Discussion AMD Ryzen MegaThread! FAQ and Resources

[010TheMaster010]

XV2 is competing with Pentium, I believe.

 

[jdwii]

XV2 is competing with Pentium, I believe.

Pricing shows nothing below 130$, also read that Amd plans to keep piledriver around for a little longer.

 

[salgado18]

R3 1100 (lowest Ryzen) is the same price as the i3-6100, and has 4 full cores. Pentium is not a target yet, and I hope price wars push prices down, instead of they making a 2c/4t R1 or something.

 

[8350rocks]

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/56234/amd-ryzen-leaks-r7-1800x-costs-499-line-up-strong/index.html
If this sticks then that 1400X is looking like my new best friend

That looks like some very aggressive binning...and very aggressive pricing as well. Glad to see that thoughts on this were pretty close.

 

[010TheMaster010]

Let me clarify, what I'm meaning is, while Zen competes at i3-i7X, XV2(Excavator v2; see A10 9xxx, Athlon X4 950) will compete with Pentium and below, possibly nipping at some low power i3s.
Edit: opinion, not fact.

 

[Cazalan]

But we were told over and over again that a 6C couldn't exist. *shocking*

 

[8350rocks]

But we were told over and over again that a 6C couldn't exist. *shocking*

Definitely an interesting development.

 

[010TheMaster010]

I was back and forth with the 6 cores quite honestly. First it seemed like there would be, them I was dissuaded, but look at this. Pretty interesting. Also interesting is the cache. Same as the 8 core. Possible 6->8 core unlocking? Or am I just too hopeful

 

[8350rocks]

I was back and forth with the 6 cores quite honestly. First it seemed like there would be, them I was dissuaded, but look at this. Pretty interesting. Also interesting is the cache. Same as the 8 core. Possible 6->8 core unlocking? Or am I just too hopeful

It is possible.

 

[jdwii]

I was back and forth with the 6 cores quite honestly. First it seemed like there would be, them I was dissuaded, but look at this. Pretty interesting. Also interesting is the cache. Same as the 8 core. Possible 6->8 core unlocking? Or am I just too hopeful

I actually think we will have a 6 core i think they are just going to disable the cores on some 8 core units that don't offer the performance/watt levels Amd DEMANDS from global foundry. Global foundries will probably sell them to Amd at a much lower cost.

I believe and i could be wrong but i think Amd only has to pay for the ones that delver the performance they demand its based on a newer contract then the one they had a long time ago.

 

[HUMDRUM2000]

I love the new commitment from AMD,if all this holds true Intel is going to lower prices on some ,but not all sku's
But for the love of sanity it is high time for a new motherboard design.
Cable management has become a P.I.T.A.
There has to be a wireless spec in the near future, I.E wireless HDD,wireless USB.
I am already planning to sell my current rig Featuring AMD 8350@4.3 GHz.
Whomever engineers a wireless spec for the PC market please take my money.
Apologize for the slight rant but these thick sata cables are driving me insane.
Hmm fiber optic cables?

 

[010TheMaster010]

I was back and forth with the 6 cores quite honestly. First it seemed like there would be, them I was dissuaded, but look at this. Pretty interesting. Also interesting is the cache. Same as the 8 core. Possible 6->8 core unlocking? Or am I just too hopeful

It is possible.

Definitely making a mental note of that.

 

[salgado18]

Let me give the usual warning, then (I keep forgetting too): if they are that great, prices will probably increase in the beginning. It would be wise to plan for any purchase at least a month after release, because I think Ryzen will be more expensive, instead of Intel being cheaper in the short run.

 

[Rookie_MIB]

Let me give the usual warning, then (I keep forgetting too): if they are that great, prices will probably increase in the beginning. It would be wise to plan for any purchase at least a month after release, because I think Ryzen will be more expensive, instead of Intel being cheaper in the short run.

Agreed. The typical 'early adopter' tax, also known as supply and demand, much like what was happening with the Nvidia 10 series cards at first. The difference with that though is:

1) GPUs are much bigger, much more complicated, and much harder to get right on the first try than a CPU. A single GTX 1080 GPU is 7.2 billion transistors. A 10 core Xeon is about 2.6 billion.
2) Nvidia already HAD high market share, they might have restricted the supply deliberately to keep their margins high. AMD is in exactly the opposite position and as such needs a good launch and avoid shortages at all costs. Their salvation right now lies in getting their products into the hands of consumers who clearly are looking to upgrade.

That being said, the sweet spot on pricing indeed seems to be the 6c/12t 1600x. XFR, 3.4-3.7ghz boost (+XFR). All that for $250.00. Hellooooo my new rig core (assuming reviews and benchmarks bear out the IPC improvements)

 

[ComputerSecurityGuy]

Yeah. Although from the sounds of things AMD is building up a reserve, it's very likely that the first brief while there will be major price hikes.

 

[salgado18]

Let me give the usual warning, then (I keep forgetting too): if they are that great, prices will probably increase in the beginning. It would be wise to plan for any purchase at least a month after release, because I think Ryzen will be more expensive, instead of Intel being cheaper in the short run.

Agreed. The typical 'early adopter' tax, also known as supply and demand, much like what was happening with the Nvidia 10 series cards at first. The difference with that though is:

1) GPUs are much bigger, much more complicated, and much harder to get right on the first try than a CPU. A single GTX 1080 GPU is 7.2 billion transistors. A 10 core Xeon is about 2.6 billion.
2) Nvidia already HAD high market share, they might have restricted the supply deliberately to keep their margins high. AMD is in exactly the opposite position and as such needs a good launch and avoid shortages at all costs. Their salvation right now lies in getting their products into the hands of consumers who clearly are looking to upgrade.

That being said, the sweet spot on pricing indeed seems to be the 6c/12t 1600x. XFR, 3.4-3.7ghz boost (+XFR). All that for $250.00. Hellooooo my new rig core (assuming reviews and benchmarks bear out the IPC improvements)

It's not just that. Now there's very little incentive to recommend Intel, for one important reason: if you buy a new system with a Pentium or i3, the best you can upgrade to is a 4c/8t i7. But if you get a new system with an R3 1100, you can go as high as 8c/16t without changing motherboard. Or even start out with a weak APU, then get a GPU, and then get a powerful CPU. AMD has unified the entire ecosystem into one socket, and Intel hasn't. That is a big incentive to many people (I won't recommend Intel ever again for this reason).

 

[Crumpet 1]

It's not just that. Now there's very little incentive to recommend Intel, for one important reason: if you buy a new system with a Pentium or i3, the best you can upgrade to is a 4c/8t i7. But if you get a new system with an R3 1100, you can go as high as 8c/16t without changing motherboard. Or even start out with a weak APU, then get a GPU, and then get a powerful CPU. AMD has unified the entire ecosystem into one socket, and Intel hasn't. That is a big incentive to many people (I won't recommend Intel ever again for this reason).

You mean a 8c/16t from 2020 without changing the motherboard.

 

[ComputerSecurityGuy]

Actually, the socket differences from the last few years are the exception to the norm. If they keep up their cross socket compatibility, then it'll be awesome.

 

[Rookie_MIB]

It's not just that. Now there's very little incentive to recommend Intel, for one important reason: if you buy a new system with a Pentium or i3, the best you can upgrade to is a 4c/8t i7. But if you get a new system with an R3 1100, you can go as high as 8c/16t without changing motherboard. Or even start out with a weak APU, then get a GPU, and then get a powerful CPU. AMD has unified the entire ecosystem into one socket, and Intel hasn't. That is a big incentive to many people (I won't recommend Intel ever again for this reason).

Well, there are some issues with that, namely one of the big desires for getting one of the high end CPUs - the XFR features and overclocking which is only enabled on a X300/X370/B350 motherboard. If you buy one of the A300/A320 motherboards, you may not get the full benefit of a high end CPU if you upgrade.

So - best idea if you're on a budget is get the X/B motherboards, as they will support ANY of the AM4 CPUs, and will overclock with them as well, then get whatever CPU fits your budget. Then if you need/want to upgrade, they can have you covered as mentioned up to 8c/16t beast mode. (lol).

Now - here's a bit of a possible leak on information which might hint as to availability. Not directly, but by inference. The ASUS motherboard prices and release date have leaked. X370 @ $209, X370 Pro @ $149, B350 @ $89, B350 $69. Release date of Feb 24th.

However, the actual release date for Ryzen has NOT been confirmed yet, but why would they (Asus) release a motherboard before you can even get a CPU for it? Do they think that people will sit around, looking at their pretty motherboard, dreaming of benchmarking it WITHOUT being able to put a CPU in it? No. I don't think they would do that. Unless they know something we don't (which I'm sure is quite a lot). As in the actual release date for the Ryzen CPU.

Does that sound about right? Why would you release a motherboard without being able to use it? I could see releasing GPU's all over the place because you can put them in anything. Same with SSDs, HDDs. RAM. But a motherboard is for the most part tied to a socket and a CPU, both of which are brand spanking new. Having different release dates for either makes no sense.

 

[010TheMaster010]

I think it makes sense to release the motherboard first, it just gets that piece out of the way so that you don't have to worry about it. Plus, if they are the first to do so, they can establish themselves as the best AM4 manufacturers(by default). I'm hopeful for a CPU release that early, but not expecting it.

 

[8350rocks]

I think it makes sense to release the motherboard first, it just gets that piece out of the way so that you don't have to worry about it. Plus, if they are the first to do so, they can establish themselves as the best AM4 manufacturers(by default). I'm hopeful for a CPU release that early, but not expecting it.

I am betting on GDC physical launch.

 

[010TheMaster010]

"We're set to launch Ryzen in early March. We've also announced that not only will the CPU occupy 10% less space than the competitor, it will offer twice the L2 cache." Taken directly from the AMD Facebook page.
Edit: So yes, probably GDC

 

[jdwii]

Someone sent me this online so i figured i'd post it here

https://videocardz.com/65913/how-fast-is-ryzen

Shows some 4/6 core Ryzen benchmarks


As said before the closer to launch the less salt you need for each leaked benchmark.

 

[juanrga]

Let me give the usual warning, then (I keep forgetting too): if they are that great, prices will probably increase in the beginning. It would be wise to plan for any purchase at least a month after release, because I think Ryzen will be more expensive, instead of Intel being cheaper in the short run.

Agreed. The typical 'early adopter' tax, also known as supply and demand, much like what was happening with the Nvidia 10 series cards at first. The difference with that though is:

1) GPUs are much bigger, much more complicated, and much harder to get right on the first try than a CPU. A single GTX 1080 GPU is 7.2 billion transistors. A 10 core Xeon is about 2.6 billion.

Transistor counts aren't reliable because not all transistors are the same size just as not all cars have the same size.

Making CPUs can be so hard or more than making GPUs. It depends. The are two different kind of compute devices: GPUs are optimized for throughput and CPUs are optimized for latency. Different requirements give engineers different problems to solve and produce different design choices.

Said that, the GTX 1080 has 7.2 billion transistors on a 314mm² die. The smaller 10-core Xeon has 3.2 billion transistors on 246mm² die. The 24-core Xeon has 7.2 billion on a 456mm² die. Both Xeons on a 14nm process is more dense than the 16nm used for the GPU.

 

[juanrga]

It seems a press release is scheduled for day 2, but no confirmation still this is the launch day.