Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AMD Discussion
- Thread starter koyoot
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Keep in mind, that this still can be fake or wrong. Base clocks, only are shown, without Turbo states.
But, as always. Mountain of salt, before we believe in this.
And one more thing:
Edit: First chart is wrong, second one is put together by extrapolation of numbers from CPCHardware magazine.
Last edited:
Ryzen X for eXtreme and PRO is the APU variant? Guessing here. Anyone knows the difference between them?
Let's see if these numbers come out true.
[doublepost=1486150726][/doublepost]OK:
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-am4-processor-family-leak-r7-1800x-flagship/
Let's see if these numbers come out true.
[doublepost=1486150726][/doublepost]OK:
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-am4-processor-family-leak-r7-1800x-flagship/
And funniest part, which is in my post:
The first chart with those CPU lineup are completely wrong. The "source" claims that only X versions are unlocked, but as AMD has stated, ALL of the CPUs are unlocked.
So its rubbish, or simply, wrong.
What do you guys think about this thing for naming of upcoming AMD CPUs:
AMD Ryzen X8 - 8C/16T
AMD Ryzen X6 - 6C/12T
AMD Ryzen X4 - 4C/8T
AMD Ryzen X8 - 8C/16T
AMD Ryzen X6 - 6C/12T
AMD Ryzen X4 - 4C/8T
Where's the "thumbs down" button?What do you guys think about this thing for naming of upcoming AMD CPUs:
AMD Ryzen X8 - 8C/16T
AMD Ryzen X6 - 6C/12T
AMD Ryzen X4 - 4C/8T
What about clock speeds? How about Ryzen X4-1600 for the 4 core 1600MHz version.
What do you call the next version? Intel has a pretty clear and understandable naming convention that newer products easily fit into. If AMD stays afloat, what would you call the next version hex core 2100 MHz system?
It was me who was emotionally invested in Zen?
I feel that this question should not be pointed at me, but others who are bashing AMD, or me personally...
Anyway.
BitsAndChips twitter suggests, that 8 Core Ryzen will cost as much as 6 Core i7 from Intel. Not because of performance, but marketing. Good ol' Athlon XP times.
https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/827663341946621952
What do your emotions have to do with my post or anything else?
I simply think that "Ryzen X<corecount>" is a bad naming scheme that doesn't consider what to call the next iteration (assuming that AMD is still in business).
Have you thought that this is MAINSTREAM lineup. Just like i7 7700K, i5 7600K, etc?
Just because the CPUs have 8 cores does not have to mean they are targeted at High End Desktop space. Its all about innovation. Next generation Ryzen CPU, as well as Intel's(Cannonlake!) will have 4/6/8 core setups, for mainstream markets.
You should've known this by now. AMD decided, to push down the HEDT into the mainstream market by price, but not performance. Thats why I have said before, which you may have overlooked, that they are building their brand on innovation, because this is gigantic innovation in market that hasn't seen any change for past 10 years.
And AMD is getting back to growth this year, and will be in business, for foreseeable future. We know you are AMD hater, but you are underestimating what they have done technologically in past months. Hardware, software, everywhere.
Which is exactly why "Ryzen X6" is a horrible choice for a naming convention.
I understand that ATI has released the underwhelming Polaris GPUs. No Zen. No Vega.
Note that I consider "shipping" and "sending a press release" as different things.
Am I a "hater" because I don't repost every ATI press release verbatim? Or every HyperZen rumour from anywhere?
I'm biased towards things that I can actually buy today. Since few of your ATI/AMD hallucinations are for sale - feel free to label me a "hater" for living in the here and now.
Last edited:
If the flagship Ryzen is as fast as the Intel Core i7 6900K, it's probably going to cost around $735 which is 70% of the price of the Intel Core i7 6900K
No chances. 599$ is the highest price AMD can charge for Black Edition of Ryzen.
About half of an APU is the GPU, that's why a CPU with twice the cores should cost the same.
It's either (1.) not going to perform well as the Intel Core i7 6900K does or (2.) if it does perform that well, it's not going to cost half as much as the Intel Core i7 6900K.
Why not? Intel knew about it for very long time, that Zen will bring 8 core to mainstream. Thats why they were designing Cannonlake with 4/6/8 core mainstream options.
3.4 GHz Ryzen CPU is already slightly faster than 6900K clocked at 3.5 GHz, which has been demoed by AMD live in the New Horizon stream.
And this is base 8Core/16Thread CPU, in AMD lineup. Currently, the word is that it will cost less than 400$. Others will only be clocked higher. But will not cost more than 600$.
intel needs to up the pci-e. 16 + DMI is to low and the server chips still use DMI to chip set.
Do you mean Coffee Lake and not Cannonlake?
Cannonlake is just a die shrink.
According to rumors, Coffee Lake might bring hex-core (but not octa-core) to the mainstream.
And you might say that the AMD FX-8xxx costs less then $200 which is true, but the performance is terrible.
What FX? Ryzen is new brand from AMD, for the CPUs. I have no idea what FX-8XXX has any relation to Ryzen?
Coffe Lake will bring 6 cores, but Intel already, few months ago announced that with Cannonlake they go from 2/4 core setup in mainstream to 4/6/8 core setups, for i3, i5, and i7. http://wccftech.com/intel-cannonlake-cpus-8-cores/ Doesn't this sound familiar?
Right now I can remember when people laughed at me, when I have written that AMD was working on their own Coherent Fabric, that will be used in CPUs and GPUs, before anything was even announced by AMD... But anyway.
Let me give a little perspective. When AMD started designing Zeppelin cores, and Zen CPU, overall, they wanted to offer 5960X performance for 399$, and with less power. That was their goal. But the CPUs design was ultimately better, and the silicon is better. So we might get 6900K performance for 399$, but AMD can up the game with higher clocked CPU(3.6/4.0 GHz@95W) for 499-599$.
https://www.cpchardware.com/intel-prepare-la-riposte-a-ryzen/
Rough translation from Google:
Last autumn, Intel's marketing teams published a succinct presentation on future AMD processors based on the Zen architecture (Ryzen). The goal was then to reassure the sales people and offer them a rationale to answer their customers' questions. In essence, the presentation indicated that there was nothing to fear from Zen (especially on the performance side).
Since then, things seem to have changed. The latest reports confirm that the upcoming Ryzen - which will be officially announced on March 2 - represent a serious threat to Intel's hegemony. Intel's communication department is now trying to avoid at all costs the humiliation that would represent a Ryzen comparable to the Core i7 6900K (1200 €) for a much lower price. Adjustments to the tariff schedule are becoming inevitable and are being finalized. Nonetheless, this is a last-resort solution that represents a confession of indisputable weakness. In the rest of the range, the response is also organized.
According to one of our sources, Intel would be sampling several new Quad Core processors based on the Kaby Lake architecture.
First we find the Core i7 7740K. It has 8 MB of L3, with a base frequency of 4.30 GHz (100 MHz more than the Core i7 7700K) at the price of a significantly higher TDP (> 100W against 91W). The Turbo frequency is not known, but should logically be 4.60 GHz.
One of the other sample takes the name of Core i5 7640K. At first glance, this is also a speed bump of the Core i5 7600K: Quad Core, 6MB L3, 4.0GHz base frequency for the 7640K against 3.8GHz for the 7600K. On the TDP side, it would also climb above the 100W. But there is much more interesting: the Core i5 7640K would have active SMT (Hyper-threading), a first for a Core i5 Desktop. This modification profoundly upsets the segmentation of the different "Core". Until now, the Core i5 were distinguished from the Core i7 by the absence of Hyper-threading.
Indeed, it should not be forgotten that an identical evolution has already taken place between the Pentium and the Core i3 in the world of Dual Core: the Kaby Lake versions of the Pentiums now benefit from Hyper-threading, while this functionality was Previously reserved for Core i3 only. The arrival of the HT on the Core i5 is however a last-minute maneuver, presumably intended to counter the Ryzen CPU. They benefit in fact from the SMT in almost the whole range (4, 6 and 8 cores), only one model Quad Core being deprived.
We should very soon have access to a Core i5 7640K, which will allow us to confirm this information and give you more details about the frequencies in Turbo mode. Given the excitement at Intel, and according to the first tests on final Ryzen processors, other models could quickly complement these CPUs. Conversely, Intel is currently testing the Core i5 7640K and 7740K with its major customers but does not guarantee them a final sale. The manufacturer wants to ensure that it can respond almost immediately (within a few days) in case AMD changes its plans at the last minute. However, the validation of new processors is a time-consuming process, especially when they incorporate sensitive modifications such as activation of HT on Core i5. However, the democratization of 4C / 8T models in the mid-range would remain very good news for consumers. Proof of the concrete interest of healthy competition, absent for too long.
The Santa Clara giant had certainly not anticipated the level of performance achieved by the Zen architecture. Nevertheless, it should not bury Intel too fast. The new AMD CPUs clearly pose a concern for the price positioning of the most expensive models (at 6, 8 or 10 cores). Thanks to their frequent frequency, the SMT and the number of embedded cores, the most high-end versions of Ryzen offer excellent performance on highly multi-threaded applications, that is to say, Set of available cores. For the rest, especially for Quad Core and video games, the latest information that has come down to us creates doubt. As we wrote in our article, the frequency of Ryzen Quad Core should be between 3.8 GHz and 4.2 GHz base to compete effectively with the Intel range. But we are far from it. The current quasi-final samples are limited to 3.2 GHz in base frequency. This is very insufficient and especially surprising since the two 8-core models reach 3.4 / 3.8 and 3.6 / 4.0 GHz.
Why a frequency so low on the Quad Core while the Octo Core go much higher? One can first imagine that a Turbo mode particularly swift will come to save the furniture, but currently, we have no information in this sense. For now, we only have access to the 6- and 8-core versions of the Ryzen in stepping B and we do not know the Turbo frequencies of the Quad Core B-Step. We can, however, risk a comparison. Between stepping A0 and B, the turbo mode of 8-core models increased by 400 MHz at best from 3.6 to 4 GHz. In stepping A0, Quad Core were clocked at best at 3.4 GHz (for 2.9 GHz base). In stepping B, the Quad Core Ryzen should therefore be at 3.8 GHz. It's still far too little to compete with the next Core i5 7640K for example. This situation seems all the more strange since AMD seems determined to sell Ryzen with 8 cores clocked faster, which proves that the architecture can reach more frequencies. So what?
A potential yield problem on the 14nm Globalfoundries process may well explain this situation. We now know that the first 4- and 6-core Ryzen will be based on 8-core non-functional cores, with AMD providing the ability to easily disable multiple cores, whether or not they are in the same CCX. Perfectly aware that demand will focus on Ryzen as soon as it leaves, AMD could logically choose to recycle its defective dies to the maximum by turning off some cores ... and lowering the frequency. The cores contained in the dies may in fact be faulty in two ways: either they do not work, or they turn out to be unstable at the expected frequency. By taking out CPUs with half the cores disabled and which, in addition, are limited in frequency, AMD can recycle as many defective dies as possible and limit the breakdown financially.
However, such a situation is not sustainable in the medium term. The Wow Effect that AMD is looking to create with its strongest Ryzen chip will only hide disappointing performances of the rest of the range (if the frequencies do not evolve by the launch). The end of the NDA and the release of the first official tests in the press will give a foretaste of the situation: if AMD just sampler journalists only with its chip 8C / 16T at 3.6 / 4.0 GHz, forgetting the 4C declinations, There will be a wolf. Then, if the problems are proven, they can significantly impact the bulk availability of the chip ... or cause a much higher price than expected. AMD unfortunately has little latitude on production since it no longer has manufacturing plants. However, it remains a last resort: leaving Globalfoundries. Coincidence strange, AMD would be in the process of negotiating with ... Samsung.
Rough translation from Google:
Last autumn, Intel's marketing teams published a succinct presentation on future AMD processors based on the Zen architecture (Ryzen). The goal was then to reassure the sales people and offer them a rationale to answer their customers' questions. In essence, the presentation indicated that there was nothing to fear from Zen (especially on the performance side).
Since then, things seem to have changed. The latest reports confirm that the upcoming Ryzen - which will be officially announced on March 2 - represent a serious threat to Intel's hegemony. Intel's communication department is now trying to avoid at all costs the humiliation that would represent a Ryzen comparable to the Core i7 6900K (1200 €) for a much lower price. Adjustments to the tariff schedule are becoming inevitable and are being finalized. Nonetheless, this is a last-resort solution that represents a confession of indisputable weakness. In the rest of the range, the response is also organized.
According to one of our sources, Intel would be sampling several new Quad Core processors based on the Kaby Lake architecture.
First we find the Core i7 7740K. It has 8 MB of L3, with a base frequency of 4.30 GHz (100 MHz more than the Core i7 7700K) at the price of a significantly higher TDP (> 100W against 91W). The Turbo frequency is not known, but should logically be 4.60 GHz.
One of the other sample takes the name of Core i5 7640K. At first glance, this is also a speed bump of the Core i5 7600K: Quad Core, 6MB L3, 4.0GHz base frequency for the 7640K against 3.8GHz for the 7600K. On the TDP side, it would also climb above the 100W. But there is much more interesting: the Core i5 7640K would have active SMT (Hyper-threading), a first for a Core i5 Desktop. This modification profoundly upsets the segmentation of the different "Core". Until now, the Core i5 were distinguished from the Core i7 by the absence of Hyper-threading.
Indeed, it should not be forgotten that an identical evolution has already taken place between the Pentium and the Core i3 in the world of Dual Core: the Kaby Lake versions of the Pentiums now benefit from Hyper-threading, while this functionality was Previously reserved for Core i3 only. The arrival of the HT on the Core i5 is however a last-minute maneuver, presumably intended to counter the Ryzen CPU. They benefit in fact from the SMT in almost the whole range (4, 6 and 8 cores), only one model Quad Core being deprived.
We should very soon have access to a Core i5 7640K, which will allow us to confirm this information and give you more details about the frequencies in Turbo mode. Given the excitement at Intel, and according to the first tests on final Ryzen processors, other models could quickly complement these CPUs. Conversely, Intel is currently testing the Core i5 7640K and 7740K with its major customers but does not guarantee them a final sale. The manufacturer wants to ensure that it can respond almost immediately (within a few days) in case AMD changes its plans at the last minute. However, the validation of new processors is a time-consuming process, especially when they incorporate sensitive modifications such as activation of HT on Core i5. However, the democratization of 4C / 8T models in the mid-range would remain very good news for consumers. Proof of the concrete interest of healthy competition, absent for too long.
The Santa Clara giant had certainly not anticipated the level of performance achieved by the Zen architecture. Nevertheless, it should not bury Intel too fast. The new AMD CPUs clearly pose a concern for the price positioning of the most expensive models (at 6, 8 or 10 cores). Thanks to their frequent frequency, the SMT and the number of embedded cores, the most high-end versions of Ryzen offer excellent performance on highly multi-threaded applications, that is to say, Set of available cores. For the rest, especially for Quad Core and video games, the latest information that has come down to us creates doubt. As we wrote in our article, the frequency of Ryzen Quad Core should be between 3.8 GHz and 4.2 GHz base to compete effectively with the Intel range. But we are far from it. The current quasi-final samples are limited to 3.2 GHz in base frequency. This is very insufficient and especially surprising since the two 8-core models reach 3.4 / 3.8 and 3.6 / 4.0 GHz.
Why a frequency so low on the Quad Core while the Octo Core go much higher? One can first imagine that a Turbo mode particularly swift will come to save the furniture, but currently, we have no information in this sense. For now, we only have access to the 6- and 8-core versions of the Ryzen in stepping B and we do not know the Turbo frequencies of the Quad Core B-Step. We can, however, risk a comparison. Between stepping A0 and B, the turbo mode of 8-core models increased by 400 MHz at best from 3.6 to 4 GHz. In stepping A0, Quad Core were clocked at best at 3.4 GHz (for 2.9 GHz base). In stepping B, the Quad Core Ryzen should therefore be at 3.8 GHz. It's still far too little to compete with the next Core i5 7640K for example. This situation seems all the more strange since AMD seems determined to sell Ryzen with 8 cores clocked faster, which proves that the architecture can reach more frequencies. So what?
A potential yield problem on the 14nm Globalfoundries process may well explain this situation. We now know that the first 4- and 6-core Ryzen will be based on 8-core non-functional cores, with AMD providing the ability to easily disable multiple cores, whether or not they are in the same CCX. Perfectly aware that demand will focus on Ryzen as soon as it leaves, AMD could logically choose to recycle its defective dies to the maximum by turning off some cores ... and lowering the frequency. The cores contained in the dies may in fact be faulty in two ways: either they do not work, or they turn out to be unstable at the expected frequency. By taking out CPUs with half the cores disabled and which, in addition, are limited in frequency, AMD can recycle as many defective dies as possible and limit the breakdown financially.
However, such a situation is not sustainable in the medium term. The Wow Effect that AMD is looking to create with its strongest Ryzen chip will only hide disappointing performances of the rest of the range (if the frequencies do not evolve by the launch). The end of the NDA and the release of the first official tests in the press will give a foretaste of the situation: if AMD just sampler journalists only with its chip 8C / 16T at 3.6 / 4.0 GHz, forgetting the 4C declinations, There will be a wolf. Then, if the problems are proven, they can significantly impact the bulk availability of the chip ... or cause a much higher price than expected. AMD unfortunately has little latitude on production since it no longer has manufacturing plants. However, it remains a last resort: leaving Globalfoundries. Coincidence strange, AMD would be in the process of negotiating with ... Samsung.
Cannonlake is a die shrink. The 6/8 cores Cannonlake is not for mainstream processors.
The rumor is that Coffee Lake would bring 6-cores to the mainstream.
I with reiterate that if it's as good as you think that it would be, then it definitely would't be cheap. Obviously, it would be cheaper than Intel's, but definitely not half as much.
A lot of people think that the flagship Ryzen would be cheap because AMD released the FX-8350 for $199, but that's because AMD didn't have competitive processors at the time.
$700 for AMD's flagship is still a bargain considering that the equivalent Intel processor is $1050.
Last edited:
Yeah, I am rooting for AMD here. It would be fun to see them challenge Intel. Its been almost 15 years since Athlon 64 took advantage of Intel's missteps with the pentium 4 and now AMD can challenge them again. While I doubt AMD could be significantly faster, they could certainly bring back competition and they can offer APUs with much better integrated graphics. Something I'm sure Apple would love to add to its machines.
Apple may partner with AMD because of their ability to make APUs and since AMD has a smaller market share apple may feel they have more ability to "steer" AMD compared to Intel. But, this heavily depends on AMD's ability to deliver competitive products. Apple isn't going to give up battery life in the MacBooks just so it can be rid of Intel.
Apple may partner with AMD because of their ability to make APUs and since AMD has a smaller market share apple may feel they have more ability to "steer" AMD compared to Intel. But, this heavily depends on AMD's ability to deliver competitive products. Apple isn't going to give up battery life in the MacBooks just so it can be rid of Intel.