Full Skylake reveal result? Waiting for Zen.

[ShintaiDK]

Core i3 4130, 3,4GHz, release Q3 2013, MSRP $117
Core i3 4150, 3,5GHz, release Q2 2014, MSRP $117

Also,

Core i3 4170, 3,7GHz, release Q1 2015, MSRP $117

You only prove my point. No price reductions.

 

[Exophase]

Same with process tech. Since about 1995 Intel had 2-3 years advantage in process over the 2nd best.

Now its probably about 0.5-1 years at most. Intel process is probably still going to be the best, but the advantage will be pretty small. So everyone ends up being nearly the same, despite taking radically different route there.

I'm not so sure about this. Here is a timeline of AMD processes vs Intel processes:

AMD:
350nm: June 1996 (K5)
250nm: May 1998 (K6-2)
180nm: November 1999 (Athlon Orion)
130nm: June 2002 (Athlon XP Thoroughbred)
90nm: October 2004 (Athlon 64 Winchester)
65nm: February 2007 (Athlon 64 Lima)
45nm: February 2009 (Phenom II Deneb)
32nm: September 2011 (Llano)
28nm: January 2014 (Kaveri)
20nm: ??
"14"nm: 2016 (Zen)

Intel:
350nm: November 1995 (Pentium Pro)
250nm: January 1998 (Pentium II Deschutes)
180nm: October 1999 (Pentium III Coppermine)
130nm: July 2001 (Pentium III Tualatin)
90nm: March 2004 (Pentium IV Prescott)
65nm: January 2006 (Pentium IV Cedar Mill)
45nm: January 2008 (Core 2 Wolfdale)
32nm: January 2010 (Clarkdale)
22nm: April 2012 (Ivy Bridge)
14nm: September 2014 (Broadwell)
10nm: 2017 (Cannonlake)

So I think the scenario is more the opposite of what you're saying. In 1995 there wasn't much gap and at times they were neck and neck. Now Zen will be 2 years behind in a process that's the same in name only, in reality being in between Intel's 22nm and 14nm. So more like 3 years behind.

 

[lord_emperor]

There's no reason not to wait if you have a somewhat recent Intel CPU or even an AMD FX, they're all "good enough".

 

[Dresdenboy]

I think Zen will be a decent jump over its predecessors. Likely a SB like jump. Do I expect Skylake IPC out of it? No.

Skylake is there where it is after multiple evolutionary step since SB or even earlier (down to Merom). XV did the same since BD, so did K10 since K7, and so on. This pace is OK as the SW world has to adapt. The chips don't exist on their own.

Any big change is a lot of effort, which is also held back due to risk, time, capacity, and complexity concerns. I think, even Intel couldn't do an aggregated SKL effort on a first iteration.

 

[el etro]

There are plenty of Zen threads already, and they always end up with AMD fans fueling the hype train and Intel fans (and everyone else really) saying, lets wait and see.

I won't set my expectation this high with Zen. My expectation will be nowhere near as high as it was(until the first real leaked technical detail) with Bulldozer.

 

[AtenRa]

You only prove my point. No price reductions.

This is what i have said.

This has already started with the Core i3 vs Kaveri APUs, both have seen price reductions or newer models since 2014.

 

[Abwx]

Now Zen will be 2 years behind in a process that's the same in name only, in reality being in between Intel's 22nm and 14nm. So more like 3 years behind.

GF 14nm has better perf/Watt than Intel s 14nm, i hardly call this being between 14 and 22nm, at some point you should better read the relevant litterature, or ask the knowledgeable, that wil spare you doing such urban legends shaped claims.

 

[Ma_Deuce]

GF 14nm has better perf/Watt than Intel s 14nm, i hardly call this being between 14 and 22nm, at some point you should better read the relevant litterature, or ask the knowledgeable, that wil spare you doing such urban legends shaped claims.

Who has the time to actually educate themselves?!?! It's way easier just to repeat the same tired arguments and misinformation repeatedly.

Intel hasn't really bumped up the performance enough in the last couple of generations to make upgrading thay exciting. While I don't have any high hopes for Zen, I really would like to see them hit a home run with it.

Im not exactly waiting for Zen, but I'm not planning on upgrading before it is available anyway. If it can keep up with a 4790k in gaming @ stock clocks for both, I'll build an AMD machine.

 

[TheELF]

This is what i have said.

And this is what he said.

You are trying to say that direct competition won't result in downward price pressure, which is almost always not true.

So while one company did have to drop prices because there where no better products,the other company released several improvements on the same price point...

Of course the kaveri is nowhere near the i3 but that's a different story.

 

[Ma_Deuce]

And this is what he said.

So while one company did have to drop prices because there where no better products,the other company released several improvements on the same price point...

Of course the kaveri is nowhere near the i3 but that's a different story.

During the same period prices on almost everything else you can buy have gone up...

 

[TheELF]

Who has the time to actually educate themselves?!?! It's way easier just to repeat the same tired arguments and misinformation repeatedly.

Oh comon,because they improved perf/power in a very restricted tdp envelope doesn't mean that they will have the same power improvement everywhere.
Look at a overclock situation higher tdp and the perf/power goes to hell.

 

[TheELF]

During the same period prices on almost everything else you can buy have gone up...

prices for the i3 didn't,and not only that you got a improved version on top...for the same price.

 

[PliotronX]

My question is, can AMD deliver an affordable 8C/16T model, if even at a 10-15% clock-for-clock performance deficit with similar efficiency? If so I will give it a very serious consideration. I think it's too haughty to declare enthusiasts as the reason for innovation but there is certainly a factor there where trickle-down performance reaches the masses after time passes. Unfortunately the market is actually veering off to slower less power hungry models but at least the trend to worthless tablets has slowed down.

 

[Abwx]

Of course the kaveri is nowhere near the i3 but that's a different story.

Indeed, Kaveri is more versatile, an i3 without dGPU is just good as office PC but no more, but t hat s another debate that belong to other threads.

Who has the time to actually educate themselves?!?! It's way easier just to repeat the same tired arguments and misinformation repeatedly.

Intel hasn't really bumped up the performance enough in the last couple of generations to make upgrading thay exciting. While I don't have any high hopes for Zen, I really would like to see them hit a home run with it.

Im not exactly waiting for Zen, but I'm not planning on upgrading before it is available anyway. If it can keep up with a 4790k in gaming @ stock clocks for both, I'll build an AMD machine.

DT market has lost relevancy because people were lured buying the flawed logic that 4 HW cores at 12% better IPC and 15-18% better throughput is more relevant than 8 SB cores...

With such a logic, that actualy only benefit to Intel, DTs are lagging in respect of the other segments and their functionalities are within possibilities of laptops, only a few select apps are still their stronghold, that s why AMD is shooting at a big core count for the FXZen.

 

[AtenRa]

Of course the kaveri is nowhere near the i3 but that's a different story.

I will have to agree with that, Kaveri is the better all around product.

 

[HOOfan 1]

Boy are you in for a learning experience. Remember the Athlon64, XP and X2 days?

That was great..the Athlon FX processors were the best of the best....but I also remember Bulldozer

 

[AtenRa]

prices for the i3 didn't,and not only that you got a improved version on top...for the same price.

Actually no, you got the same performance as Core i3 4330 3.5GHz, 4GB L3 Cache, HD4600 (MSRP $147) with another product like the Core i3 4170 3.7GHz, 3GB L3 Cache, HD4400 at a lower MSRP of $117.

So Intel didnt change the prices but you paying less for the same performance (different model), much like having a nice price cut.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Actually no, you got the same performance as Core i3 4330 3.5GHz, 4GB L3 Cache, HD4600 (MSRP $147) with another product like the Core i3 4170 3.7GHz, 3GB L3 Cache, HD4400 at a lower MSRP of $117.

So Intel didnt change the prices but you paying less for the same performance (different model), much like having a nice price cut.

No, stop trying to change the goalpost again because you was wrong.

The 4170 is a Q1 2015 product. The 4330 a Q2 2013 product that have been replaced a couple of times and is now a 4370 since Q3 2014.

Its like trying to say Intel made a price cut down to 40$ on an E6600 because a G1840 is faster. Its completely bogus logic.

 

[AtenRa]

You could buy a Haswell Core i3 4330 at $147 in 2014 and now in 2015 you can have the same performance with the Haswell Core i3 4170 at $117.

So effectively you had a price cut. Get over it.

 

[PliotronX]

No, stop trying to change the goalpost again because you was wrong.

The 4170 is a Q1 2015 product. The 4330 a Q2 2013 product that have been replaced a couple of times and is now a 4370 since Q3 2014.

Its like trying to say Intel made a price cut down to 40$ on an E6600 because a G1840 is faster. Its completely bogus logic.

Where it also blows is that relegated-but-still-relevant procs don't see the same price freefall any other computer product does typically. An example would be a 2500k or 3570k. How are prices so tightly controlled?

 

[BurnItDwn]

so, pretty much, single threaded CPU performance has improved by like 50% over the last 10 years, rather than how it used to improve by 50% every 18 months.

I see no point at all in replacing my i5 2400.
my Phenom II 945 might be worth replacing, but mostly because it uses old fashioned DDR2, and DDR2 is expensive, and I have only 4GB of Ram on it.

Not sure if I will continue to wait to see what happens with Zen, or if I will retire the ancient phenom 2 box and put a skylake box in its place....

 

[ShintaiDK]

You could buy a Haswell Core i3 4330 at $147 in 2014 and now in 2015 you can have the same performance with the Haswell Core i3 4170 at $117.

So effectively you had a price cut. Get over it.

No its not. And for the same 147$ you can get a 4370.

You couldnt buy a 4170 in Q3 2013 or entire 2014 for that matter.

The 4330 have been replaced several times before the 4170 release.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Where it also blows is that relegated-but-still-relevant procs don't see the same price freefall any other computer product does typically. An example would be a 2500k or 3570k. How are prices so tightly controlled?

Its due to the tick/tock and refresh model. Older models simply cease to exist in production. So there isnt really anything to do price cuts on unlike pre Core 2 days.

 

[ShintaiDK]

so, pretty much, single threaded CPU performance has improved by like 50% over the last 10 years, rather than how it used to improve by 50% every 18 months.

50% in 10 years? Skylake vs Core M/P4/K8?

 

[AtenRa]

No its not. And for the same 147$ you can get a 4370.

You couldnt buy a 4170 in Q3 2013 or entire 2014 for that matter.

The 4330 have been replaced several times before the 4170 release.

Relax and read carefully what i said. For the same performance you had in 2014, you spend less in 2015.

Thing of it like that,

Intel didnt release the Core i3 4160 and 4170 in 2015.
Instead they had a price cut of the Core i3 4330 down to $117.
They also released a faster model, the Core i3 4370 in Q1 2015 at $147

now lets get on topic.