AMD Ryzen 7 1800X CPU Review

[InvalidError]

Can tomshardware confirm an single core overlclock of 5Ghz on air?

What would the point of that be? Two cores has become the minimum even for basic OS operation, a single core OC is useless, even dual core causes usability issues in some software and makes some games either unplayable or refuse to start.

A far more interesting but equally impractical Ryzen OC result is the 5+ GHz LN2 with all cores and SMT enabled RUNNING GAMES AND BENCHMARKS. Personally, I do not regard overclock records that require crippling the CPU beyond usability as valid - there is no point in overclocking a single core to 6GHz when your single-core CPU gets destroyed in most benchmarks by a stock CPU on an entry-level stock motherboard with stock HSF. In many cases, those OC records can't even run benchmarks.

 

[ttt_2017]

not really , I am not saying bring the Naples with their server mobos.

I am saying bring a cut down Naples to 8 or 4 channels and 40 lanes... and use them with X370 chipset.

you can find X99 Motherboards today for $189 not $1000 ...

And I'm saying that a $200 entry-level motherboard doesn't make sense for the AM4 platform which is intended to support CPUs that will will cost all the way down to somewhere in the neighborhood of $100. AM4 motherboards are available for under $100, that would not be possible with quad-channel memory and all that extra fluff most people won't use in a home desktop PC.

AMD may have introduced its high-end mainstream Ryzen first but at the end of the day, AM4 is a low-cost socket chosen for overall bang-per-buck.

under $100 are the B350 not X370 chipset ... AMD could made AM4 Socket with more pins to take both low CPU and Higher CPU , it is all about the pin counts for the extra channels and extra lanes... could be done easy...

on cheap B350 <$100 motherboards those pins are not connected , on X370 motherboard they are connected ...

the Difference will not be in layers at all just the socket price itself ... on lower mobos , the extra pins are not connected , on X370 the pins are connected and more layers added to the motherboards for more connections .. not that hard to make . and wont make it expensive , just the difference between the socket oonly price . not the rest of motherboard price in case the pins are not connected.

you are talking about $2 difference only socket type wise ...

LGA 1151 Socket price : $7

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/LGA-1151-Motherboard-Repair-Soldering-Replacement-CPU-Socket-with-Tin-Balls-for-Skylake-Series/32600079826.html?spm=2114.01010208.3.2.8HekMs&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_5_10000560_10000606_10000561_10000073_10000074_10000608_10000709_10000660_10000704_10000703_10000175_10000509_10000507_10000505_10000558_10136_10000068_10000552_10000369_10000063_10000365_10000367_10099_10000663_10000665_10096_10000669_10000569_10000097_10000094_10000337_10000723_10000090_10000147_10000091_10000726_10000144_10000339_10000150_10000679_10084_10000678_10083_10000676_10080_10000153_10082_10000673_10081_10110_10111_10112_10113_10000535_10114_10000534_10000089_10000086_10000710_10000083_10000349_10000690_10000135_10000716_10000080_10000693_10078_10079_10000717_10000688_10073_10000684_10000140_10070_10122_10123_10126_10124_10000546_10065_10068_10501_10000132_10000033_10503_10000030_10000026_10000126_10000023_10000129_10000123_10000696_10060_10062_10000699_10056_10055_10054_10000632_302_10059_10000120_10000020_10000013_10000117_10103_10102_10000016_10000114_10000111_10052_10053_10107_10050_10106_10051_20517_10000621_10000384_20515_10000629_10000101_10000100_10000576_10000579_10000104_10000045_10000578_10000375_10000108_10000377_10000612_10000390_10000613_10000042_10000592_10000594_10000039_10000587_10000036_10000389_10000187-10503_10501_20517_20515,searchweb201603_1,afswitch_1,ppcSwitch_5,single_sort_0_default&btsid=4786640a-131f-4f11-83d0-1583faf7b24e&algo_expid=1aa825bc-efd7-4682-a945-629fe8fc7984-0&algo_pvid=1aa825bc-efd7-4682-a945-629fe8fc7984

LGA 2011-3 Price : $9

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/10pcs-LGA-2011-3-LGA2011-V3-CPU-Soldering-CPU-Socket-with-Tin-Balls-back-side-for/32676636705.html?spm=2114.01010208.3.10.sRMEaL&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_5_10000560_10000606_10000561_10000073_10000074_10000608_10000709_10000660_10000704_10000703_10000175_10000509_10000507_10000505_10000558_10136_10000068_10000552_10000369_10000063_10000365_10000367_10099_10000663_10000665_10096_10000669_10000569_10000097_10000094_10000337_10000723_10000090_10000147_10000091_10000726_10000144_10000339_10000150_10000679_10084_10000678_10083_10000676_10080_10000153_10082_10000673_10081_10110_10111_10112_10113_10000535_10114_10000534_10000089_10000086_10000710_10000083_10000349_10000690_10000135_10000716_10000080_10000693_10078_10079_10000717_10000688_10073_10000684_10000140_10070_10122_10123_10126_10124_10000546_10065_10068_10501_10000132_10000033_10503_10000030_10000026_10000126_10000023_10000129_10000123_10000696_10060_10062_10000699_10056_10055_10054_10000632_302_10059_10000120_10000020_10000013_10000117_10103_10102_10000016_10000114_10000111_10052_10053_10107_10050_10106_10051_20517_10000621_10000384_20515_10000629_10000101_10000100_10000576_10000579_10000104_10000045_10000578_10000375_10000108_10000377_10000612_10000390_10000613_10000042_10000592_10000594_10000039_10000587_10000036_10000389_10000187-10051_10503_10501_20517_20515,searchweb201603_1,afswitch_1,ppcSwitch_5,single_sort_0_default&btsid=234af90c-f6a5-4d15-8840-e07c35c42e5d&algo_expid=6eb30735-5eea-4504-a769-b4d42aec24a3-1&algo_pvid=6eb30735-5eea-4504-a769-b4d42aec24a3


you are exaggerating the price difference of the sockets ... it is not a big deal at all ... You can use more pins socket on a low Motherboard and not connect all the pins , and not use more layers as well on $99 motherboards for just $2 more.

This is how you make a universal socket .. Sadly AMD did not choose to make it this way ... AM4 sockets should have enough pins for more lanes and channels ...

 

[xaephod]

I wonder how it would compare to one of those Dual E5-2670 32 thread xeon monsters that people love to build in multi-threaded scenarios.

 

[s4fun]

So many AMD fanboys. If you can NOT win the gamer's over, you ain't GOT NO game! Price at a price competitive to i7-7700K, or quit wasting our time with crappy hype. As much as I like an alternative, second source, be it CPU or software platforms, the fact remains Windows still win the gaming market, that is why Apple, Linux, Steam boxes, consoles etc. still has NOT broken thru and become the dominant player. AMD has been on hiatus for too long, what the pile of bulldozer pile drive crap, and they are going to blow their opportunity by pricing too high. That is just plain stupid. You win by zerging it and zerging it hard. They fact that they can't get sufficient quantity means they got other production problems, otherwise it is just another cynical play by creating false shortages with it being so called sold out. The excuse of not marketing to gamers, is sour grape BS and trying to FUD stuff. Utter nonsense.

And what is so wrong for demanding a real price war, so that both AMD and Intel lower their prices? This has been long overdue!

Again, the R7 is not a competitor to the 7700k, it is to the 6900k which its generally as fast as or faster. The R7's are less than half the price while doing nearly the same thing.

Try reading the articles before commenting.

Are you a paid shill for AMD or what? That is BS AMD marketing speak, misdirecting people. You condescending remark about reading the article no withstanding. You know full well i7-7700K is benchmark that matters, and telling us to go look at 6900K is just BS red herring crap!

 

[elbert]

Can tomshardware confirm an single core overlclock of 5Ghz on air?

What would the point of that be? Two cores has become the minimum even for basic OS operation, a single core OC is useless, even dual core causes usability issues in some software and makes some games either unplayable or refuse to start.

A far more interesting but equally impractical Ryzen OC result is the 5+ GHz LN2 with all cores and SMT enabled RUNNING GAMES AND BENCHMARKS. Personally, I do not regard overclock records that require crippling the CPU beyond usability as valid - there is no point in overclocking a single core to 6GHz when your single-core CPU gets destroyed in most benchmarks by a stock CPU on an entry-level stock motherboard with stock HSF. In many cases, those OC records can't even run benchmarks.

Unlike Intels CPU's and AMD's old stuff Ryzan is a new architect. We know very little about its limits and more importantly sweet spots. What RAM speeds work best? Benchmarks on RAM speeds comparing faster 3200 16ns RAM vs 3000 15ns on Ryzen? Some of AMD's older CPU's responded better to slower but lower latency. A baseline of 2666 RAM to see if faster RAM is worth the price on the new plateform. Still a huge amount of unaswered questions I would like to see tested.

 

[gdmaclew]

The Ryzen universe is still only 3 days old. The various reviews probably raised more questions than they answered. This is an exciting time as we are witnessing the birth of a new architecture and it is only going to get better with time.
Regardless if you are a gamer or a "number cruncher" or just plain PC user you will see a re-jigging of the PC industry in the next couple of years.
Doubters will always be doubters and fanboys will always be fanboys. The real test will be the marketplace and watching just how many are sold (and kept).
Having two viable choices has been missing for years and I'm glad it is back. This is just the opening shot from AMD, and the opening response from Intel. Once the lower echelon Ryzens are released it will only pick up steam.

 

[InvalidError]

under $100 are the B350 not X370 chipset ... AMD could made AM4 Socket with more pins to take both low CPU and Higher CPU , it is all about the pin counts for the extra channels and extra lanes... could be done easy...

A socket and CPU package with 600+ extra pins is still going to be significantly more expensive even if half of the extra pins are unused. To fit those extra pins, you either need a bigger CPU package or a higher density one. Increasing the pin grid density would require closer trace spacing on the motherboard and require additional signal layers. A larger package and socket would be more expensive, use more board space, have worse EMI and signal integrity performance.

Like it or not, it would introduce significant cost overhead at the entry-level where ever penny matters.

 

[Fulgurant]

Until very recently, the conventional wisdom held that the i5 was functionally the best gaming CPU on the market; some on this forum even went so far as to say that gamers would be foolish to buy an i7. So when I see Ryzen obliterate the i5 in minimum framerate, as in the following review, I'm pretty damn impressed with AMD:

http://www.techspot.com/review/1345-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x/page4.html

This bodes very well for the lower-to-mid-tier Ryzen offerings. And AMD's reemergence as a legitimate challenger to Intel bodes very well for all of us.

 

[Rogue Leader]

So many AMD fanboys. If you can NOT win the gamer's over, you ain't GOT NO game! Price at a price competitive to i7-7700K, or quit wasting our time with crappy hype. As much as I like an alternative, second source, be it CPU or software platforms, the fact remains Windows still win the gaming market, that is why Apple, Linux, Steam boxes, consoles etc. still has NOT broken thru and become the dominant player. AMD has been on hiatus for too long, what the pile of bulldozer pile drive crap, and they are going to blow their opportunity by pricing too high. That is just plain stupid. You win by zerging it and zerging it hard. They fact that they can't get sufficient quantity means they got other production problems, otherwise it is just another cynical play by creating false shortages with it being so called sold out. The excuse of not marketing to gamers, is sour grape BS and trying to FUD stuff. Utter nonsense.

And what is so wrong for demanding a real price war, so that both AMD and Intel lower their prices? This has been long overdue!

Again, the R7 is not a competitor to the 7700k, it is to the 6900k which its generally as fast as or faster. The R7's are less than half the price while doing nearly the same thing.

Try reading the articles before commenting.

Are you a paid shill for AMD or what? That is BS AMD marketing speak, misdirecting people. You condescending remark about reading the article no withstanding. You know full well i7-7700K is benchmark that matters, and telling us to go look at 6900K is just BS red herring crap!

The 7700k is the benchmark that matters FOR GAMING. Heres a surprise revelation for you. Most of the worlds computers, including those out in the wild and even ones people build here on TH are NOT used for gaming. If processors should be priced based on the performance in one aspect that not everyone uses then sure you may hold water. However thats not how it works.

Every piece of marketing about the R7 series has compared it to the i7-6900k, since they are identically configured (8c/16t). I don't see where this is a surprise to anyone. Read through this thread and you will see everyone, except you, clearly understands this fact.

Thank you for posting again and re-iterating that you either have not read the article, or any articles on it, or if you did you clearly did not comprehend it.

 

[larkspur]

Until very recently, the conventional wisdom held that the i5 was functionally the best gaming CPU on the market; some on this forum even went so far as to say that gamers would be foolish to buy an i7. So when I see Ryzen obliterate the i5 in minimum framerate, as in the following review, I'm pretty damn impressed with AMD:

http://www.techspot.com/review/1345-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x/page4.html

This bodes very well for the lower-to-mid-tier Ryzen offerings. And AMD's reemergence as a legitimate challenger to Intel bodes very well for all of us.

I can't agree that I'm impressed with AMD in the gaming benchmarks. The only gaming bench in that review where a stock-clocked $240 i5 gets "obliterated" by a stock-clocked $400 Ryzen in minimum framerate is in Battlefield 1. That game is also one of AMD's suggested gaming benches and a stock-clocked $310 i7-6700k beats both Ryzens easily. They do beat the i5s in the other games but not by much. I'm seeing way too many other game benches where the Ryzen chips are showing very weak results.

Obviously we shouldn't get too upset that these high-tier Ryzens aren't putting up good gaming numbers because that's not where their market is. Way too many people are judging these chips on their gaming performance which is simply not right. However, from a gaming standpoint it is a little disturbing to see such poor results from the AM4 flagship. We'll have to see what kind of clocks, prices and performance the six and four core Ryzens have when considering them for gaming machines. I'm optimistic that their price-to-performance will be good enough to recommend, but let's face it - I'm certainly not going to recommend building a gaming-only machine with one of these currently-available high-tier Ryzens...

 

[s4fun]

So many AMD fanboys. If you can NOT win the gamer's over, you ain't GOT NO game! Price at a price competitive to i7-7700K, or quit wasting our time with crappy hype. As much as I like an alternative, second source, be it CPU or software platforms, the fact remains Windows still win the gaming market, that is why Apple, Linux, Steam boxes, consoles etc. still has NOT broken thru and become the dominant player. AMD has been on hiatus for too long, what the pile of bulldozer pile drive crap, and they are going to blow their opportunity by pricing too high. That is just plain stupid. You win by zerging it and zerging it hard. They fact that they can't get sufficient quantity means they got other production problems, otherwise it is just another cynical play by creating false shortages with it being so called sold out. The excuse of not marketing to gamers, is sour grape BS and trying to FUD stuff. Utter nonsense.

And what is so wrong for demanding a real price war, so that both AMD and Intel lower their prices? This has been long overdue!

Again, the R7 is not a competitor to the 7700k, it is to the 6900k which its generally as fast as or faster. The R7's are less than half the price while doing nearly the same thing.

Try reading the articles before commenting.

Are you a paid shill for AMD or what? That is BS AMD marketing speak, misdirecting people. You condescending remark about reading the article no withstanding. You know full well i7-7700K is benchmark that matters, and telling us to go look at 6900K is just BS red herring crap!

The 7700k is the benchmark that matters FOR GAMING. Heres a surprise revelation for you. Most of the worlds computers, including those out in the wild and even ones people build here on TH are NOT used for gaming. If processors should be priced based on the performance in one aspect that not everyone uses then sure you may hold water. However thats not how it works.

Every piece of marketing about the R7 series has compared it to the i7-6900k, since they are identically configured (8c/16t). I don't see where this is a surprise to anyone. Read through this thread and you will see everyone, except you, clearly understands this fact.

Thank you for posting again and re-iterating that you either have not read the article, or any articles on it, or if you did you clearly did not comprehend it.

Keep on parroting that AMD marketing spiel you are paid to do so. The rest of us have and comprehend the bait and switch BS that AMD marketing has put out. WE ARE NOT IDIOTS. We do NOT believe the crap AMD puts out just like we DO NOT believe the lies that cheetos jesus in white house spouts every day on twitter or otherwise. Get SMART and face the reality! You clearly DO NOT understand what truth is, and what people demand.

 

[Fulgurant]

I can't agree that I'm impressed with AMD in the gaming benchmarks. The only gaming bench in that review where a stock-clocked $240 i5 gets "obliterated" by a stock-clocked $400 Ryzen in minimum framerate is in Battlefield 1. That game is also one of AMD's suggested gaming benches and a stock-clocked $310 i7-6700k beats both Ryzens easily. They do beat the i5s in the other games but not by much. I'm seeing way too many other game benches where the Ryzen chips are showing very weak results.

"Obliterate" is perhaps too strong a word, but Ryzen also beat the i5 by a significant margin in the Watchdogs benchmark. Let's not quibble; Ryzen compares favorably with a chip that until very recently was the gold standard for gaming. When you look at the benchmarks through that lens, the angst over Ryzen's gaming performance seem overwrought.

More to the point, if AMD can release a chip in the $200 range that matches the i5 in gaming and competes with i7 in all other workloads, then it'll be a massive win. That scenario seems very plausible in light of the early results.

Obviously we shouldn't get too upset that these high-tier Ryzens aren't putting up good gaming numbers because that's not where their market is. Way too many people are judging these chips on their gaming performance which is simply not right. However, from a gaming standpoint it is a little disturbing to see such poor results from the AM4 flagship. We'll have to see what kind of clocks, prices and performance the six and four core Ryzens have when considering them for gaming machines. I'm optimistic that their price-to-performance will be good enough to recommend, but let's face it - I'm certainly not going to recommend building a gaming-only machine with one of these currently-available high-tier Ryzens...

Agreed. The current batch of Ryzen CPUS is too expensive to recommend to most gamers. Just as the i7 was not that long ago. 😉

 

[Rogue Leader]

Keep on parroting that AMD marketing spiel you are paid to do so. The rest of us have and comprehend the bait and switch BS that AMD marketing has put out. WE ARE NOT IDIOTS. We do NOT believe the crap AMD puts out just like we DO NOT believe the lies that cheetos jesus in white house spouts every day on twitter or otherwise. Get SMART and face the reality! You clearly DO NOT understand what truth is, and what people demand.

Paid to do so? Guys what the hell? We (moderators) get paid to be here and comment on this? Where are my checks?!?!

Thanks for proving my point. Because typing in caps, baseless accusations, and lame political references really drive home how "correct" you are.

 

[InvalidError]

Keep on parroting that AMD marketing spiel you are paid to do so. The rest of us have and comprehend the bait and switch BS that AMD marketing has put out. WE ARE NOT IDIOTS.

There is no bait and switch happening here. AMD is marketing Ryzen 7 to content producers and other people who run workloads that can leverage a 8C16T CPU and Ryzen is doing fine compared to the i7-6900 which costs twice as much in those workloads. Ryzen 7 may be worse than the i7-7700 for gaming but gaming isn't the primary concern for most of the R7's target audience.

Also, as Rogue wrote above, I have been a mod on THG for over three years and have received a grand total of $0.00 so far for my forum contributions.

 

[BNCID]

And now a fanatic from the other side. Must be a fair review since fanboys from each side are claiming payoffs. God forbid a cpu not really aimed at gamer doesn't game as well as one that is .

Honestly I think AMD has done well with Ryzen, it's a big step up from their last gen.

 

[gdmaclew]

And now a fanatic from the other side. Must be a fair review since fanboys from each side are claiming payoffs. God forbid a cpu not really aimed at gamer doesn't game as well as one that is .

Honestly I think AMD has done well with Ryzen, it's a big step up from their last gen.

You are not kidding. I just viewed the 8350 vs. Ryzen benchmark comparisons over at Wccftech and the Ryzen blows away my 8350!
I know the 8350 is not in the same league as the 1800x but I'm sure the numbers would be just as surprising for the 1700.

 

[Rogue Leader]

Just to follow up on my last post and what InvalidError said, click on any of the 3 systems in my signature, 1 is AMD and the other 2 are Intel, including both a Xeon and a Skylake processor. Feel free to PM me I can provide receipts for all parts for all 3 systems, as well I have ordered up the parts to build a new R7-1800X based system to the tune of a little over $1500, and I will be more than happy to provide receipts for that as well.

Tom's Hardware moderators are not compensated for their work. On top of that Tom's Hardware editors, while compensated by TH's parent company, are not compensated in any way by any manufacturer. You can feel free to believe otherwise, but those are the facts. That said feel free to have a spirited discussion as you like, however if you start to incite problems, arguments, or turn political, violent, profane, etc, your time posting here will end.

 

[Crashman]

Just to follow up on my last post and what InvalidError said, click on any of the 3 systems in my signature, 1 is AMD and the other 2 are Intel, including both a Xeon and a Skylake processor. Feel free to PM me I can provide receipts for all parts for all 3 systems, as well I have ordered up the parts to build a new R7-1800X based system to the tune of a little over $1500, and I will be more than happy to provide receipts for that as well.

Tom's Hardware moderators are not compensated for their work. On top of that Tom's Hardware editors, while compensated by TH's parent company, are not compensated in any way by any manufacturer. You can feel free to believe otherwise, but those are the facts. That said feel free to have a spirited discussion as you like, however if you start to incite problems, arguments, or turn political, violent, profane, etc, your time posting here will end.

Hey hey now, I get cookies from manufacturers at Christmas most years. I didn't get any last year though. Maybe it's because I moved.
Is there a rule against soliciting recompense from readers who have ACCUSED me of taking bribes?

 

[PaulAlcorn]

Tom's Hardware moderators are not compensated for their work. On top of that Tom's Hardware editors, while compensated by TH's parent company, are not compensated in any way by any manufacturer. You can feel free to believe otherwise, but those are the facts. That said feel free to have a spirited discussion as you like, however if you start to incite problems, arguments, or turn political, violent, profane, etc, your time posting here will end.

Hey hey now, I get cookies from manufacturers at Christmas most years. I didn't get any last year though. Maybe it's because I moved.
Is there a rule against soliciting recompense from readers who have ACCUSED me of taking bribes?

I never get cookies 🙁

 

[Crashman]

Tom's Hardware moderators are not compensated for their work. On top of that Tom's Hardware editors, while compensated by TH's parent company, are not compensated in any way by any manufacturer. You can feel free to believe otherwise, but those are the facts. That said feel free to have a spirited discussion as you like, however if you start to incite problems, arguments, or turn political, violent, profane, etc, your time posting here will end.

Hey hey now, I get cookies from manufacturers at Christmas most years. I didn't get any last year though. Maybe it's because I moved.
Is there a rule against soliciting recompense from readers who have ACCUSED me of taking bribes?

I never get cookies 🙁

UNBLOCK YOUR COOKIES!!!

 

[ttt_2017]

under $100 are the B350 not X370 chipset ... AMD could made AM4 Socket with more pins to take both low CPU and Higher CPU , it is all about the pin counts for the extra channels and extra lanes... could be done easy...

A socket and CPU package with 600+ extra pins is still going to be significantly more expensive even if half of the extra pins are unused. To fit those extra pins, you either need a bigger CPU package or a higher density one. Increasing the pin grid density would require closer trace spacing on the motherboard and require additional signal layers. A larger package and socket would be more expensive, use more board space, have worse EMI and signal integrity performance.

Like it or not, it would introduce significant cost overhead at the entry-level where ever penny matters.

its $2 difference .. and bigger CPU package is always better for cooling. and you dont need more layers on lower motherboards if the extra pins are not connected. and big no , it is not about pennies , Motherboard Manufacturers already wont mind $2 extra at all ... where you find a motherboard of the same chipset range between $120 and $350 .. $2 will disappear and the consumer will never notice it.

 

[InvalidError]

Motherboard Manufacturers already wont mind $2 extra at all ... where you find a motherboard of the same chipset range between $120 and $350 .. $2 will disappear and the consumer will never notice it.

AM4 motherboards don't start at $120, they start at $90 with the B350 chipset and you can expect A320/300 boards to go for even cheaper than that, likely down to the same ~$50 as FM2/AM3+ boards do.

 

[ttt_2017]

Motherboard Manufacturers already wont mind $2 extra at all ... where you find a motherboard of the same chipset range between $120 and $350 .. $2 will disappear and the consumer will never notice it.

AM4 motherboards don't start at $120, they start at $90 with the B350 chipset and you can expect A320/300 boards to go for even cheaper than that, likely down to the same ~$50 as FM2/AM3+ boards do.

okay $50+$2=$52

maaaaan ...

 

[InvalidError]

okay $50+$2=$52

maaaaan ...

You are underestimating the extents to which companies often go to shave even $0.10 off the cost of a $300 device. Having to pay $2 more for an under-used component (assuming the incremental cost is that low, which it probably isn't) on a $50-class motherboard is a significant setback. The final price will either go up by significantly more than just $2 or the manufacturer will cut corners elsewhere if there are still corners left to cut at that price level.

Also keep in mind that out of the $50 retail price, 50-60% of it usually gets gobbled up by the retailer and middlemen markups, leaving the motherboard manufacturer with only $20-25. The margins on entry-level boards are razor-thin.

 

[ttt_2017]

okay $50+$2=$52

maaaaan ...

You are underestimating the extents to which companies often go to shave even $0.10 off the cost of a $300 device. Having to pay $2 more for an under-used component (assuming the incremental cost is that low, which it probably isn't) on a $50-class motherboard is a significant setback. The final price will either go up by significantly more than just $2 or the manufacturer will cut corners elsewhere if there are still corners left to cut at that price level.

Also keep in mind that out of the $50 retail price, 50-60% of it usually gets gobbled up by the retailer and middlemen markups, leaving the motherboard manufacturer with only $20-25. The margins on entry-level boards are razor-thin.

and that $2 difference is retail price differnce as well , it is almost 0.5 $ in real