Why I'm excited about Zen/GCN + DX12

[TheELF]

Most systems probably don't have DX12 IGPs though

They don't need to be specifically dx12 igpus,probably,just like you don't need a dx12 gpu to get the low overhead bonus.

 

[Azix]

Azix, you forget AMDs marketshare, or lack of same in your lockout dreams.

you guys aren't thinking too clearly. What would market share matter in this? You think just because nvidia has been further ahead in a few quarters people would keep buying them even if their performance was significantly behind? Some would, but nvidia would then begin to lose that market share. Market share does not make one immune.

The first Zen CPUs won't even have an igpu. It will be at least 2017 before a Zen apu , and I don't think they officially have said when they will get hbm.

As far as Intel, being able to sell a small die that crushes AMD in CPU performance and is getting ever closer in igpu performance is a result of the billions of dollars they have devoted to r and d and their fabs. I think prices are quite reasonable for the performance you get.

Edit: apparently they market does too, considering they have about what 85 or 90 percent of it.

remains to be seen if intels GPUs are actually as capable as GCN. We can't really say they are catching up on architecture because they happen to be 2 nodes ahead of the AMD APUs. The situation might well return to those APUs mopping the floor with the intel iGPUs once the rest reach 14nm/16nm. My hope is the shrink allows amd to produce high performance APUs that have good CPU power as well.

The benefit I think AMD will definitely have is using the same GCN on their APUs as their dGPUs. Should make things easier. an intel iGPU + AMD or Nvidia is cross-vendor w/ different architecture.

 

[tential]

The first Zen CPUs won't even have an igpu. It will be at least 2017 before a Zen apu , and I don't think they officially have said when they will get hbm.

As far as Intel, being able to sell a small die that crushes AMD in CPU performance and is getting ever closer in igpu performance is a result of the billions of dollars they have devoted to r and d and their fabs. I think prices are quite reasonable for the performance you get.

Edit: apparently they market does too, considering they have about what 85 or 90 percent of it.

Look at the complaint. It's die size to price. Because people are looking for a reason to trash Intel and that's the metric they choose. Price to die size.

 

[tential]

What software issues?

Also, huh? dGPU and dGPU will work for both, this is about iGPUs and dGPUs. Nvidia cannot lock AMD out of multi-dGPU unless the developer is going to break something. The green goblin also doesn't have iGPUs. They are in a worse position since their competition is the one with iGPUs and if they don't get their dGPUs working with intel and AMD, their performance would actually look worse on those systems. AMD should lock out geforce GPUs . driver detects nvidia card... noworks.

Lol.... You truly believe amd is the only company to purchase products from rather than truly evaluating all products and making a decision.

Amd fails on the vsr front (so much less support), game support (I don't care whether gameworks is the reason or not the end result is less performance at game launches on average than nvidia), no oc for memory on hbm, no readily available and easily usable voltage tool on fury,

To name some of the few amd software issues plaguing them.

Let's gloss over every amd flaw because "nvidia is evil!" though.

 

[Azix]

Lol.... You truly believe amd is the only company to purchase products from rather than truly evaluating all products and making a decision.

Amd fails on the vsr front (so much less support), game support (I don't care whether gameworks is the reason or not the end result is less performance at game launches on average than nvidia), no oc for memory on hbm, no readily available and easily usable voltage tool on fury,

To name some of the few amd software issues plaguing them.

Let's gloss over every amd flaw because "nvidia is evil!" though.

Not sure VSR is a software issue. I guess they could do the scaling in software. I still don't see why this is so important.

performance has been fine in everything but some gameworks games. AMd isn't making the OC software and they do not intend memory OC. They don't put voltage modification in CCC typical. i.e. none of that is their software problem.

You're just hating man.

I don't think AMD is the only company. I have an intel CPU. I wouldn't buy nvidia because they took advantage of me already. Not for now anyway.

 

[frozentundra123456]

you guys aren't thinking too clearly. What would market share matter in this? You think just because nvidia has been further ahead in a few quarters people would keep buying them even if their performance was significantly behind? Some would, but nvidia would then begin to lose that market share. Market share does not make one immune.



remains to be seen if intels GPUs are actually as capable as GCN. We can't really say they are catching up on architecture because they happen to be 2 nodes ahead of the AMD APUs. The situation might well return to those APUs mopping the floor with the intel iGPUs once the rest reach 14nm/16nm. My hope is the shrink allows amd to produce high performance APUs that have good CPU power as well.

The benefit I think AMD will definitely have is using the same GCN on their APUs as their dGPUs. Should make things easier. an intel iGPU + AMD or Nvidia is cross-vendor w/ different architecture.

All I look at is bottom line performance right now. And tests show Broadwell C faster than AMD's fastest, a corner case I will grant you, but even skylake GT2 showed considerable gains. Saying it is because intel has a better process is like saying the Packers win because their QB is Aaron Rodger, true but winning is still winning. I have yet to see this mythical AMD HBM 14nm 2000+ shader APU that is going to crush everyone. Bottom line is this whole thread just seems a bit ahead of itself speculating about how great something is going to be 2 years in the future, assuming no delays.

 

[railven]

All I look at is bottom line performance right now. And tests show Broadwell C faster than AMD's fastest, a corner case I will grant you, but even skylake GT2 showed considerable gains. Saying it is because intel has a better process is like saying the Packers win because their QB is Aaron Rodger, true but winning is still winning. I have yet to see this mythical AMD HBM 14nm 2000+ shader APU that is going to crush everyone. Bottom line is this whole thread just seems a bit ahead of itself speculating about how great something is going to be 2 years in the future, assuming no delays.

It feels like AMD forgot about the "now" and is focusing on the "then." So while all these talks and leaks what not are exciting because their current line up (specifically APU/CPUs, GPUs are decent) aren't that compelling - people look forward to tomorrow.

Yet, these discussions are always seem to assume that the competitors will stand still for two years while AMD's tech rolls out.

So something like "but a performance advantage of AMD iGPU+dGPU would beat Nvidia" is acting as if Nvidia (who I believe already has a cross patent deal with Intel) wouldn't want to shake things up (or at that Intel) and provide each other with something to promote both their techs.

Oh well, when tomorrow comes if Intel/Nvidia just sat there and let AMD make these gains - the egg is on their faces.

 

[Keysplayr]

All I have been hearing for the past few years is

If AMD....

AMD needs to....

AMD is going to....

If they just....

If they had....

This is soooooooooo tired. I have to feel a little bad at this point at the constant hype let down train that AMD fans have had to endure for years in the CPU arena, and now starting to overflow into the GPU area. Guys, it HAS to be frustrating. It's a main reason why we see so many ludicrous arguments in here that have no business ever existing in the first place.
I would just like to know why people do not learn. If you are let down time and time again, why hope for anything different? Isn't that the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results? Drives me nuts. No pun intended.

 

[Ma_Deuce]

I remember being one of about 15 Mac users in 1999. It was a lot of the same thing back then. Tons of doom and gloom and everyone but Apple knew how to run their business better...

It's not impossible for them to turn things completely around.

 

[ShintaiDK]

But its not likely either.

 

[tential]

All I have been hearing for the past few years is

If AMD....

AMD needs to....

AMD is going to....

If they just....

If they had....

This is soooooooooo tired. I have to feel a little bad at this point at the constant hype let down train that AMD fans have had to endure for years in the CPU arena, and now starting to overflow into the GPU area. Guys, it HAS to be frustrating. It's a main reason why we see so many ludicrous arguments in here that have no business ever existing in the first place.
I would just like to know why people do not learn. If you are let down time and time again, why hope for anything different? Isn't that the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results? Drives me nuts. No pun intended.

Focusing on the bold this I what drives me nuts.

The unbiased among us, myself railven, etc. All are able to recognize the current market and how competitive nvidia is when we all previously recommended far more amd cards.

Now we get ridiculous arguments like "the fury isn't overpriced the gtx 980 was sold at that price!"

The gtx 980 was the fastest card on t he market... The fury is a lol worthy card that gets crushed by a oc 980ti in value to me.

I don't have loyalty to these companies so the gtx 980ti and r9 390 are my 2 favs

 

[TheELF]

I remember being one of about 15 Mac users in 1999. It was a lot of the same thing back then. Tons of doom and gloom and everyone but Apple knew how to run their business better...

Yeah well,where's your PowerPc ( and os) now!

 

[Ma_Deuce]

The unbiased among us, myself railven, etc.

Wow, lol, what an amazing place. A person without bias I have never met, but it turns out that we have several right here. Some even self professed at that!!! Is it even possible to declare yourself non-biased without bias? I bet Orwell could draft a novel out of that quote

The main reasons we see so many ludicrous arguments in here is that 1) it's the interwebs & 2) Anyone that doesn't agree with "your name here", must be ludicrous!

I think that soon AMD will have the best shot they have had at getting something rolling again since they dropped the ball so hard with Bulldozer. I don't think it's probable, or likely but if they sacrifice a Phenom II just as the sun and the moon line up...

 

[Ma_Deuce]

The benefit I think AMD will definitely have is using the same GCN on their APUs as their dGPUs. Should make things easier. an intel iGPU + AMD or Nvidia is cross-vendor w/ different architecture.

I think you are spot on with this. If they can knock it out of the park, it could be really huge. Both for GPU and CPU performance/sales.

Hopefully it wasn't just an afterthought to them.

 

[railven]

I would never present myself as not bias, but I'd like to think I don't allow my bias to affect my opinions (ie I don't make decisions out of emotions). If I did, I'd have a Fury X.

I'm very bias to Intel+ATI (ATI is dead so that bias transferred to AMD [but I was very sad when they axed the ATI name]).

Just taking a stroll through CPU forums, I swear AMD would have taken over the world by now with the wishes and desires of the forum posters. Currently, there is this pesky notion that AMD is going to launch a 16 Zen Core processor + Greenland GPU + HBM2 and decimate Intel (and I assume Nvidia in the process).

When the AMD guys dream, they dream so lofty I can't seem to keep up. I'd love to see AMD GPUs on top (like during the 9800/X800 days) but for that to happen AMD needs to do a whole lot. And I don't even mean bring a performance part to take the crown. I mean, Nvidia has it's tentacles in dev rel to the point where even if AMD had a crown taking GPU I wouldn't hesitate to make a wager dominate PC games will sport that little Greenwork badge.

Anyways, I personally don't see AMD delivering on their presentations. After the "overclockers dream" the JFAMD fiasco, the memory re-write driver, the "Mantle is going to make 290X faster than SLI 780" nonsense - I've come to realize AMD under delivers, quite often.

If AMD hits a home run, serve me as much crow as you want. I never claimed to be infallible and I will chomp on it without regret.

[Yes, I know Intel is evil, with their contra tactics and the lawsuits in the EU and I acknowledge that Microcenter has been in the sack with Intel for years. Also that Nvidia forces users to upgrade, locks out users from features (MSAA in Batman: AA/Hybrid PhysX), and knowing all this I still buy Intel and this round GeForce. Call me what you want, don't bother me ]

 

[Azix]

The below is what I was saying. I am not saying the present situation is different just because intel had a process advantage, I was simply saying we can't directly compare a 14nm chip to a 28nm and say "this architecture is better". Intel will also not be leaving to 10nm till 2017 apparently so that advantage is going when Zen and the future APUs get here next year.

The shared FPU design was one of the most debated things about the architecture of previous AMD processors. Basically, whenever the FPU was in use by a core, the other core had to wait till the FPU finished its current task – acting as a bottleneck and leading to accusations of the flagship processor not being a “true” 8 core. The rationale given behind the decision was because of space problems on the die and higher integer throughput to be achieved. With the shift to sub-20m architecture however there will be ample space in the cores for an integrated FPU. You might also remember that Zen will be shifting to Simultaneous Multi Threading (SMT) approach and leaving behind CMT so every Zen core should be able to run two threads. Basically, AMD is making a comeback in Intel style, in full force.

Read more: http://wccftech.com/amd-one-fpu-per-core-design-zen-processors/#ixzz3ipLCymtY

 

[frozentundra123456]

Yes, this is the same WCCF tech that speculated Skylake was going to have morph core and be a performance jump like Conroe.

Do I think AMD will be more competitive with Zen than they are now? Of course. But Zen is more than one year away, and Zen APUs probably closer to 2. All we have are statements from AMD, and of course they are going to put an optimistic face on the projected performance.

Even with all their resources, look at the problems Intel had with 14nm, and I wonder if the lack of high clocked 6700k might mean yields are still poor on high clocking 14nm. So to assume AMD with their much lower resources is going to have everything go on time and turn out to meet expectations is... optimistic at the minimum. And even more absurd are the asumptions by some posters that AMD is going to make an 8 core powerhouse with the IPC and clockspeed of Sandy Bridge or higher and out of the goodness of their heart sell it for 200.00.

 

[Azix]

Yes, this is the same WCCF tech that speculated Skylake was going to have morph core and be a performance jump like Conroe.

Do I think AMD will be more competitive with Zen than they are now? Of course. But Zen is more than one year away, and Zen APUs probably closer to 2. All we have are statements from AMD, and of course they are going to put an optimistic face on the projected performance.

Even with all their resources, look at the problems Intel had with 14nm, and I wonder if the lack of high clocked 6700k might mean yields are still poor on high clocking 14nm. So to assume AMD with their much lower resources is going to have everything go on time and turn out to meet expectations is... optimistic at the minimum. And even more absurd are the asumptions by some posters that AMD is going to make an 8 core powerhouse with the IPC and clockspeed of Sandy Bridge or higher and out of the goodness of their heart sell it for 200.00.

http://www.fudzilla.com/news/processors/38456-a-few-more-details-about-amd-s-zen

Zen cores came into this really only because they are expected to be in the APUs. if we are speculating on APUs on smaller processes the points are valid. considering it only recently was possible for intel to exceed AMDs 28nm iGPU performance, I would expect the situation to return to how it was when AMD jumps to a similar node