AMD Ryzen Discussion

Prices starting to emerge; online retailers are taking pre-orders for several new chip models:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/antonyl...-revealed-massive-blow-to-intel/#15bc9a0e6e7c

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-lineup-pricing-confirmed-8-cores-low-320/

Also, rumors of a sales parry by Intel, a possible new 4C/8T/4.2/4.6 chip, and possibly a new i5 as well:

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/244065-intel-core-i5-i7-kaby-lake-processors-amd-ryzen

Since I'm already committed to an Intel build by the mainboard I bought [but haven't yet bought the processor], I'm waiting to see if they drop prices when Ryzen comes online.

Also, make what you want out of this:

http://seekingalpha.com/article/4042991-intel-amd-join-forces
https://hardforum.com/threads/from-...in-futility-h.1900681/page-72#post-1042797289

Kyle Bennett is a reliable source, I'd think, but I'm not exactly sure what to think about AMD graphics on an Intel CPU:

https://liliputing.com/2017/02/report-intel-launch-kaby-lake-chip-amd-radeon-graphics.html
 
Last edited:
Interestingly, despite the fact that rumors indicate 4C and 6C chips, we aren't seeing any confirmed pricing for anything other than the 8C chips. This may actually be a strategic move on AMD's part to target Intel's high end, and force them to drop pricing on everything lower. I'm wondering if we may not be seeing some Excavator-based cores showing up on the AM4 socket to compete at the lower end. This would give people wanting cheap chips that aren't available in Ryzen yet and upgrade path at a later point. Just a theory.

That would definitely force Intel to both drop prices on lower spec CPUs and release higher clocked stuff at the upper end. I just recently heard a rumor that AMD will be releasing Zen at up to 4 GHz base freqs, and it appears to be very competitive IPC-wise with Sky Lake/Kaby Lake, meaning that Intel really have to crank up the clocks to maintain a competitive advantage (and I do believe Intel will retain a base clock speed advantage for at least 6 months, though perhaps not an OC advantage). As always, though, benches are going to be required before we can make a definitive statement.

With respect to the GPU, Kyle is behind if he's just now talking about that; I was aware of it back in late December. I think this is basically Intel admitting that their GPU core sucks and they can't build a better one, or at least not quickly. An APU built around Ryzen/Polaris (or later on Ryzen/Vega) would be a SERIOUS problem for Intel in the business segment, and even the low end gaming segment, as AMD clearly has better capabilities in the GPU arena than Intel. Also, Intel and nVidia don't seem to be getting on too well.
 
WHAT?
Who put the fire back into AMD!
Is this out of no where or did you guys see this coming?
When does Intel release the next round of attack?

Do you see this creating enthusiasm for over clocking?

Does Intel still understand the concept of competition?

Looks like AMD may be getting ready to remind them
When do your parts start arriving!!?? "::O}
 
Lisu Su and the AMD leadership have pretty much bet the company on Ryzen. Honestly, I didn't really see any of this coming until about August. Even then I was somewhat skeptical, but I've been following closely since then and I'm pretty optimistic, provided AMD can continue to execute. And let's be honest; that has ALWAYS been AMD's problem.

I hear that Intel's CEO Brian Krzanich is in a tenuous position with the current board, and that Intel was more-or-less blind-sided by this development by AMD. I don't know how much stock to put in that second bit, but I really don't see how Intel can get truly competitive with AMD in less than about a year, PROVIDED AMD is able to keep up the pressure and keep improving Ryzen like they plan.

That being said, there are some basic limitations here that both AMD and Intel are faced with, IMO:
  1. Process shrinks are getting harder and harder to do; current thinking is that 2-3 more generations (3 nm) will bring us to the limits of physics, not just the limits of our technology, and that's going to happen probably around 2025.
  2. Both Intel and AMD are reaching the limits of what can be done with the x86 processor technology to improve performance on a per-core basis.
  3. Processors are so powerful now that, with the exception of high-performance-computing and computer aided drafting/design, and a few other very niche areas, people don't really need the high end performance capabilities; what they need are low power chips that can drive portable electronics with the level of performance we had in high-end desktops at around 20008 or so, and last at least a day doing so.
  4. The desktop computer market is shrinking. Ryzen will let AMD get a bigger piece of the pie, but the pie is getting smaller, and doing so rapidly. There will IMO ALWAYS be a demand for the desktop systems, but they are going to become much more boutique, purpose built systems.
All of this means that while Ryzen is letting AMD 'bring it' in the desktop enthusiast market, the real play for AMD MUST be in the data center. Those loads are large and getting larger every year, as more computation is moved from the client application to the server (mainframes, anyone?). And the data center is a market where AMD has really, REALLY struggled, historically.
 
AMD's other significant customer is MS, so could be interesting to see whether a Ryzen/Polaris (or Ryzen/Vega) APU would tempt MS to bring forward a new console and ruin Sony's year. There's a potential few million more CPUs sold if they do...
 
Rumor mill is already churning hard on that one, saying that Project Scorpio (due out late this year) will have Ryzen/Vega.
 
My Intel i-7 runs 4 cores up to 4,8 fairly safely,depending upon ambient temps. now at 4.4. how will that stack up against AMD 8 core chips? Are they unlocked?
Not that I will get to see them personally.":O}
 
All AMD CPUs will be unlocked, per Lisa Su. Given that Ryzen is apparently neck-and-neck with SkyLake/KabyLake for IPC, then clock for clock they are about equal. Whether a 4.4 GHz AMD chip with 8 cores can match or beat a 4.8 GHz chip with 4 cores will really depend on the application and how will it takes advantage of the available resources. If it can make use of 8 cores, it'll SCREAM on the AMD chip. If it is only using 4 cores or less, then the Intel chip will have about a 10% performance advantage because of the difference in clock speed.
 
Benches leaking out are showing 6C/12T CPUs. I'm really not understanding the economics of that CPU, but it looks like it's going to be a real thing.

Benches are also suggesting that Ryzen should be able to OC to around 4.5 GHz on good air cooling. Not QUITE up to what KabyLake is doing (seems to be around 4.8 to 4.9) but still right in the ball park, and DEFINITELY showing good IPC, competitive with KabyLake.

All in all, this is looking like a VERY good offering from AMD.
 
It
Gizmo said:
All in all, this is looking like a VERY good offering from AMD.
Click to expand...

Well, for all our sakes, both users and business people, it had better be, with the future of AMD pretty much leveraged on Ryzen.

I have a [small] bit of AMD stock; it was around $2/share a year ago. Today? $14. Hope that continues.
 
AMD Ryzen Launch event was today. AMD announced the following:

R7 1800X - 3.6 GHz with boost to 4.0 GHz - $500
R7 1700X - 3.4 GHz with Boost to 3.8 GHz - $400
R7 1700 - 3.2 GHz with Boost to 3.7 GHz - $329

The 1700 is a 65W part, the other two are 95W. All are 8 Cores.

No mention of 6 Cores, or the R5/R3 product line.

Availability March 2.

Interestingly, AMD showed single-core performance pretty much neck-and-neck with Broadwell-e (which means Skylake and KabyLake as well), so yeah, Intel has about a 10% performance advantage in clock speed, but that's really it.

We'll have to wait for the reviews to see how well it overclocks, but things are looking good so far.
 
It would be nice to see Intel just a little uncomfortable.
And it's great to see AMD is trying trying to give the world a descent alternative.
 
I'm interested to see in the next few years what Intel's abandonment of tick/tock after 20 years or so will affect R&D.

I'm thinking that it will actually help them; now they will most likely do both at the same time.
 
This is great for me. I've always purchased AMD CPU's because of the price. I know some of the CPU's I've purchased in the last few years have faster Intel competitive chips, but I still got the AMD to save $$
 
This looks like GREAT news for booman, yay! Sticking with AMD over all these years could have been a bit depressing, of course I don't know how booman felt about the performance disparity. AMD finalfreakingly comes through again, Yaay!
 
I never had a lot of performance problems. Of course I picked up some used Core2Duo CPU's that I've been using for a few years, but rarely buy them brand new. If I'm building a new machine, I stick with AMD
 
Well as far as I can see I've built my last box.. So I'm more than happy to watch as you guys build your next boxes! ":O}
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top