[SOLVED] CES. No mention of Ryzen 5 5600 (non X).

ConradWebster

Reputable
Aug 2, 2019
22
0
4,510
Hoping rumours of Ryzen 5 5600 would be confirmed at CES 21, but only higher priced Ryzen 7 and9 non X versions mentioned. Any idea if it will ever land?
 
Solution
Hoping rumours of Ryzen 5 5600 would be confirmed at CES 21, but only higher priced Ryzen 7 and9 non X versions mentioned. Any idea if it will ever land?
What rumors?

When considering 7nm wafer supply issues I have to wonder under what conditions AMD would be willing to steer 7nm components to what logically would be a part with low profit margins. It probably depends more on how many sub-optimal CCD chiplets they end up with at the end of binning: those with 6 useable cores but don't all reliably hit 5600X or, especially, 5900/X clocks within voltage and current margins. It may have to wait until that pile of parts is big enough before they consider it.

I also tend to think it would be a part for OEM's anyway, like 5800 and...
Hoping rumours of Ryzen 5 5600 would be confirmed at CES 21, but only higher priced Ryzen 7 and9 non X versions mentioned. Any idea if it will ever land?
What rumors?

When considering 7nm wafer supply issues I have to wonder under what conditions AMD would be willing to steer 7nm components to what logically would be a part with low profit margins. It probably depends more on how many sub-optimal CCD chiplets they end up with at the end of binning: those with 6 useable cores but don't all reliably hit 5600X or, especially, 5900/X clocks within voltage and current margins. It may have to wait until that pile of parts is big enough before they consider it.

I also tend to think it would be a part for OEM's anyway, like 5800 and 5900 non-X parts are. Therefore no retail boxed SKU's, only tray parts lacking end-user warranties. That helps prop up the profit margin by reducing long-term warranty liabilities as well as marketing costs.
 
Last edited:
Solution
What rumors?

When considering 7nm wafer supply issues I have to wonder under what conditions AMD would be willing to steer 7nm components to what logically would be a part with low profit margins. It probably depends more on how many sub-optimal CCD chiplets they end up with at the end of binning: those with 6 useable cores but don't all reliably hit 5600X or, especially, 5900/X clocks within voltage and current margins. It may have to wait until that pile of parts is big enough before they consider it.

I also tend to think it would be a part for OEM's anyway, like 5800 and 5900 non-X parts are. Therefore no retail boxed SKU's, only tray parts lacking end-user warranties. That helps prop up the profit margin by reducing long-term warranty liabilities as well as marketing costs.
There are very few reasons non-x would be released, One is having enough sub standard chips but 7nm technology is at the peak now, pretty well nailed put, unlikely that there will any significant number and releasing them as non-x would cut down on sales fully functional ones.
Another reason is just like they did with some Phenom models with fully unlocked cores selling them as "B" models just to get rid of them. That's also unlikely.
 
There are very few reasons non-x would be released, One is having enough sub standard chips but 7nm technology is at the peak now....

AMD's mostly been good to enthusiasts by finding ways to keep prices in check even when they have high end parts. No whining about current prices...3 years ago would anyone have dreamed we'd have a top performing 16 core/32 thread part that runs on bog-standard motherboards with an MSRP under $999?

But with all their good intentions AMD has to make money. In tech that means re-investment; in the desktop CPU market (Intel's still the leader in all segments and by huge margins) that means HEAVY re-investment. If you want to keep shareholders happy (with some semblance of dividend along with share valuation growth) then you have to make a fair profit. So think of this like a business: if binning yields are that high, where's the money in selling off parts at a lower profit vs putting them in 5900X's/5600X's?

As far as I'm concerned: AMD needs to put the profit in R&D and keep thinking outside the box (which, yes, means there'll be another Bulldozer at some point as that what happens when you do). Right now, DIY'ers needing a bit more 'value' can find perfectly good 3600's/X/XT's to fill the bottom "value" performance bracket of their lineup. That adds up to very little reason to release non-x parts at all. Unless OEM's are clamoring for one, which seems to be the case with 5800/5900 parts.
 
Last edited: