• AMD Ryzen may skip 6-core entirely
    20 replies, posted
[url]http://www.pcgamer.com/amd-ryzen-may-skip-6-core-entirely[/url]
Fine. Just make 4C/4T and it's fine by me.
Kind of a shame if it's true, I was really excited about the possibility of a 6C/12T model. 4 cores used to be the best price/performance choice for gaming for quite a while now, but considering how software's been catching up, 6 cores could become the new sweet spot fairly soon. Hopefully at least the 8C/8T model will be priced aggressively to make up for the lack of a 6 core.
The whole thing needs to be priced aggressively because A big ass sales, and B they've already said memory is going have a hell of a lot less max bandwidth than the equivalent intel platform, which is actually where the bottleneck in most systems is now that M2 and NVME is gaining a lot of traction as storage. If Ryzen is amazing and cheap(ish), it's only good news for consumers across the board.
[QUOTE=27X;51754876]and B they've already said memory is going have a hell of a lot less max bandwidth than the equivalent intel platform, which is actually where the bottleneck in most systems is now that M2 and NVME is gaining a lot of traction as storage.[/QUOTE] Wait, what? AFAIK both Intel's current consumer-level CPUs and AMD's Ryzen will support dual channel DDR4. Where did you hear about the "hell of a lot less bandwidth" thing? Besides, memory bandwidth barely seems to matter unless you're doing some very specific stuff that relies heavily on it. And how does M2 and NVME have anything to do with that? What.
[QUOTE=pebkac;51754932]Wait, what? AFAIK both Intel's current consumer-level CPUs and AMD's Ryzen will support dual channel DDR4. Where did you hear about the "hell of a lot less bandwidth" thing? Besides, memory bandwidth barely seems to matter unless you're doing some very specific stuff that relies heavily on it. And how does M2 and NVME have anything to do with that? What.[/QUOTE] I even did a quick search on it, and couldn't find anything. You would think if the bandwidth was noticeably worse, that shit would be making headlines and AMD would be getting a lot of flack for it. I was thinking it was maybe related to storage speeds, but then I also saw that the AM4 platform will be supporting M.2 and NVME as well, so I'm not seeing any potential issues. Really, the only thing stopping Ryzen from "rising" is pricing. They still haven't given us details, but something tells me it's probably not going to be as affordable as AMD's offerings usually are. Meaning, I doubt you'll be able to get a near top of the line Ryzen CPU for only $300.
[QUOTE=pebkac;51754864]Kind of a shame if it's true, I was really excited about the possibility of a 6C/12T model. 4 cores used to be the best price/performance choice for gaming for quite a while now, but considering how software's been catching up, 6 cores could become the new sweet spot fairly soon. Hopefully at least the 8C/8T model will be priced aggressively to make up for the lack of a 6 core.[/QUOTE] This kind of thinking ([I]soon[/I] applications will have better multithreaded performance) is exactly what fucked over AMD years ago with FX. I'd highly prefer they focus on single-core performance above all else. 4C/8T is perfectly fine for the mass majority of consumers.
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;51755027]This kind of thinking ([I]soon[/I] applications will have better multithreaded performance) is exactly what fucked over AMD years ago with FX. I'd highly prefer they focus on single-core performance above all else. 4C/8T is perfectly fine for the mass majority of consumers.[/QUOTE] Well, AMD says they've pretty much caught up with Intel in terms of IPC. Hopefully that's true in general and not just in the few cherry-picked benchmarks they've shown so far. Once you're at that level, gaining any more single-thread performance becomes pretty difficult and adding more cores starts making more sense. Yes, they made a huge misstep half a decade ago with bulldozer, but things have changed since then. Modern game engines make really good use of 4 cores, and some even show noticeable benefits if you add more. If I was building a PC to last me the next 5 years, 6 cores suddenly looks like an appealing choice, of course assuming it's priced reasonably compared to 4 core models, unlike Intel's offerings. If I could get a 6C/12T that matches Intel's IPC for around 300€, I'd be all over it. Then you overclock it to the same speeds you'd expect from a good quadcore and you're pretty much set for a while.
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;51755027]This kind of thinking ([I]soon[/I] applications will have better multithreaded performance) is exactly what fucked over AMD years ago with FX. I'd highly prefer they focus on single-core performance above all else. 4C/8T is perfectly fine for the mass majority of consumers.[/QUOTE] Problem with AMD was that they neither had great Multithread or Singlecore performance with their old CPU. 6 cores would actually be a pretty great market if it comes close to Intels i7 E series. They are the great compromise of game performance (for the future as well) and application performance. A good combo in streaming games for example.
[QUOTE=pebkac;51754932]Wait, what? AFAIK both Intel's current consumer-level CPUs and AMD's Ryzen will support dual channel DDR4. Where did you hear about the "hell of a lot less bandwidth" thing? Besides, memory bandwidth barely seems to matter unless you're doing some very specific stuff that relies heavily on it. And how does M2 and NVME have anything to do with that? What.[/QUOTE] Since he's talking M.2 and NVME, it's about storage, not RAM. Afaik both of those run on the PCI-E lanes, so I don't see how AMD should be significantly worse off, but I don't know, it's not an area I know much about.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51755310]Since he's talking M.2 and NVME, it's about storage, not RAM. Afaik both of those run on the PCI-E lanes, so I don't see how AMD should be significantly worse off, but I don't know, it's not an area I know much about.[/QUOTE] I've looked around a bit and found that the CPU will have 4 lanes dedicated for NVMe, while the chipset will provide 2 sata express / extra pcie3 lanes. I'm not entirely sure how it'll end up in practice, but looks like an m.2 slot should be a standard feature on AM4 mobos. I'm sure the motherboard makers will come up with high-end options offering more slots for those who want to go crazy with NVMe drives.
[QUOTE=pebkac;51755967]I've looked around a bit and found that the CPU will have 4 lanes dedicated for NVMe, while the chipset will provide 2 sata express / extra pcie3 lanes. I'm not entirely sure how it'll end up in practice, but looks like an m.2 slot should be a standard feature on AM4 mobos. I'm sure the motherboard makers will come up with high-end options offering more slots for those who want to go crazy with NVMe drives.[/QUOTE] Four lanes of PCI-E 3.0 is still a good deal of bandwidth, I honestly don't see this being an issue for most consumers. Anyone who would really [I]require[/I] more would probably have the budget to go for Intel either way. It's not like that couldn't be changed when they release whatever product comes after Ryzen.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51756021]Four lanes of PCI-E 3.0 is still a good deal of bandwidth, I honestly don't see this being an issue for most consumers. Anyone who would really [I]require[/I] more would probably have the budget to go for Intel either way. It's not like that couldn't be changed when they release whatever product comes after Ryzen.[/QUOTE] I mean any PCIe based SSD over 4 lanes is going to be a datacenter tier SSD that'll cost more than the rest of a top end build.
[QUOTE=pebkac;51755967]I've looked around a bit and found that the CPU will have 4 lanes dedicated for NVMe, while the chipset will provide 2 sata express / extra pcie3 lanes. I'm not entirely sure how it'll end up in practice, but looks like an m.2 slot should be a standard feature on AM4 mobos. I'm sure the motherboard makers will come up with high-end options offering more slots for those who want to go crazy with NVMe drives.[/QUOTE] Basically if you need more than 4 PCI-E 3.0 lanes dedicated to NVME, you're not building a gaming computer and are in an entirely wrong hardware market for your application tbh.
Exactly that. Not to mention that desktop intel processors like even the 7700k only have the standard 16 lanes, then a different type of link about the bandwidth of 4 lanes that it uses for NVMe.
[QUOTE=pebkac;51754932]Wait, what? AFAIK both Intel's current consumer-level CPUs and AMD's Ryzen will support dual channel DDR4. Where did you hear about the "hell of a lot less bandwidth" thing? Besides, memory bandwidth barely seems to matter unless you're doing some very specific stuff that relies heavily on it. And how does M2 and NVME have anything to do with that? What.[/QUOTE] Intel's new line will be quad channel and AMD's is capped at dual channel. This doesn't really mean much for gaming, it means quite a bit for the types of purchasers of enterprise class builds in bulk, which AMD will need entice to remain competitive. The last time consumer only builds made a difference in the race was when FX San Diego was king, and that was quite a while ago.
[QUOTE=27X;51756590]Intel new line will be quad channel and AMD's is capped at dual channel. This doesn't really mean much for gaming, it means quite a bit for the types of purchasers of enterprise class builds in bulk, which AMD will need entice to remain competitive. The last time consumer only builds made a difference in the race was when FX San Diego was king, and that was quite a while ago.[/QUOTE] Oh, I thought we were only talking consumer grade stuff. When it comes to server/workstation zen parts, wasn't there talk about up to 32 cores and quad or even 8-channel memory? I'm not sure if that's officially confirmed yet since they're mostly releasing info about the consumer desktop cpus.
Consumer sales will probably be a huge marketing boost and some decent money, but I think the bulk will still reside as it has with science and enterprise.
[QUOTE=27X;51756752]Consumer sales will probably be a huge marketing boost and some decent money, but I think the bulk will still reside as it has with science and enterprise.[/QUOTE] Gotta crawl before you can walk I guess. Smaller scale and less powerful yet bang-for-the-buck mid-range hardware for the average enthusiasts seems like a good way to make yourself known again.
[QUOTE=27X;51756590]Intel's new line will be quad channel and AMD's is capped at dual channel. This doesn't really mean much for gaming, it means quite a bit for the types of purchasers of enterprise class builds in bulk, which AMD will need entice to remain competitive. The last time consumer only builds made a difference in the race was when FX San Diego was king, and that was quite a while ago.[/QUOTE] Yeah I don't know how you think you can judge stuff they haven't even talked about much at all. No shit their consumer stuff is capped at dual. [editline]31st January 2017[/editline] And any source on Cannonlake consumer being quad channel or are you actually just comparing enterprise gear from one company to consumer of another?
Seems like 6-core Ryzen CPUs will be a thing anyway: [url]http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-6-core-8-core-processor-clock-speeds-confirmed/[/url] I know WCCFtech isn't the most reputable site, but guru3d.com is also reporting that 6-cores should at the very least be possible with Zen.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.