News
Now Reading
AMD Summit Ridge Zen ES CPU Benchmarks Leaked, Faster Than Intel Core i5-4670K in AotS
10

AMD Summit Ridge Zen ES CPU Benchmarks Leaked, Faster Than Intel Core i5-4670K in AotS

Sam ChenAugust 11, 2016

computex-2016-zen-custom-pc-review

Up until this point, AMD has been all talk about their upcoming “Summit Ridge” Zen architecture based CPUs, but a recently leaked benchmark of two AMD Zen Engineering Sample CPUs in the Ashes of the Singularity benchmark database may have just confirmed some of AMD’s claims.

In the database, two Zen ES CPU unique identifiers popped up – 1D2801A2M88E4_32/28_N and 2D2801A2M88E4_32/28_N. Based on the unique identifiers it appears that the CPUs are both clocked at 2.8GHz base and 3.2GHz turbo, but the 1D variant significantly outperformed the 2D variant.

Although the full results of the leaked benchmarks have been pulled from the database at this time, WCCF managed to put together a chart with the meaty details of the Ashes of the Singularity CPU benchmark.

amd-zen-summit-ridge-benchmarks-aots-leaked

Above we can see four CPUs being compared, the Intel Core i7-4790, AMD Zen ES-1D, Intel Core i5-4670K, and AMD FX-8350. According to the results, the AMD Zen ES-1D was able to outperform the Intel Core i5-4670K by approximately 10% and the AMD FX-8350 by approximately 38%. However, it did come in approximately 11% slower than the Intel Core i7-4790. If these numbers are true, AMD’s claims of 40% IPC improvement may be right on the mark which should make Zen’s architecture very competitive against Intel’s products.

Of course, these are engineering samples benchmarked on a single benchmark without full knowledge of actual clock speeds, drivers, other hardware, etc. so I’d highly recommend taking these benchmarks with a grain of salt. However, this is the first time we’ve seen actual benchmarks for Zen, and if these numbers hold true across the board, we may see something very competitive from AMD come 4Q2016.

 

Source: WCCFtech

About The Author
Sam Chen
Hardware and Technology Enthusiast. SSD Evangelist. Editor-in-Chief.
10 Comments
  • Gromanon
    August 11, 2016 at 12:19 pm

    Clock that Zen to i7’s speed and bye i7!

      • Donny Stanley
        August 11, 2016 at 3:35 pm

        “a true 8 core i7 5960X trashed this ES easily.”

        Implying that you have some information as to the Zen part not being a “true 8-core” ? That would conflict with all other reports and AMD’s own claims as to the underlying architecture.

        I would really take these benchmarks with a grain of salt, and wait before you start using these findings as fuel for your fanboy flame wars.

        • rogue1
          August 12, 2016 at 2:32 pm

          Bcoz we don’t know much bout Zen yet. Could be a Bulldozer enhanced lookin at how the results turned out despite havin 8 cores, still slower than i7 4790 and way slower than i7 5960X.

      • August 11, 2016 at 3:58 pm

        Sure, but it would also depend on pricing. An Intel Core i7 5960X is $1,000. We still have no clue what the pricing of the Zen ES CPU is going to be. What if it came in at a $200-$250 pricepoint? It would be very competitive…

        • rogue1
          August 12, 2016 at 2:36 pm

          Imagine that AMD still needs twice the number of cores to compete with quad cores from Intel? Perhaps when AMD said it would be competitive to Skylake they meant the 4c/8t desktop CPUs and not the 8c/16t HEDT CPUs. There aren’t any HEDT Skylake CPUs yet. As for pricin, no idea but guessin it would be around the old pricin used for current FX CPUs.

          • Donny Stanley
            August 12, 2016 at 6:24 pm

            You’re basing all of this on a single, unofficial, gaming benchmark. That’s a rather poor way to make an assumption about a CPU’s performance.

            At this point, we have no real idea how these things will perform, what they will compete against in terms of pricing and where they fit in the marketplace. It is very important to take leaks such as these ones as entertainment and not education.

          • rogue1
            August 12, 2016 at 6:41 pm

            Deja vu https://www.chiphell.com/thread-210890-1-1.html bout same frequency, disappointin perf…. All turned out true in the end, even higher frequency could not save Faildozer…. Waitin for more real leaks….

  • Michael Gariti
    August 16, 2016 at 4:22 pm

    Forgive me, for I am confused. I’ve been eagerly awaiting a Zen APU (which has been delayed AGAIN to mid-2017). Reason being that it was so much cheaper and (apparently) faster than an i7-6950k’s meager 3.2GHz (Zen was rumored to be 3.8GHz OC’d to 4.2). But wait! Zen’s bragging rights seem now to be that it’s expected to ALMOST be as fast as a 3-year old i7-4790 at 3.6GHz? Even more bewildering is that the latest current AMD chip is clocked at 5GHz, but comes nowhere close to an i7-6700k at 4GHz! Explain the speed to me!

    • August 16, 2016 at 9:18 pm

      This is actually a very common confusion. The clock speed of a CPU (x GHz) can only be compared to a chip that’s identical so an Intel Core i7 6770K 4.2GHz will be faster than a Core i7 6770K at 3.2GHz. But when comparing two different CPUs, especially from different manufacturers, the frequency doesn’t tell you anything about the actual performance. It’s like comparing 3,000 RPMs on a Chevy 8 Cylinder Diesel vs 3,000 RPMs on a Honda 4 Cylinder Gas engine. The only way to compare the two is through comparing benchmarks.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.