Nextgen CPUs

The AM4 x370 motherboard can support 2 m.2 ports and 6 SATA, really depends on the manufacturer (scroll past the CPUs).

That's not an implementation; that is a different chipset that provides more feature. However, it remains to be seen how well the chipset are implemented (performance/correctness).

A CPU under $10K that can run AC4 on baseclock without microstutters?
Yesterday I'd say not possible, today I'm not so sure:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/6-c…-i5-7600k.html

Originally Posted by joxer
A CPU under $10K that can run AC4 on baseclock without microstutters?
Yesterday I'd say not possible, today I'm not so sure:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/6-c…-i5-7600k.html

Some people are arguing that's a 1500, because there is no 65W 1600x according to leaks. It could be a 1400x too.

One week and a half to wait.

Another "leak" comes from reddit:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd…-i7-6800k.html

R5 1600X Cinebench test puts it at the same spot with i7 6800K - the price difference is drastic, $260 for AMD's CPU vs $430 for Intel's.

While mortals like me are dancing already even if nothing we saw is true, there are hotel owners among us who buy those overpriced diamonds in phonegames just because they can pay crapload of $ to win. For them Intel prepared Xeon E7-8894, a CPU with 24 cores (hyperthreading is included so it can pretend to have 48):
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11121/…c-48t-9000-usd
Only $9000.

Videocardz has pictures of the new packaged AMD coolers (Wraith Max and Spire).

DO we know how much power they will draw and how hot they run compared to Intel ones? This was always an issue from AMD fro me so I wish they sorted that out as well.

Check the graph from link in my previous post. Too good to be true, right?

Originally Posted by lostforever
DO we know how much power they will draw and how hot they run compared to Intel ones? This was always an issue from AMD fro me so I wish they sorted that out as well.

The rumored TDP (Thermal Design Power) for Ryzen is 65w and 95w (for XFR version which should have better OC/Boost).

Saying that, AMD doesn't use the same TDP definition as Intel, so you can't really compare the two on paper, we are going to have to wait for the review embargo to lift (on Feb 28th apparently).

One of the tech sites (anand?) had a preview that showed (at least at a trade show) the chip running a little cooler and faster with less power draw. However, I'm not sure this was final production silicon and since it was a controlled test some of the details are unclear.

I've seen a lots of people not believe Ryzen performance improvements on the web. Someone on reddit made a graph showing past and present Intel and AMD CPUs performance (single core, Zen being based on leaks so it could be even better).

Ryzen is just AMD going back to 2009 and following the trend from there instead of following Bulldozer…

No reason to believe anything, we need to see real tests with unoptimized garbage ports that hammer just one core (I think I mentioned AC4 already). In a week or two.

Ryzen Tech Day coverage.

Confirms 1800x, 1700x and 1700 are launching on March 2nd and their suggested price, along a bunch of other stuff. Pre-order start today though.

I personally wants to know when the 1400x to 1600x are coming. No mention of that though.

It seems the top end 1800x (£488) can match top end intel i7 6900K (£1000) for half the price! Exciting times to be living in

Another worry I have with AMD is single core performances and in that regards it seems intel is has big margin even over these new chips. Some of the games i play are still few years old and don't make good use of multi cores again giving intel the advantage

We'll see about that soon, some sites are not stupid. We all know TW3 works like a charm on i5 2500K with Titan GPU, some sites will use TW3 to test AMD's CPUs paired with Titan. It's like checking if a liter of beer can be poured in a barrel - of course it can!

We need to see tests with horrible coding products that hammer CPU, especially one core, and we certainly will.

There is another thing to mention. The first bunch being released are NOT gaming CPUs. I'm aware some people here swear in i7 and want R7, but those CPUs are overkill and too expensive to be considered as gaming standard.
Gaming CPUs are i5, and from AMD will be R5. Maybe even R3 because these will have 4 cores unlike Intel's i3. Sadly, we'll have to wait some more to see those live:
https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/amd-ryzen-gaming-cpu

Originally Posted by lostforever
Another worry I have with AMD is single core performances and in that regards it seems intel is has big margin even over these new chips.

Since when is 0 a big margin? The 1800x has the same IPC (single core performance) as the 6900k in synthetic bench (AMD presentation and leaks both support that) and is slightly faster in multithreading. Broadwell-E is the Intel competition for AMD R7 8 cores CPUs, not the latest Kabylakes 4 cores.

If you checked gaming review of CPUs, the 6900K is in 1FPS of the 7700k in The Witcher 3 even if technically the 6900k isn't a gaming CPU.

We could also add that it seems that Ryzen is slightly better than Broadwell-E for gaming…at least at 4k resolution in Sniper Elite 2.

Originally Posted by azarhal
Since when is 0 a big margin? The 1800x has the same IPC (single core performance) as the 6900k in synthetic bench (AMD presentation and leaks both support that) and is slightly faster in multithreading. Broadwell-E is the Intel competition for AMD R7 8 cores CPUs, not the latest Kabylakes 4 cores.

If you checked gaming review of CPUs, the 6900K is in 1FPS of the 7700k in The Witcher 3 even if technically the 6900k isn't a gaming CPU.

We could also add that it seems that Ryzen is slightly better than Broadwell-E for gaming…at least at 4k resolution in Sniper Elite 2.

I can't find the links now but in some of them they were putting 20% lead for Intel over AMD on single core. These were not gaming benchmarks but historically intel had the edge when it came to single core performance.

Originally Posted by lostforever
I can't find the links now but in some of them they were putting 20% lead for Intel over AMD on single core. These were not gaming benchmarks but historically intel had the edge when it came to single core performance.

It's probably saw something that didn't take clock speed into consideration, it was probably comparing a not boosting 1700x at 3.4GHz vs a i7 7700k at 4.5Ghz.

Also, your historically only started in 2006…

I don't care so much about processor speed as stability and compatibility with apps. It could be 50X the speed of intel but if it crashes twice a day, it's junk

The company I work for runs tests on AMD all the time and they never pass our apps load test. I'd love to see that happen.

CPU is hardware. It has it's setting and rules just like RPG. If you can't make a proper use of those rules, there is no random generator, no dice, nothing to save your skin, you die.
An application crashes? Never blame it on CPU. Well… Unless it's certain ancient Pentium bug. Otherwise, it's always a bad code, a bad roleplay of a class and missed attrib/stats points.

IMO start caring about prices. The most common excuse from console propaganda used against PC is the hardware price. Should I say - was?
After overpowered yet not unbelievably expensive new GPUs for gamers, seems PC is now getting superstrong and cheaper than ever CPUs. What will consoles use now as an excuse? Box design?