News That's Ryzen AF: Some Old AMD Chips Might Be Getting a 12nm Makeover

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
If AMD is really down-marking 2600s as 1600s due to failing to make the 2600 speed bin, that seems like a recipe for making things stupidly confusing. Should be marking them as Ryzen 2590 or 2600B/2600F or whatever suffix might seem appropriate to designate a lower-tier (B-grade / Failed-at-nominal) bin.
 

NightHawkRMX

Illustrious
if you get a 2600 with 1600 price, if i read that correctly i have no objection.
I agree.
If AMD is really down-marking 2600s as 1600s due to failing to make the 2600 speed bin, that seems like a recipe for making things stupidly confusing. Should be marking them as Ryzen 2590 or 2600B/2600F or whatever suffix might seem appropriate to designate a lower-tier (B-grade / Failed-at-nominal) bin.
People will just have to notice the clocks to see the difference. I could see how a suffix would help too.

I really have a hard time believing there are a lot of 2600s that fail stock frequency. My 2600 has been able to hit 4.3 stable in cinebench, and i see pretty much all hit 4ghz all core or more, so i doubt there are many that cant hit the stock 3.7-3.8ghz all core and 3.9 boost speeds.
 

mihen

Respectable
Oct 11, 2017
262
28
1,820
1
I think it's the least confusing most economically viable approach. You get a chip that meets the criteria for a Ryzen 1600 being advertised as such. It would make less sense to sell them as a Ryzen 2600 B or making new packaging just for this chip. People may buy it thinking it's a 2600 but missing the ghz rating or B designation.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
I think it's the least confusing most economically viable approach. You get a chip that meets the criteria for a Ryzen 1600 being advertised as such.
And then you buy a 300-series motherboard with a 1000-series CPU that won't work in first-gen boards without BIOS update. For boards that dropped first-gen support to accommodate tables for newer CPUs due to insufficient SPI Flash memory to support all CPUs, you may also run into issues of updated boards not supporting CPUs that report as being 1000-series.

Mixing up generations without an obvious tell could turn into a massive support nightmare for AMD, motherboard manufacturers and end-users.
 
Reactions: TJ Hooker

BaRoMeTrIc

Reputable
Jan 30, 2017
134
6
4,715
8
If AMD is really down-marking 2600s as 1600s due to failing to make the 2600 speed bin, that seems like a recipe for making things stupidly confusing. Should be marking them as Ryzen 2590 or 2600B/2600F or whatever suffix might seem appropriate to designate a lower-tier (B-grade / Failed-at-nominal) bin.
Yes, introducing new skus to denote a "b" stock chip to confuse consumers would make total sense. If the dye doesnt meet specs then it either gets cores fused off (if remaining cores meet lower sku spec) or they get scrapped. But if AMD has a few thousand chips laying around that dont have any cores that can hit boost clocks at the intended tdp, then why not package them as first gen and at least recoup some profit
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
If AMD is really down-marking 2600s as 1600s due to failing to make the 2600 speed bin, that seems like a recipe for making things stupidly confusing. Should be marking them as Ryzen 2590 or 2600B/2600F or whatever suffix might seem appropriate to designate a lower-tier (B-grade / Failed-at-nominal) bin.
What do you think the odds are they they have "X" amount of wafers left for the 12nm (14nm+) that they have already purchased or agreed to purchase and see how popular the sales are of the older Ryzen and are purposefully binning and marking them as such?

Wouldn't be the first time as the Phenom II X3s had a lot of success especially after it was found you could unlock them to a quad core and plenty of them were perfectly fine quad cores but sold better as a X3.
 

shabbo

Distinguished
Nov 29, 2011
31
4
18,545
2
If AMD is really down-marking 2600s as 1600s due to failing to make the 2600 speed bin, that seems like a recipe for making things stupidly confusing. Should be marking them as Ryzen 2590 or 2600B/2600F or whatever suffix might seem appropriate to designate a lower-tier (B-grade / Failed-at-nominal) bin.
It's not confusing. The 1600 SKU exists and the AF product is suitable for this existing SKU. Why spend needless dollars on spinning up a new 2590 SKU when it's completely unnecessary.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
It's not confusing. The 1600 SKU exists and the AF product is suitable for this existing SKU. Why spend needless dollars on spinning up a new 2590 SKU when it's completely unnecessary.
You buy a Ryzen 1600 not knowing it is actually a 2600 and put it on a 300-series board expecting it to work and it doesn't because 300-series boards require an unexpected BIOS update assuming they actually have any update new enough to support the new variant. Now you are in tech-support hell until someone figures out that you actually got an AF chip.

Edit: all boards regardless of chipset may require an unexpected BIOS updates before being able to use a 1600 AF too. Imagine the frustration of building a PC and unknowingly having the only CPU currently on the market that won't work on a B450 MAX or X570 board out of the box due to missing BIOS entry.
 
Last edited:

NightHawkRMX

Illustrious
The new Ryzen 3 and older ryzen cpus are in different markets.

The new R3 have integrated graphics and are ment for low cost entry level systems.
The older Ryzen CPUs like a 1600 lack graphics and are meant for higher cost systems using dedicated gfx.

So while im sure they do compete, they really are being bought for different reasons.

The old Ryzen 3s are for very cheap systems with dedicated gfx. They really aren't very good anymore tho.
 
You buy a Ryzen 1600 not knowing it is actually a 2600 and put it on a 300-series board expecting it to work and it doesn't because 300-series boards require an unexpected BIOS update assuming they actually have any update new enough to support the new variant. Now you are in tech-support hell until someone figures out that you actually got an AF chip.
Has it actually been confirmed that boards will require a BIOS update for these chips though? Perhaps they are simply detected as a 1600, seeing as they seems to match the specifications of that processor.
 

wirefire

Distinguished
Oct 1, 2006
14
3
18,515
0
OK so we have a potential 2600 marked as a 1600. First of all there is no guarantee that the BIOS can or can not see the AF SKU on the old BIOS. That said, no shipping motherboard that has not been lying around in a warehouse for several years should be shipping a BIOS that is not aware of the 2000 series Ryzen. And a 1600 is not exactly the place I would be looking for a drop in upgrade over my previous CPU. In some cases you may have boards that removed support for the 1000 series Ryzen that actually work with the AF SKU because it is so close to a 2600. Worst case the 1600 AF doesn't work on the updated BIOS (performs as advertised, no 1000 Ryzen chips.). Without more information I wouldn't get too excited about it. This affecting an end user would be a super extreme case.
 

Rdslw

Estimable
Very odd one. Still possbile that 2600 that have problems were good enough after little downclock and are rebranded to 1600 series. Still plenty of power in it so its good to see v2 (anyone checked power usage? same clock lower node -> less juice?)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS