Slashdot Mirror
AMD Outlines Plans For Zen-Based Processors, First Due In 2016
crookedvulture writes: AMD laid out its plans for processors based on its all-new Zen microarchitecture today, promising 40% higher performance-per-clock from from the x86 CPU core. Zen will use simultaneous multithreading to execute two threads per core, and it will be built using "3D" FinFETs. The first chips are due to hit high-end desktops and servers next year. In 2017, Zen will combine with integrated graphics in smaller APUs designed for desktops and notebooks. AMD also plans to produce a high-performance server APU with a "transformational memory architecture" likely similar to the on-package DRAM being developed for the company's discrete graphics processors. This chip could give AMD a credible challenger in the HPC and supercomputing markets—and it could also make its way into laptops and desktops.
14nm tech may be the end of the line for CMOS. The 10 nm node that follows may not even be possible
Featuring GGL (Gateless Gate Logic).
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Hobbling???? I just upgraded TO an 8350 from a Athlon 5200+ (which did pretty much everything I asked of it, including MythTV and watching Netflix in Virtualbox). I don't know what to do with all these cores now.
12:50 - press return.
This.
I have a FX-8350 too. Given how much the the cores sit around idling at less than 5% usage, I don't think I'll need to upgrade my CPU before 2020. RAM, on the other hand...
As many other people have noted: the CPU speed wars have been over since the Intel Wolfdale/AMD Deneb days of 2009-2010.
Note that, in comparison to ARM CPUs, x86 SoCs are *crazy* overpriced. There are superb ARM SoCs for just 20 USD. WTF are you doing selling similar consumer-grade chips for 100 USD??
Intel develops technology which doesn't doesn't make it into their plant for 5 to 10 years. Also they don't put things on their roadmap until they've proven possible.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/c...
Intel's 2012 roadmap shows 4nm process in 2022. Which means they have a process that has been tested to work, they are just tweaking it to reduce errors and working on the best way to outfit a plant for it. Also costs billions and time to refit a plant.
Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
Good bang for your buck and ethical business practices. Hell, just the unethical business practices alone should make most informed people stay away from Intel.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
Anyone care to extrapolate from current benchmarks as to how this new processor will compare to Intel's desktop offerings? I would like to see Intel have some competition there.
FX-8350: 2012
"Zen": 2016
The 40% jump is more like 0%, 0%, 0%, 40%.
If you compare a 3770K (best of 2012) to a 4790K (best of today) you get a ~15% frequency boost and another ~10% IPC improvements. If the leaked roadmaps are to believed Skylake for the desktop is imminent which will bring a new 14nm process and a refined micro-architecture at the same time as Broadwell missed their tick for the desktop, so in the same timeframe Intel will have improved 30-40% too.
Anyway you asked about AMD and I answered with Intel but it's a lot easier to get a meaningful answer without getting into the AMD vs Intel flame war. In short, even if AMD comes through on that roadmap they're only back to 2012 levels of competitiveness and honestly speaking it wasn't exactly great and AMD wasn't exactly profitable. They're so far behind that you honestly couldn't expect less if they weren't giving up on that market completely, which honestly thinking I thought they had. And I wonder how credible this roadmap is, I remember an equally impressive upwards curve for Bulldozer...
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
A lot of people don't really understand that the CPUs are already "fast enough" and that they can include other important issues in their buying decisions.
I mostly buy and recommend AMD because:
1) better price/performance ratio
2) code I write is designed to scale horizontally, which loops back to #1 even when it is a high load service
3) better power/performance ratio on desktops and servers
4) the motherboards are cheaper for the same components, and I hate over-paying even if the motherboard cost is too small a percent of the total system cost to matter very much
Intel does mostly win on laptops due to lack of availability of alternatives.
So I can get a 64 core machine with 512GB or memory for $8k instead of $80k.
At the low end good enough and dirt cheap pushes towards AMD. In the middle there are niches where braindead developers still don't have a fucking clue in 2015 how to write multi-threaded code so a fast i7 with hardly any cores is the best tool for the job, but that's a diminishing niche as developers start to learn what they should have in 1995.
What are you talking about? All AMD server boards support ECC. In contrast to Intel, AMD always puts every feature into every processor of the same generation. AMD does not dumb down artificially even its cheapest processor. That is one of the thing I like in AMD processors. I do not have to check which random feature is disabled in a particular processor. Even some desktop AMD motherboards have ECC support, like the SABERTOOTH 990FX.