than my htpc AMD A10-6700 machine….

        … All because some corporate dweeb hobbled my i7 with a 5400rpm HD.

    • DarkMikaru
    • 5 years ago

    As an avid AMD fan I’m def glad to hear this! I had assumed that my beloved 8350 was pretty much the end of the road with regards to dedicated x86 parts (not APU’s). Like a reader said a while back, come on AMD… I’m loving my 8 Core goodness, you can’t expect me to downgrade to a Quad APU and like it! lol

    Anyway, like the rest of you we can only hope that the performance is at least within spitting distance of Intel. Over the years, I’ve been perfectly happy paying 70% of Intel’s price and getting roughly 70% of the performance on AMD’s chips. That’s a fair metric I’d say.

    Come on AMD, hang in there. I’ve said it once and I’ll say it 1000 times… we don’t need to have an Intel only world.

      • chuckula
      • 5 years ago

      And people say I never upthumb anything pro-AMD.

    • Takeshi7
    • 5 years ago

    I am praying these Zen cores are the miracle AMD needs. I also would rather have a CPU with more cores and a successor to AM3+ instead of an APU. Oh well. I hope it works out for them.

    • NeelyCam
    • 5 years ago

    Hmm… When I hear the word “Zen”, I tend to think peaceful, quiet and [b<]ssllllloooooooowwwww[/b<]. Like me on Sunday morning. Is that what this CPU is going to be like...?

      • chuckula
      • 5 years ago

      [quote<] I tend to think peaceful, quiet and ssllllloooooooowwwww. Like me on Sunday morning.[/quote<] Saturday nights at the combo Viking Reenactment & death-metal concerts really take it out of Neely.

      • Anonymous Coward
      • 5 years ago

      Its only a question of how many o’s are on the “slow”. However I bet AMD will be prepared to compete on price.

      • anubis44
      • 5 years ago

      Or it’s so goddam fast, it gives you a calm sense of serenity… in its superiority. πŸ™‚

    • maxxcool
    • 5 years ago

    Dear AMD, good luck. 8 cores, 14-NM … yeah. no …. I forsee low LOW yields and utter disaster. Which is too bad since intel is now wayyyyy to content making zillions of bay trail crap and losing focus on the dekstop with the utter lack of competition and or threat of competition.

    Seriously .. 8 cores? Sounds like this “NEW” core is steam-roller with dedicated front and back-ends as I predicted. I do not see the cost to produce being helpful at all to AMDs bottom line. In fact this sounds like a pot-sweetener and a loss per cpu overall.

    *I predict this is the last larger core cpu AMD ever builds.*

    • sweatshopking
    • 5 years ago

    hey guize, let me clear this up:
    zen will suck. you’ll still be buying intel for pretty much everything.
    amd will still be bleeding money in 2016, and like the zombie they are, they’ll still be walking around with their fans talking about how zen will be different. until it isn’t, and it’s steamroller all over again.

      • chuckula
      • 5 years ago

      SSK, stop bringing reality into this conversation!

      Zen is the most amazing processor ever created… as long as it remains in our imaginations!

      [insert Muppet Babies theme song here]

      • Hari_Oilstone
      • 5 years ago

      Now if only they could take the hit to their financials and bully OEM’s that try to use Intel out of the market. And write off a quarters worth of profits in penalties as merely an operations cost.

      Man, that would be some great schadenfreude.

        • chuckula
        • 5 years ago

        [quote<]Now if only they could take the hit to their financials [/quote<] Pfftt... AMD's been doing that every quarter for the last 5 years! [quote<]bully OEM's that try to use Intel out of the market. [/quote<] Care to name a single OEM that Intel has "bullied out of the market"? [Guy who registered 5 minutes ago and sounds suspiciously like 50 other posters who copy-n-paste the same fact-free drivel] Didn't think so.

    • Arclight
    • 5 years ago

    Eight cores at 95W is not bad compared with what we have today but we’re talking about potentially 14nm so it might not turn out to be stellar.

    Also we have no idea what performance it brings per core so regardless of the TDP and fabrication node we still have a long time to go until we learn more details.

    Meanwhile the cheapest 4 core Intel CPU costs about what it cost when Sandy Bridge was launched many years ago, at least in my country (i live in Europe). A competitor is needed, Intel is stagnating, sometimes moving even backwards.

    • bfar
    • 5 years ago

    If it’s a full octocore at 95w, and if it is indeed still on track for 2016, then there’s very little to complain about imo.

    However, if Skylake delivers, many enthusiasts may well take the plunge in the second half of 2015.

      • the
      • 5 years ago

      That’s assuming that Skylake arrives on the desktop in 2015. Enthusiasts are still waiting on Broadwell desktops. In fact, Intel hasn’t completed the mobile roll out of Broadwell.

      I have the strong feeling that desktop SkyLake won’t arrive until 2016.

        • chuckula
        • 5 years ago

        Desktop Skylake will arrive in 2015… but not high-end desktop Skylake-K, which is likely Q2 2016 or so.

        Having said that, given that AMD is shooting for Q3 2016… and assuming that their aspirational goals materialize ontime… then Skylake-K should be out for 2 – 3 months before Zen lands.

      • smilingcrow
      • 5 years ago

      Not sure why the TDP is a big deal really as it is at 14nm!

      • Kretschmer
      • 5 years ago

      Eight weak cores will still be worse than four strong ones in 2016, and we have no indication that AMD’s solution will offer competitive per-core performance. Bulldozer was advertised as an “eight core” part, and look how that turned out.

      Given AMD’s constrained resources and difficulty delivering, Occam’s Razor suggests that Zen will not be competitive with Intel on performance or power draw metrics.

        • sschaem
        • 5 years ago

        And it doesn’t have to be…

        Intel sell many CPU with a much MUCH worse performance then a I7-4690k, and also much worse power efficiency then a i7-5550U.

          • Kretschmer
          • 5 years ago

          Right, but Intel’s performance parts are more efficient than AMD’s low power parts, while Intel’s low power parts are faster than AMD’s performance parts. Zen will have to be quite a leap forward to make AMD competitive on performance or power.

            • Anonymous Coward
            • 5 years ago

            Its best to assume that it will be a modest design. Winning is impossible, but perhaps they can get a price/performance value that Intel isn’t interested in matching.

    • Srsly_Bro
    • 5 years ago

    I’d better be able to get this in a metal container.

    • ronch
    • 5 years ago

    When will AMD realize that anyone who’s building a desktop PC has the freedom to plug in a discrete graphics card? This means they can include a very basic GPU in there because anyone looking at gaming will want to plug in a dedicated graphics card anyway, and for office use employers actually don’t want their PCs equipped with fast graphics (I found some games installed in some of our office PCs, actually). For APUs aimed at lower TDPs (e.g. for use with HOME laptops) they can cut the CPU core count and add more GPU resources because you can’t plug in a discrete graphics card and people have lower standards when it comes to CPU performance with smaller machines. They can also put out ‘Business Class’ chips aimed at corporate environments that provide moderate CPU performance and basic GPUs good enough for most office duties.

    Oh BTW, ditch the crappy APU moniker. Just call it a CPU with integrated graphics. No one cares if it’s ‘accelerated’. Compromised CPUs and compromised GPUs in one piece of silicon. What’s accelerated with that?

    They should really look at how Intel does it. IMHO, Intel truly understands what most folks want. AMD understands only what they think we want. Chip sales are testament to who gets it right.

      • _ppi
      • 5 years ago

      As much as you seem to underestimate them – AMD knows they have much weaker CPU core (why they are not really doing anything with it is another matter, Zen should have been here two years ago), and they have much better graphics than Intel (including, but not limited to drivers).

      Therefore, they try to position themselves into the part of the market, where their offering has some merit, and they play that card. Unfortunately for them, it is quite a niche.

      With regards to Zen, it is supposed to be a CPU core. Therefore, AMD certainly plans to implement them in variety of CPU&GPU configurations.

      • BaronMatrix
      • 5 years ago

      Intel pays people to take chips… Sometimes they threaten them…

      AMD is ALWAYS better when under heavy load… They do have Kaveri Pro chips and will probably have more with Carrizo…

      And APU is an apt term when the GPU does accelerate OpenCL\GL and thereby GPGPU…

      • TO11MTM
      • 4 years ago

      I feel like AMD had a different long term goal and stumbled.

      Ideally, if the end goal IS to have the CPU and GPU on the same Die, to have some ability to share more resources than just some cache and memory would be a huge boost to die space/efficiency. i.e. start running vector operations through the GPU bits instead.

      The scheduler unit alone would probably be a nightmare, however. But if you look at AMD’s architecture, they’ve kept the Dual-Pipeline for a long time on most of their architectures, whereas Intel has continued to use Unified Schedulers for Integer/FP operations, so it wouldn’t be a HUGE stretch.

      I mean, AMD’s had problems with bold technology moves in the past (K5.) I almost feel like they’re just struggling to get some piece of technology ‘fixed up’ to retake the lead with Intel. The K6 was a product of NexGen’s assistance, the K7 had a lot of help from former DEC engineer experience, The K8 was bold, but even that did stumble, I remember waiting and waiting and it was delayed at least a year and a half, longer for consumer level systems. It was good, and I’m glad it succeeded. But it may not have gotten enough traction, were it not for Intel being too busy failing at making Prescott a non-dud to compete.

    • Meadows
    • 5 years ago

    Well, at least they’re working on *something*.

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 5 years ago

    Zen is coming.

    Prepare.

      • ronch
      • 5 years ago

      Prepare for what?

        • chuckula
        • 5 years ago

        TO BALANCE YOUR CHI!

        • HisDivineOrder
        • 5 years ago

        Zen.

    • phileasfogg
    • 5 years ago

    AMD will target a new market with Zen : Motorcycle Maintenance.

    • MadManOriginal
    • 5 years ago

    Zen huh…hopefully the marketing mascot is a gigantic, bloated, floating alien baby with it’s head split open to show off its huge multicore brain!

      • Ethyriel
      • 5 years ago

      [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70ELaFu0jp4<]For anyone too young to get the reference[/url<]

    • geekl33tgamer
    • 5 years ago

    Yay, Zendozer!

    • ALiLPinkMonster
    • 5 years ago

    Not that it’s likely, but wouldn’t it be awesome if this marks AMD’s return to true competitiveness instead of a gimpy “look at how many coars you get for the money!” marketing strategy WITHOUT cannibalizing its GPU department? Yeah yeah I know, it’s quite a fantasy. One can certainly hope though.

    • fhohj
    • 5 years ago

    Hopefully it’s decent.

    People who bought into Bulldozer, and Piledriver and Steamroller should get some kind of bonus for doing so. Like, provide proof of purchase on your Piledriver chip and your Zen chip and get an awesome 8 T-Shirt* pack from AMD with a design that says

    “I bought Piledriver and all I got was 8 of these lousy tank tops that become T-shirts by sharing 4 sets of sleeves they came with.”

      • geekl33tgamer
      • 5 years ago

      I don’t expect any discounts for having one (FX-9590), but am excited to see what their “brute force – every core overprovisioned” approach brings to the table.

      • Anonymous Coward
      • 5 years ago

      My home Linux box runs a Prescott. Got it for free at work. Sadly nobody buys recent AMD chips, so I don’t think I’ll get a free Bulldozer. πŸ™

        • chuckula
        • 5 years ago

        Glad to see you enjoy a combination of open source and open-air heating.

          • Anonymous Coward
          • 5 years ago

          Where I live, electric heating is the only option, and its winter, so its perfectly efficient to leave it on 24×7. The only concern is that I might need to replace it some day, unlike most heaters.

            • Concupiscence
            • 5 years ago

            At least Prescott does some voltage throttling. I don’t think the power usage is offensive in absolute terms, but the value-per-watt’s just awful. Still, a free computer’s a free computer. I hope it’s PCIe, at least.

      • maxxcool
      • 5 years ago

      Hahahahah +1

    • south side sammy
    • 5 years ago

    “eight cores inside thermal envelopes ranging up to 95W. The site also brings up a DDR4 memory controller, integrated PCI Express 3.0 lanes, and a new FM3 socket”………..”nothing so far is mentioned about the integrated graphics parts”

    pci-e 3.0 ssd’s/work station integrated graphics/8 speedy cores at a reasonable 95watts/ddr4……….. sounds good.

    • vargis14
    • 5 years ago

    I hope they are not just adding the CPU cores and the GPU cores together to come up with 8 cores.
    A4, A6, A8, A10 sound familiar?

    I wish they would just make a real dedicated CPU, after all the mistakes they just might get it right this time. Please direct links from PCI-E to CPU no northbridge HT crap to make heat and limit CPU to GPU communications.

    Or just shrink and optimize a Thuban to 14, 20 or 28nm add DDR4 support and run then at 4.5ghz!…..would probably still use 70 watts less then the FX 9000 series and perform better also.

    I just cannot believe they are still limiting their dedicated CPU’s with a northbridge.

      • geekl33tgamer
      • 5 years ago

      The 990FX chipset is due another re-brand – watch this space… πŸ˜‰

        • geekl33tgamer
        • 5 years ago

        Someone’s sarcasm detector wasn’t working. :-/

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 5 years ago

    Interesting. Hope its worthwhile.

    • jjj
    • 5 years ago

    All day i kept waiting for you guys to report on the China rumor that BLX IC Design Co. is looking to acquire AMD.
    Hard to say what kind of loophole they can find to be able to do it and if it would be bad or great. AMD is running on fumes right now, a huge cash infusion would matter a lot and China really wants it’s own CPU so they would provide plentiful funding.

      • 3SR3010R
      • 5 years ago

      The sky is falling, the sky is falling

      or

      AMD will be bought out by [insert name of company here]

      These buyout rumors on AMD have been repeated like clockwork every time AMD reports stinky numbers. And that is quite often.

      BLX is a fraction the size of AMD. BLX is also (since 2003) AMD’s partner for AMD’s China Development Center.

      This rumor is either a mis-quote or the rumor was placed for stock price manipulation.

        • jjj
        • 5 years ago

        AMD is small actually, it’s market cap is bellow 2 billions , has 1b illion cash and 2.2 billions debt. Even if you value it at 4 billions, it’s not that much, even Mediatek could buy it.
        A few month ago China announced some 20 billions $ for the National Integrated Circuit (IC) Industry Investment Fund.
        And China will go for key technology . A few months ago a Chinese entity made an offer for Omnivision , one of the big camera sensor makers, they’ll likely go into RRAM too if not 3D NABD before that and so on.
        If AMD misfires in 2016 they are pretty much done and it’s very likely that they would gladly sell now if anyone makes a reasonable offer, problem was that nobody had a good reason to buy them, it was just too much $ for too little.
        There is huge difference between nonsense like Samsung or Dell buying them and China buying them. Samsung could get what it needs for 20 times less, for China it’s a strategic investment.

        I bet you were this smug when the rumor about intel investing in Rockchip showed up and soon after, it became reality.It doesn’t hurt to take a second and think.

        I got no idea why i always expect readers here to behave like adults and maybe have something intelligent to say.

          • south side sammy
          • 5 years ago

          I see you edited that post twice. the first time was when your mom proof read and amended it and the second when your father reedited it…???

      • Deanjo
      • 5 years ago

      China already has it’s own processor, the Loongson. Besides if China wanted to have their own x86 processor they would just copy intel and call it their own. China isn’t exactly well known for honouring someone else’s IP.

        • sschaem
        • 5 years ago

        Search for : “Spreadtrum to be Granted Intel’s x86 ISA License”

          • Deanjo
          • 5 years ago

          Search for “Chinese ripoff”

          Still if they do grant it, that only solidifies that AMD has next to nothing to offer for a buyout. Intel on a whim could grant a license to anyone and that makes AMD’s license next to worthless.

            • south side sammy
            • 5 years ago

            pretty much says it……… short and sweet. China is ripping everything off. And I don’t see anybody handing China an x86 license. I’ll stick with my Samsung thought. Only thing that makes sense right now.
            But I will say, for all of us, lets hope AMD continues to grow and prosper.

            • rechicero
            • 5 years ago

            The original x86 patents expired some time ago. Of course, sse 1-4 are still valid, but can Intel license x86-64 (AMD64) instruction set?

            • Tristan
            • 5 years ago

            x86 is specification and never expires.

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            x86 is an instruction set architecture.

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            They can license Intel 64. The last cross patent agreement allows intel to license it out as if x86-64 was theirs alone.

            • rechicero
            • 5 years ago

            Good to know… And good to know the agreement is public.

            • _ppi
            • 5 years ago

            Are you certain?

            I looked at [url<]http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2488/000119312509236705/dex102.htm[/url<] and while not being a lawyer and not reading it ten times properly, the wording of paragraph 3.1 of "AMD and its Subsidiaries hereby grant to Intel and its Subsidiaries a non-exclusive, non-transferable, fully paid-up, worldwide license, without the right to sublicense" seems to tell the opposite. I may have missed something, ofc.

      • south side sammy
      • 5 years ago

      samsung………..

      • fhohj
      • 5 years ago

      Sure seems like it would be good on the R&D front. But as far as the Western market is concerned, this would pretty much kill AMD dead. Even if there weren’t any hardware backdoors or anything built into it, believe Intel marketing would sure make it out like there was. And there’s no way it would be good enough for the government. The government would possibly ban the chips. The private sector might follow suit. One of the last places AMD chips are supposed to make sense, economical well rounded workstations, would dry up.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 5 years ago

      Why would China buy it when they can just steal the IP through security hacks?

    • Deanjo
    • 5 years ago

    Sigh, 95 watts again….. How about dumping that heater graphics core and use the extra die space for better CPU uses?

      • Ethyriel
      • 5 years ago

      For eight cores, that’s not too bad. Haswell-E octo-core parts were what, 140w? We’ll see how it goes for AMD here. I’m not holding out too much hope for them, but nothing looks bad yet.

        • Deanjo
        • 5 years ago

        I would much rather have additional CPU cores or a higher clock speeds for the same TDP or same amount of cores and speed at a lower TDP. Integrated graphics are a waste for the performance crowd.

          • smilingcrow
          • 5 years ago

          This is AMD not the performance crowd …… unless this time they have finally come good!

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            Well it is still trying to address the performance crowd otherwise PCI-e 3.0 really wouldn’t be needed.

            • smilingcrow
            • 5 years ago

            PCIe 3.0 is supported by Celerons these days so it’s entry level for the desktop.

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            Sure but the platform also works for their higher end product.

            • smilingcrow
            • 5 years ago

            LGA1150 is mainstream.

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            LGA1150 covers mainstream to enthusiast to workstation/server class.

            Just ask intel

            [url<]http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/chipsets/performance-chipsets/z97-chipset.html[/url<] [url<]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon#E3-12xx_v3-series_.22Haswell.22[/url<]

            • smilingcrow
            • 5 years ago

            We are talking semantics here then as I’m referring to LGA 2011 which is not mainstream.

            • Ethyriel
            • 5 years ago

            And you’re suggesting this core can’t be used for both high end and low end parts, with different core counts, clock speeds, and with and without integrated graphics. If it’s truly a new architecture, they’re not just going to use it in one segment.

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            That is not at all what I’m suggesting. Re-read the initial post.

            • Ethyriel
            • 5 years ago

            The way I read it, if Intel supports a higher end interconnect on a low end processor, it’s because the platform is also used for higher end parts. But if AMD supports a higher end interconnect on anything, lolz, AMD can’t make anything high end.

            The way I see it, Intel is pushing power consumption over IPC to an extreme with Broadwell. Much like Netburst pushing clocks over IPC and power consumption, this is a prime time for AMD to strike.

            Can they do it again? Hell if any of us know, but it’s pretty clear Intel might stumble a little here, and if AMD has a good architecture on their hands with Zen it has the potential to take advantage of a weak spot in Intel’s armor and pull themselves out of the grave.

            • Ninjitsu
            • 5 years ago

            I don’t know if Intel isn’t pushing IPC or simply can’t push it faster(or more safely) than they are.

            Problem is, they’re pretty much leading IPC performance in the consumer space, so it’s not really possible to know if isn’t simply a case of them hitting a wall. Their competition has more headroom because it’s further behind, so naturally they seem to be making more progress.

            • Ethyriel
            • 5 years ago

            Well, if they are hitting a wall, even if it’s temporary, it definitely opens them up for competition even from the likes of ARM architectures.

            • Ninjitsu
            • 5 years ago

            Of course, unless ARM hits the very same (or similar) wall(s).

            • Ethyriel
            • 5 years ago

            Considering the wall will probably be in fabrication, it’s going to come down to adapting architectures to scale in performance without reducing fabrication size. A lot of this would also have to be up to software.

            Maybe ARM will succeed ultimately if it can more easily scale to many cores. Maybe AMD will have an advantage if stream processors begin to supplement the traditional CPU for general purpose computing. Maybe with Intel’s R&D might they’ll continue to bypass the roadblocks with x86, or find their own advantage in other subsystems.

            Or maybe something new like memristors or quantum computing will take off and change the way we compute, effectively resetting the clock.

            • anubis44
            • 5 years ago

            Jim Keller designed the K12. He will not be bringing his ‘B’ game to this fight. You can count on this being a genuine, full-out effort to dethrone Intel, like he did when he designed the K8 (Athlon 64) for AMD back in 2003.

            • BIF
            • 5 years ago

            I see, AMD is so far down in the snakepit, we’ve resorted to dropping designer names?

            I’ve been depressed lately. Can’t wait to see the new line of Jordache CPUs and Ive GPUs!

          • albundy
          • 5 years ago

          Do they still think that they are catering to the performance crowd? lol. meh, doesn’t matter. i’m not waiting for them anymore. i’ve moved on.

        • HisDivineOrder
        • 5 years ago

        True, but then there’s no performance promises here except you’re getting octacore and 95 watts, which sounds more Jaguar than Excavator.

          • Anonymous Coward
          • 5 years ago

          Funny thing, it probably [b<]is[/b<] more Jaguar than Excavator. Designed to turn a profit, not chase after some gold medal to hang on the wall.

        • dragosmp
        • 5 years ago

        “IF” they are cores with 1x ALU and FPU per core

          • Narishma
          • 5 years ago

          Why wouldn’t they be? This is a new micro architecture that shouldn’t have anything to do with Bulldozer.

        • smilingcrow
        • 5 years ago

        Intel have an 8/16 C/T Xeon on 22nm at 2.6/3.4GHz at 90W so without more info 8 core at 95W at 14nm tells us very little.

      • Pholostan
      • 5 years ago

      “Up to” is the important part.

      • auxy
      • 5 years ago

      [url=http://ark.intel.com/m/products/82930/Intel-Core-i7-5960X-Processor-Extreme-Edition-20M-Cache-up-to-3_50-GHz?q=5960X#@product/specifications<]Yes, 95W is absolutely insane for an eight-core CPU.[/url<]

        • Deanjo
        • 5 years ago

        Are you implying that the graphics core doesn’t generate heat? If not then your link means nothing.

          • auxy
          • 5 years ago

          Really? The 95W eight core CPU that as far as we know does not include a GPU is still deserving of ridicule in the face of a 140W 8-core? ( δΈ€δΈ€)

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            Really, especially when you consider that one 140w 8-core can literally wipe the floor still on a performance per watt basis.

            • Ethyriel
            • 5 years ago

            I’m sorry, do you have a Zen based CPU that you’re benchmarking?

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            Nope, just wise enough to know what AMD is realistically able to deliver which has been all to many times overpraise and under deliver again, and again, and again, and again.

            • auxy
            • 5 years ago

            Troll post! Banned for life! (οΎŸβˆ€οΎŸ)

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            It can’t be a troll post when it is the truth. Financials, ever shrinking marketshare, missed road maps, under performing parts, production woes, flawed products, multiple “one time charges”, massive layoffs, closing their advance research centre, compiler partner acquired by their competition, etc, etc, etc.

            To think anything otherwise is putting one’s head in the clouds.

            Edit: also forgot to mention their abandonment of hand drawn and hand laid design.

        • moshpit
        • 5 years ago

        Hehehe, sarcasm much? πŸ˜›

        • Deanjo
        • 5 years ago

        Also you might remember that AMD brought out x6 processors at 95W back on the 32nm process. Slapping an 8 core on 14 nm under 95W is hardly a feat of magic.

        Correction 45nm.

        [url<]http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Phenom+II+X6+1045T[/url<]

          • auxy
          • 5 years ago

          I’m aware! You’re the one acting like it’s SUUUCH A HIGH TDP. I never said it was impressive, only that it wasn’t exceptional or unusual.

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            And it’s wrong to have a high multicore cpu with low TDP?

            • auxy
            • 5 years ago

            Why would you say that?

            • Deanjo
            • 5 years ago

            You are the one saying I’m making a fuss over it having a high TDP without merit.

        • the
        • 5 years ago

        If you look around at their server parts, both AMD and Intel have been shipping 8 core parts with lower than 95W TDP for years now.

          • auxy
          • 5 years ago

          Someone didn’t click the link! (*β€˜βˆ€β€˜)

        • smilingcrow
        • 5 years ago

        Those are for over-clocking hence the high TDP. There are other 8 cores with a lower TDP:
        [url<]http://ark.intel.com/products/83359/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2640-v3-20M-Cache-2_60-GHz[/url<]

          • auxy
          • 5 years ago

          Someone else didn’t click the link! (*β€˜βˆ€β€˜)

            • smilingcrow
            • 5 years ago

            I did so I don’t know what you are on about!

            • auxy
            • 5 years ago

            I was purely making the point that 95W is not very high TDP for an 8-core CPU.

            [url=http://ark.intel.com/m/products/83361/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2667-v3-20M-Cache-3_20-GHz#@product/specifications<](not for overclocking)[/url<]

            • smilingcrow
            • 5 years ago

            Did anyone think that 95W is high for an AMD desktop CPU? They’ve often been hitting 125W or thereabouts so 95W seems low if anything to me. Sure it’s on 14nm but I’d have thought they’d want some leeway for higher clock speeds to be able to be more competitive.

      • smilingcrow
      • 5 years ago

      It doesn’t even say that it comes with graphics!
      Even if it does when disabled it won’t consume power to a significant degree.

      Intel have an 8/16 C/T Xeon on 22nm at 2.6/3.4GHz @ 90W so without more info 8 core at 95W at 14nm tells us very little.

        • Deanjo
        • 5 years ago

        [quote<]SweClockers says "nothing so far is mentioned about the integrated graphics parts of the processor."[/quote<] That implies that there is integrated graphics, just nothing is known about them yet.

          • smilingcrow
          • 5 years ago

          Oops, my bad.

      • Rurouni
      • 5 years ago

      It’s up to 95W. If it’s real 8 core, then it’s fantastic. Intel 4 core (8 with HT) flagship is currently at 84W. The 6 core variant is a whooping 130W.

      Of course you might be saying that Intel should lose the IGP. But the thing is, the future IS IGP! In next generation, IGP will play an important role since it can work a lot better with CPU (HSA stuff) vs the old way which is just a tacked on GPU to the CPU. And believe me, it can enable some amazing stuff that previously were too costly to implement on CPU only or the latency is simply too high to be run off dGPU.

      The biggest problem is whether devs will embrace it. Not all IGP is HSA compliant. I think Broadwell is, and Kaveri is. The consoles (PS4/X1) might accelerate HSA adaptation though and porting from it to PC should be relatively easier, thus the HSA thing (for games) might trickle down to PC sooner than later.

        • Deanjo
        • 5 years ago

        Um ya, sorry can’t get caught up in the overhype considering the same type of promises in performance was made with the likes of 3dNow.

        • chuckula
        • 5 years ago

        Nothing in this leak states or even implies that an 8 “core” Zen chip will have any GPU whatsoever. “Zen” is the codename of a generic microarchitecture that can be used in all kinds of different configurations. Some will undoubtedly include an IGP for the consumer market, but AMD never said that an 8 core Zen part will also include an IGP.

        Just remember, the PS4 and Xbone both have “8 core” CPUs… but I’d take a Pentium Anniversary edition and a lower tier video card over that “8 core” implementation any day of the week for real-world use.

        • Anonymous Coward
        • 5 years ago

        [quote<]It's up to 95W. If it's real 8 core, then it's fantastic.[/quote<] You act as if all cores are created equal. Lets see if AMD makes significant progress vs the best BD flavors.

      • Bensam123
      • 5 years ago

      Because 30w matters.

        • DancinJack
        • 5 years ago

        It does.

      • ronch
      • 5 years ago

      And to make it worse, this is at 14nm.

      • bwcbiz
      • 5 years ago

      These are desktop processors after all. As long as you stay under 100w, you can ship it. What amazes me about AMD is:
      1) The amount of performance they’ve been able to squeeze out of the old 28 and even 32 nm process nodes. AMD isn’t seriously competitive with Intel on the performance front in part because their cores are slower clock for clock, and in part because they generate more heat with these bulky designs running at 3-4 GHz. But they get pretty close to i5 performance overall.
      2) The fact that they’ve been able to stay in business with die yields that are lower because their parts are so big, while trying to compete with Intel on price. Even if they don’t achieve performance parity with the new designs, just getting to 14 nm is a big step in starting to turn a profit. The returns on Moore’s Law will continue to diminish, so Intel’s lead in end-user performance should start to shrink.

      On the flip side, it’s pretty clear that Intel’s engineering processes and designs are more efficient overall, and AMD is dependent on fab capacity being available from TSMC, so Intel will continue to hold the high end.

      • Hari_Oilstone
      • 5 years ago

      You do know AMD calculates their TDP differently than Intel right?

        • chuckula
        • 5 years ago

        Spigzone, can you at least come up with some new material. That whole “AMD’s TDP IS BETTAR THAN INTEL’S TDP” is rather 2004.

          • ronch
          • 5 years ago

          I think you’re referring to the time when Phenom came out and AMD came up with ACP to make Phenom seem more competitive in terms of efficiency. Disingenuous.

        • Deanjo
        • 5 years ago

        Yup, and I still know by using AMD tdp, it is still bloody hot.

    • chuckula
    • 5 years ago

    2015: The year that Zen destroys Intel.
    2016: The year that Reality destroys Zen.

      • PrincipalSkinner
      • 5 years ago

      But which year is the year of the desktop Linux?

        • chuckula
        • 5 years ago

        EVERY YEAR!

          • MadManOriginal
          • 5 years ago

          …Since 1943….literally before transistors and anything like modern operating systems. Linux was always ahead of its time.

            • the
            • 5 years ago

            Was it ahead of its time or just back to the future?

        • Concupiscence
        • 5 years ago

        Whatever year you want it to be. By most metrics it’s really functional; my main desktop’s been running it since 2011.

      • WillBach
      • 5 years ago

      Feature request: show absolute score of Chuckula’s comments.

        • Klimax
        • 5 years ago

        You’ll need histogram too. His comments can have massive differences in votes…

        • raddude9
        • 5 years ago

        Feature Request: Hide/Filter out all of Chuckula’s comments

          • chuckula
          • 5 years ago

          Feature request: Send haters to therapy so they can get help.

          Interesting that you chose this particular comment to whine about too… this is probably one of the most sage comments I’ve ever posted here since it accurately summarizes almost 20 years of history in two poetic lines… but maybe some people don’t like to hear the truth.

            • raddude9
            • 5 years ago

            I like to hear the truth.

            The truth is that there was possibly a leak about some potential features of a chip that might be released next year.

        • chuckula
        • 5 years ago

        OK! But we’ll need to implement 64-bit counters.

    • chuckula
    • 5 years ago

    [quote<] and a new FM3 socket that will apparently succeed FM2+.[/quote<] Cyril, I thought you knew better! [quote<]and a new FM3 socket that will [i<]purportedly[/i<] succeed FM2+.[/quote<]

      • jhee
      • 5 years ago

      Relax.. AMD has the potential to do it again. Remember back in 2006 when they had the Athlon 64 series that kicked Intel’s butt. As a lot of people already know by now, Jim Keller is back at AMD working up some magic with a great team! I think a lot comes down to how bold they are willing to get.. They should revamp the RISC design ( maybe similar to the RISC-V project ) and build a totally new architecture. These past years it feels like they have been chasing higher frequencies and making a smaller mess a bigger mess with support architecture to an inferior design. Intel is still using an architecture that also has a lot of limitations, so AMD has a chance of turning the tables now..

        • ronch
        • 4 years ago

        You must be new around here.

    • JosiahBradley
    • 5 years ago

    I’ll need to practice my Zen if I’ve going to be waiting 7 more Quarters.

      • Wirko
      • 5 years ago

      Not sure what artificial intelligence is built into those Pricegrabber ads but, for the quarter at hand, they’re offering me Xeons.

      • jhee
      • 5 years ago

      Relax.. AMD has the potential to do it again. Remember back in 2006 when they had the Athlon 64 series that kicked Intel’s butt. As a lot of people already know by now, Jim Keller is back at AMD working up some magic with a great team! I think a lot comes down to how bold they are willing to get.. They should revamp the RISC design ( maybe similar to the RISC-V project ) and build a totally new architecture. These past years it feels like they have been chasing higher frequencies and making a smaller mess a bigger mess with support architecture to an inferior design. Intel is still using an architecture that also has a lot of limitations, so AMD has a chance of turning the tables now..

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This