The disappointing event AMD New Horizon does not reveal any technical data, does not reveal the components and does not give a relevant benchmark test.
A few moments ago the AMD New Horizon event ended, which was based on a 'presentation' that lasted a scant half hour and where we were not able to see anything. The highlight has been the 'confirmation' of the AMD Ryzen processor, which in theory will be the company's most powerful for the desktop. This processor, like we have already told you in a news that came out a few hours ago on our website, it will have six cores and sixteen processing threads, a base frequency of 3.4GHz +, a 2MB L3 + L20 cache, and it will integrate AMD SenseMI technologies.
The only novelty regarding the AMD Ryzen processor is that they have given TDP data, which according to AMD will have a TDP of 95W, something that is very good for a desktop gaming processor. So far the little that we have been able to rescue of interest. The only data has been a 'benchmark' with the Transcoding Demo, in which supposedly the AMD Ryzen has finished the job in 54 seconds, while the Intel i7 6900K has taken 59 seconds.
We imagine they actually used the Ryzen processor, but it could have been anyone because the name of the processor is hidden. We have also noticed that the Intel i7 6900K is manipulated, since the Boost mode that raises it to 3.7GHz has been deactivated, so during the test it has worked at its base frequency of 3.2GHz.
Except for this we do not have any more data. AMD New Horizon has shown several professional gamers playing DOTA 2, apparently one with the Ryzen processor and the other with an unknown Intel processor. A test with the Battlefield with Ryzen and another with Intel has also been shown, but we do not know in what conditions, without FPS, without hardware specifications, without anything.
A stocky graphic designer from AMD has shown us a design, which moved in a fluid way, something that has impressed us, but analyzing it, we do not know if the equipment in question was simply with the Ryzen processor or had the help of a GPU. It is something that we have been missing throughout the talk, data.
They have finally closed with a professional gamer supposedly playing StarWars Battlefront. We say supposedly because we are not clear if it was really playing or it was a video. They have used this game to show the potential of Vega, which will be their new graphics card in combination with Ryzen. According to Lisa Su, the CEO of AMD, the game was moving at 4K @ 60FPS. If you tell us that the game moves to 8K @ 60FPS then we believe it the same, because again we have not seen the FPS and hardware specifications anywhere.
It has caught our attention that all the towers with an Intel processor had a large window where you could see the hardware and had LEDs inside and everything, while those of AMD with the Ryzen processor and with the Vega GPU were closed towers, without the possibility of see inside. That is something that puts us on alert.
We are unable to say that AMD has lied to us, but we are also unable to say that AMD has told the truth, the whole truth and only the truth. What we can say is that we have only seen one piece of data, a value that tells us that the AMD processor is ahead of the Intel, but even so, without knowing the hardware of said equipment and with the apparent limitation of the Intel processor, we must To say that we do not know if that data is 100% correct or not.
We can summarize the AMD New Horizon event as: no information, no real data, no evidence, no images, no release date, no official market names, and no price.
Hater from AMD, where?
Not at all. Here a completely clear information is given according to the presentation that AMD has offered. When AMD does it well, as it is with the drivers, that it has done a brutal job and that it deserves recognition, it is said, now, if AMD announces the presentation of new processors, graphics and motherboards and puts closed towers and does not show its interior , just a benchmark with analyzable data and does not show hardware, it is said. This is done by Intel or NVIDIA and I guarantee that they are showered with sticks and stones.
We saw the presentation and there is no data on it. If Intel or NVIDIA does, would you really say the same? I personally doubt it.
AMD didn't show the graphics card, or the processors, or any motherboards, it told us they were there, but we didn't see them. If AMD tells us that there is an Oompa Loompa inside the tower, we have to believe it, because we did not see what there was at any time.
Well, and when it comes out, what are you going to do? Delete comments? hahaha joke don't be mad
I DON'T KNOW, I'M PRO AMD, BUT YOU ARE RIGHT IF AT THESE HEIGHTS THEY DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING, THEY MAKE ME SUSPECT OF MANY THINGS, BE AWARE THAT VEGA AND ZEN ARE SUPPOSED TO LEAVE IN JANUARY HOSE IN 1 MONTH AND THAT TODAY THEY DO NOT GIVE NO DATA …… TOTAL DISAPPOINTMENT !!!!! 1
Look at the event and tell me if the reason they have is so great, that I have seen it and I do not agree
P.S. Zen comes out in the first quarter of 2017 that covers from January to March
They give data, few but some give. Now, they do not offer data regarding performance at all, since we do not know if it is video or game, since at no time do you see the FPS and the towers are completely opaque, so we cannot say anything, we can only say what it was seen.
A joke. Figures are for illustration purposes only. The Intel model with the turbo disabled and the memory in dual-channel mode. Programs with a lot of multithreading and high SMT efficiency to hide the IPC deficiencies…
Neither models, nor indicative prices, nor launch date, nor anything.
Questions from the respect, how do you know that Hyper-Threading was deactivated, since the CEO of AMD emphasized that they had it deactivated and Intel did not? And I don't know if you are aware of what Intel's Hyper-Threading and AMD Simultaneus Multithreading (SMT) consist of because they cannot magnify the IPC or hide deficiencies in it, the cores are what they are and the instructions that it can handle per cycle are the ones that are sorry for using software that allows the use of all cores, that works like 16 cores thanks to the 2 threads per core allows to better distribute the work avoiding downtime and in essence take more advantage of the IPC that you have but it is that although You were right that I had a low IPC that happens that the Intel was not in the same conditions or what? What if Intel had a higher IPC to use its 16 threads, which has them the same as AMD would not do better? or worse than if Intel had a lower IPC (since you imply that AMD could have it, that or you do not realize that Intel played in them) using its 16 threads (which also has in the variant with more IPC in which it gives the impression that you drop) they would get the same because if so, at 16 threads a processor with less IPC gets the same as one that has more which is basically what you are saying for what the hell would the IPC serve, imagine that by using 16 threads and 8 cores it covers its lack of IPC that you say it has when multiplying the performance because let's say that the IPC is 2 and multiplies the performance by 2 2 × 2 = 4 now Intel under the same circumstances as AMD remember that The Intel 6900K that AMD used also has 8 cores and 16 threads and has more IPC 3 times 2 there goes 6, well what I have been telling you, that if it had more IPC than AMD, it would have obtained better results than AMD
I did not say that hyperthreading was disabled. Please read my message again.
The SMT can mask IPC deficits. There's a reason why AMD insists on showing us only demos of highly threaded programs.
Multithreading was also the same, Intel is HITPERTREADING, meaning it follows that single-threading is similar. Quiet, fan boy, if you want to pay $1300 for a processor, buy it, but I doubt you'll continue with your Core2Duo.
Bravo fanboy Bravo! One cannot deduce the CPI from a benchmark that measures CPI + SMT.
Ah yes it is true I forgot that AMD is a non-profit organization ...
But have we seen the same presentation? Do you think it was a video based on? por que no es por nada ero vimos como ponían el juego paso por paso y que les llevó un poco hacerlo, claro que al poco de iniciarse la parte jugable volvieron a centrar la cámara en la conferencia y no en un PC trás el público, en los Benchmark los cuales Ryzen no se en que te basas para decir que el Intel estaba sin Turbo, es más Lisu Su, CEO de AMD dijo que mientras Ryzen iba a tener el turbo deshabilitado el Intel lo llevaba lo que le permitía llegar hasta los 3,7GHz, no se si os habíais dado cuenta pero obviamente lleva el nombre oculto en el administrador de tareas, más que oculto lo que es, una muestra de ingeniería que no tiene que ser el 100% de lo final y pueden no tener decidido el nombre completamente y no me refiero a la parte de Ryzen si no al resto no va a haber uno acaso el i7 se llama i7 y no, verás evidentemente te tendrás que creer que llevan el hardware que llevan como con cualquier otro evento, no te teletransportan allí para que desmontes el equipo y digas si señor, no nos han mentido, y espérate que ibas a solucionar mucho con una tapa de cristal en los AMD solo ibas a poder ver gráficas con disipadores no finales y un procesador que seguirías sin saber cual es por que llevan esa cosa que ponen siempre que te quieren mentir con el hardware o vender humo llamado disipador de la CPU sin el cual se quemaría al poco,recapitulemos el equipo de los benchmark con Lisa Su lleva el Ryzen tope de gama y el i7 6900k y una Titan X Pascal, por si no caísteis en que la caja de todos los AMD del evento conmemorizaban dicho evento y algunos de esos equipos llevaban gráficas como ya dije sin diseños finales y mientras que los Intel cualquier otra por que no tienen nada de AMD ni de Ryzen y en serio, en serio, me lo decís en serio las Titan X Pascal son practicamente indistingibles entre la penumbra de una sala en la que se están poninedo y retransmitiendo vídeos más allá de que se puede llegar a ver el Geforce de la tarjeta y es que fíjate tú que cabrones que son que en lugar de usar una VEGA que puede no ser final y rendir igual o mejor o usar un modelo algo menos potentes pero que en todo caso pueden acusar de estar manipulada, de no estar al alcance del público para verificar su rendimiento usan una NVIDIA Titan X Pascal de la competencia no muy amigable con AMD con uno de sus procesadores para que sepa que el hardware dado y los resultados concuerdan al menos en lo Intel que está al alcance es que vaya cabrones que humo no, no me voy a parar a investigarlo que como prensa que soy eso tendríais que hacer vosotros esos programas pueden ser solo procesador o en caso de tener ambas cosas bien que se veía como elegían la cantidad de CPU que se podía usar y todo eso no se que milagros tendríais que haber visto para estar conformes al fin y al cabo pueden pasar meses hasta que esten en la calle espero vuestra respuesta, por que mucho quejarse pero poco dijisteis sobre como tendría que haber sido solo dijisteis lo de la tapa opaca que como dije sin ella seguiríais sin dilucidar nada más
During the transmission, the Intel processor is seen with 100% load and at 3.2GHz, at no time is it seen going up to 3.7GHz. The FPS are not seen at any time, in any of the 'benchmarks' with games, you see people playing in a safe case and in another with great probability, while in another it looks like a video.
I reiterate that inside the towers there could be anything. In the last one, there are still 2, 3 or 4 RX 480 graphics cards in CrossFireX or a supposedly VEGA RX 490, we don't know. I am not saying that AMD manipulates or lies, only that with the data we have, to say that AMD has loaded Intel is to lie to people, because that is not what was seen, it is what they let see on the part of AMD. They can be good processors and graphics, it is not said otherwise, I simply do not believe that AMD's superiority over Intel will be demonstrated.
I would also like to point out that I don't know where the price of AMD Ryzen processors has come from in many places, because they are talking about it.
We tell what we saw in the presentation, not other things.
Calm down, fan boy, but the AMD turbo was disabled, the Intel turbo was enabled. That's enough, you lost, fan boy. I'm not a fan of anyone, but of my own pocket. If Intel gives me the price and performance in two years, I'll buy it. For now, it's expensive.
This "imagine that the processor I had installed was actually a..." is applicable to each and every one of the benchmarks you will see on YouTube xD
I can also put a video of a game and overlay different random FPS invented with the premiere and then say that the left half is a GTX 1080 and the right half is an RX 460, and above all say that the 460 takes more fps if I feel like it.
I get the feeling that the person who wrote this article, mr. Roberto Solé, you have no idea about hardware, much less systems and software. Find out how a benchmark works and why what is done today is absurd.
There was a time when benchmarks were only done without a system, direct to the board. Now, using bench on sys, the results are different even on the same computer, try yourself to repeat the same benchmark 7 times on your computer, you will see how the same numbers do not come out.
It is still done on a per-board basis but within the testing phase and in a "hidden" way, and I say "hidden" because we already saw that an unspecified AMD Zen was registered months ago, beating an Intel Xeon E5 v3 everywhere, remember?
When people do things well, you have to admit it, and AMD, with the entire ecosystem that it has woven, has done a fucking thing. We will see at the end of 2017 how far they go a priori with the AM4, but the cross-software and integrated technologies that they have presented are no joke:
Neural Net Prediction, adaptive artificial intelligence built into our CPU / APU.
Extended Frequency Range, The processor overclocks itself according to the cooler that we put on it (or rather according to the temperature at which it is working) Be careful with this, it is a very large surplus in the hardware world and it was already someone's turn did it, minipoint for these gentlemen!
And there is still more, related to SenseMI, more info on google or other forums since little relevant information has been given here. A greeting!
Joel, I'm sorry to tell you that I know a lot about hardware, software and systems, I haven't been in this for two days. When a benchmark is made during or at the end the team data is seen, here no data of any component has been seen, indeed, at no time are the FPS seen.
You speak of petar Intel Xeon i5 LGA2011v3 processors, you should still investigate what those processors are for, because they are used for gaming by some, those processors are NOT intended to be mounted on gaming equipment, that to begin with.
What you say about the automatic OC, we talked about it in another news, before this one, so in order not to reiterate and lengthen the thing, we link to the news. That point you are talking about depends on the heatsink, the better it is, the more it can go up, therefore I recommend you share instead of an RL, a phase change system or a 'pot' and ice bag, so that it rises as much as it can .
You should still read the first paragraph and click on the link if you want more information on our website about SenseMI.
a Xeon E3 V5 is a server processor, I know what it is for and I have assembled a few, they do not have the iX nomenclature anywhere, and they work with the FCLGA2011 socket. Precisely, that a processor supposedly not designed for servers, gives better results than a xeon e3 v5 in load of tasks is an important point of reference.
The FPS are not the most important news of the presentation, but to bring the rumors to reality and specify what new technologies the RYZEN will bring with them and how they work, and that, they explained well enough.
The tests were of use, which, at the level of seeing how something works, is much better than relying on a sad benchmark for what I was telling you.
If it is true that they could have done much more, in fact I myself believed that it would last longer and that they would take much longer than they did, and giving much more information. Yes, it is true, and everywhere they say they could have done a more extended presentation. However, from there to you do an article leaving all the work done in shit and the presentation seems crappy on your part and unprofessional.
I'm not a streamer, nor do I like LoL, but seeing how the ryzen moved with the LoL at full throttle while taking out the stream is gratifying since right now, without the ryzen, you can already have a € 2011 1200 with a 1080 sli you're going to lose between 20 and 30 fps when streaming. On the other hand, seeing how it moved in gaming in 4K, taking into account the product they were showing is amazing, even more so considering that it had a VEGA graphic mounted, in the testing phase !!! at the expense and risk that it could be unstable.
Besides, facing it with the i7 and seeing how it lagged behind in the two tests is no small feat!
If it seems like a small sample, you may be right if you expected more, it is something subjective, but you cannot say that they did not show anything, because having the balls to do this live, where by H or by B something can go wrong and you will be left with the face of mono (imagine that windows 10 starts to do things of its own as usual and ryzen is worse than intel).
As for the first link, in the link itself it does not specify what it contains (first web usability rule), then this article should review all the points covered in the presentation (which did not last half an hour but approximately 45 minutes, perhaps you were advancing it out of laziness and you skipped parts apparently.)
Anyway, you've taken your picture boy.
I don't usually like most of the articles on the following website, because many times they speak with absolute statements based on benchmarks instead of real tests, but at least they have summarized it much better, so, whatever you want, here you have it:
https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2016/12/amd-ryzen-anunciado-intel-serio-problema/
A greeting!
And how they realized that the boost was deactivated.
On the contrary, the AMD one didn't have the Turbo Core activated and the Intel one did, what happens is that the one who wrote this note is a fanboy, observe it with a friend who knows English and you'll agree with me.
Well, it is in the test that you do not see that the Intel turbo is activated and the AMD one is not even visible
If the note is too polarized, nowhere did I see that they ranted only on this site.
Given the criticism of my person, I easily finish with this topic and it will be the last comment I make about it. I am being criticized for a 30 minute AMD event and no relevant content.
Background: before the AMD filter event that would show the new GPU and the first benchmarks and the first motherboards could be seen. This in the event is NOT seen anywhere, the reason we do not know, but since they have not given any explanation, we will not suppose reasons, we simply do not know because everything promised has come to nothing.
Ryzen: what is said in the event had been published on this website on the same day December XNUMX in the morning, so no new data was given regarding this processor, in fact, it happened to fly by the processor and something else .
Benchmark: during the event there is only one moment where a figure is seen, which is when it faces the i7 6900K and it is clearly seen as AMD wins, but the Intel processor has the Boost blocked. It seems that we will have to wait for AMD to be kind enough to filter benchmarks on the processor or GPU or wait for the leaks that have been coming out in recent weeks on these AMD components, which you can search on the web.
Event: an event that lasts 30 minutes, it can go a long way, but this one does not go for anything. If this is done by NVIDIA or Intel I see you all like crazy attacking both companies. If you want to see what a real presentation is, I leave you one of NVIDIA about the GTX 1080, although you can look for more on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nanaE-vnjo8&list=PLZHnYvH1qtOZ0oLpKsdHWjw6rCRT2vhIM
My preferences: When I'm reporting, I put my preferences aside. For those who know me and have read me on Twitter or other media outlets where I collaborate, you'll know that I haven't just kept my cool and haven't been guided by feelings, but simply by information and data... well, the non-data that AMD provided. Personally, I switched to NVIDIA years ago, and for the moment, I have no reason to change.
AMD Drivers: a few days ago AMD launched the new drivers on the market. Honestly, I am happy and happy that they improve performance and reduce consumption and temperature, because that means that adjusted gaming equipment will be able to save on the GPU, installing an AMD solution that offers good performance and enhances other aspects, which is now difficult , because AMD's solutions are economically cheaper than NVIDIA's, but in power they are also quite inferior.
Economy: when a company, in this case Intel, launches a product on the market that has no competition, such as Skylake with DDR4 support, they can set the price that they really want, because they know that they offer a product that does not offer nobody. We will see how they lower the price when the new AMD processors come out and what a coincidence, it coincides with the arrival of Kaby Lake, so the Skylake will be wanted as an economic option and will compete with AMD Zen. I give you an example: let's imagine that a car brand launches the first 100% electric car and 100% autonomous driving. This brand can sell the car for 10 million euros or whatever it wants, because it has no competition in that segment. You will sell it cheaper because you want anyone to buy it. That's what Intel does, now earn more money per processor, then adjust the profit margin and that's it.
The news: This news is based ONLY on the presentation data, not based on any other data.
Greetings.
This note is even more false because the AMD turbo was disabled but the Intel one was. If you go to the news in English and know that language or at least translate it, you will see that I am right. This note says it backwards, meaning fan boy Intel, this page is mmmm…erda
Obviously if they did not want to show the FPS (in a single game: /) and other data such as the same processor that only appeared on the back screen, maybe (from my point of view) it is the same or is below the top of the Intel range . But the real tests are done by us in our quiet homes and in all the programs that they want, we just have to wait for them to come out, look at a couple of reviews and benchs and more less get an idea of what they are selling us (smoke or competition)
I'm not anyone's fanboy, I clarify xD, my pc has an i7 4790 and an rx 480, so I'm on both sides: 3
So much indignation gives them that a company with a minimum part of the budget and the personnel that handle those in blue presents a mike that equals in everything the best effort they can do?
I insist on my theory: Intel and AMD 3 years with the same resources and AMD presents a better product than Intel by far
Unfortunately, in order to sell, companies show that their products are better than those of the competition, when it comes out you will be able to see if what it promises is true