Intel should be very worried about AMD's Ryzen 7 processors

I have owned both AMD and Intel silicon over the many years I have been an enthusiast, currently using I7 5960X, had all the flagship silicon from both sides. We need AMD around to keep Intel on there toes, if not then Intel can do just as they are doing and charging what they like. And once the new AMD architecture matures, as it will, they will have some descent cpu's on the market, which is good for the consumer.:)

eLPuSHeR said:

I have read elsewhere that Intel has dropped its Tick-Tock strategy and that "Coffe Lake" is just around the corner. Exciting times ahead.

Yea, I read that on TechSpot. I like the competition, but usually end up being a little disappointed. Of course AMD and Intel will hype their products. All manufacturers do.

I have always been disappointed by the disparity between AMD specs and real-life performance. It has made me an "Intel-only" shop. As far as Ryzen is concerned, everyone ought to read Peter Bright's exhaustive review and test results over on Ars Technica:

AMD’s moment of Zen: Finally, an architecture that can compete | Ars Technica

Yes, in certain domains Ryzen can compete, but it's not the Intel-slayer that some are making it out to be. Still, I wish them well for the standard reasons.

Cliff S said:

You're welcome. Jay builds some of the nicest looking water loop rigs I think.

If you watch the video, Jay mentions how incredibly limited the Ryzen chips are for OC. This could be due to BIOS optimization issues or the silicon isn't as optimized as Intel's. Who knows? If you are the casual enthusiast hobbyist tech nerd and like to OC your chips, AMD might not quench your OC thirst. We shall see with time.

sygnus21 said:

Well I've never used AMD processors and have no plans to do so now. Intel hasn't done anything to make me look elsewhere thus far. And since I don't go for their super expensive CPU's, their "consumer" grade processors are right in my price range (mid 3 hundred) so there's still no reason to jump ship.

That said, it'd be nice to get an 8-core Intel processor for less than 5 hundred bucks. Hopefully AMD pushes Intel in this direction.

Yeah, I usually keep my CPUs between $200 and $300 on my builds. Going really high end today doesn't make the CPU and less obsolete in 5 years time.

I've had a handul of AMD cpu's over the years. I had an AMD thunderbird 900, and an Athlon X2 4600+ (I still have that one, its my linux workstation at home), and I had a Sempron 2800+ (for years it was my file server, but has since been replaced by a Core i3).

The problem with an 8 core Intel CPU for $500 is that when that happens, there will be a 12 core for $1,000 and that is what the enthusiasts will be drooling over.